Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Abhoycharan Basu vs Department Of Posts on 28 August, 2023

Author: Heeralal Samariya

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                             केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                      Central Information Commission
                          बाबा गंगनाथ मागग ,मुननरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                       नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

 नितीय अपील संख्या/Second Appeal No.: CIC/POSTS/A/2022/644083

 Abhoycharan Basu                                     .....अपीलकताग /Appellant

                                    VERSUS/बनाम


 Public Information Officer Under RTI,
 Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
 Department of Posts-India, Howrah Postal Division,
 Howrah-711101 (West Bengal).



                                                         ...प्रनतवािीगण/Respondents

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

  RTI application filed on          :   27.06.2022
  CPIO replied on                   :   08.07.2022
  First appeal filed on             :   13.07.2022
  First Appellate Authority order   :   01.08.2022
  Second Appeal received at CIC     :   16.08.2022
  Date of Hearing                   :   28.08.2023
  Date of Decision                  :   28.08.2023




                   सूचना आयुक्त   : श्री हीरालाल सामररया
            Information Commissioner:    Shri Heeralal Samariya




                                                                       Page 1 of 5
 Information sought

:

The Appellant sought following information:
1. The date on which the application was received from Miss Jayasree Basu, the applicant Aadhaar No. 401045350455 ), only daughter and legal heir of Late Prasanta Kumar Basu and Late Mangala Basu, of Vill and P.O. Fuleshwar, Ward - 20, Uluberia, Howrah-711316, for withdrawal / closure of Savings Bank A / c No. 5061782201 of Prasanta Kumar Basu & Mangala Basu, deceased persons, standing at Uluberia Sub Post Office / MDG, Uluberia, Howrah -711315.
2. The date on which the application was received from Miss Jayasree Basu (Aadhaar No. 401045350455), only daughter and legal heir of Late Prasanta Kumar Basu and Late Mangala Basu, of Vill and P.O. Fuleshwar, Ward -20, Uluberia, Howrah -711316, for withdrawal / closure of MIS A/c No. 5062516043 of Prasanta Kumar Basu, deceased person, standing at Uluberia Sub Post Office / MDG, Uluberia, Howrah -- 711315.
3. The date on which the aforementioned applications, made by Miss Jayasree Basu, nominee as well as legal heir of Late Prasanta Kumar Basu and Late Mangala Basu, claiming balance in the said SB and MIS accounts, were sanctioned by the Authority concerned.

• PIO furnished reply, vide letter dated 08.07.2022, as under:

ln response to the above referred RTI request no. POSTS/R/C/22/08958 dtd 27.06.2022, it is intimated that the Smt Jayasree Basu has submitted her unwillingness to disclose any information in respect to the withdrawal / closer and payment of balance amount in ihe Savings Bank A/c No. 5061782201 and MIS A/c No. 5062516043, of Late Prasanta Kumar Basu & Late. Mangala Basu, standing at Uluberia Sub Post Ofiice / MDG, Uluberia, Howrah - 711315, to Shri Abhoyclaran Basu. Thus, third party information cannot be provided to you under RTI Act, 2005, under Section 11(1) of RTI Act, 2005...."
• Dissatisfied with the response received from PIO, Appellant filed First Appeal, vide letter dated 13.07.2022.
• The FAA vide order dated 01.08.2022 held as under:
"Sir, you had preferred one online RTI request on 27-06- 2022 to which the CPIO & SSPOs, Howrah Division replied on 08-07-2022. Being dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, you have preferred this Appeal to the undersigned. On going Page 2 of 5 through the RTI application and the Appeal, the CPIO & SSPOs, Howrah Dn is being directed to provide admissible and available information, with respect to the RTI request dated 27-06-2022, as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 to the appellant within 15 days positively from the date of receipt of this order. With this the appeal under reference stands disposed of."

• In compliance of FAA's order dated 01.08.2022, the CPIO furnished reply dated 05.08.2022 as under :

"In response to the above referred RTI request no. POSTS/R/C/22/08958 dtd 27.06.2022, it is intimated that the Smt Jayasree Basu has submited her unwillingness to disclose any information in respect to the withdrawal / closer and payment of balance amount in ihe Savings Bank A/c No. 5061782201 and MIS A/c No. 5062516043, of Late Prasanta Kumar Basu & Late. Mangala Basu, standing at Uluberia Sub Post Ofiice / MDG, Uluberia, Howrah - 711315, to Shri Abhoyclaran Basu. Thus, third party information cannot be provided to you under RTI Act, 2005, under Section 11(1) of RTI Act, 2005..."

• Written submission dated 21.08.2023 has been received from the Appellant and same is taken on record for perusal. • Written submission 09.08.2023 has been received from the CPIO and same is taken on record for perusal.

Grounds for Second Appeal:

The PIO has not provided correct information to the Appellant.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present: -
Appellant: Present Respondent: Mr. Debashish Chatterjee, SSP, Howrah Division The Appellant stated that the relevant information has not been furnished to him within stipulated time frame. He requested to direct the PIO to furnish the information in public interest.
Page 3 of 5
The Respondent reiterated the averments made in their written submission and stated that the information sought by the Appellant relates to the personal information of third party and same is exempted from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. He averred that no larger public interest has been establish by the Appellant for disclosure of information sought. Furthermore, notice under Section 11(1) of the RTI Act was served upon the third party i.e. Ms Jayashree Basu for her consent for disclosure of information sought. The third party has refused to give her consent for disclosure of her personal information to the Appellant.
Decision:
At the outset, Commission directs the concerned PIO to furnish a copy of their latest written submission along with annexures if any, to the Appellant, free of cost via speed-post and via e-mail, within 07 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly, compliance report be sent to the Commission.
Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that the information sought by the Appellant qualifies as third-party information and same is exempted from disclosure as per Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Further no larger public interest has been invoked by the Appellant. In view of this, Commission finds it pivotal to highlight a landmark judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein aspect of "personal information" has been explained in a highly structured manner. In this regard, ratio laid down in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010. The relevant portion of the said judgment is as under:
"...59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, information relating to assets, liabilities, income tax returns, details of investments, lending and borrowing, etc. are personal information. Such personal information is entitled to protection from unwarranted invasion of privacy and conditional access is available when stipulation of larger public interest is satisfied. This list is indicative and not exhaustive..."
[Emphasis Supplied] Page 4 of 5 Adverting to the supra, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned case has categorized a variety of aspects that comes under the purview of "personal information" which are exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Commission taking into account the facts of the referred case deny the request of Appellant for disclosure of the information and upholds the submission of the PIO. No further action lies.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy.
(अनिप्रमानणतसत्यानपतप्रनत) Ram Parkash Grover (रामप्रकाशग्रोवर) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Page 5 of 5