Central Information Commission
Shri D. Manohar Samuel vs Canara Bank on 3 November, 2009
Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/SM/A/2009/000063 dated 18.01.2007
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated: 3 November 2009
Name of the Appellant : Shri D. Manohar Samuel, 11-10/20, Design Nagar, S. Alangulam Anaiyur P.O., Madurai - 625 017.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Canara Bank, Strategic Planning & Development Wing, Head Office, 112, J.C. Road, Bangalore - 560 002.
The Appellant was not present for the hearing.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Mahesh Kumar, Manager (Legal) was present.
2. In this case, the Appellant had, in his application dated January 18, 2007, requested for the copies of (i) certain Government guidelines referred in the Bank's special communication 207/87 dated July 14, 1987, (ii) a copy of the policy laid down by the Board referred to in the Regulation 17(1) of Canara Bank Officers' Service Regulations 1977 and (iii) a copy of the guideline based on which the Chartered Accounts were to be recruited in Scale II. The CPIO replied on February 8, 2007 and denied the information by claiming that it was personal information having no relationship with any public activity or interest and was, therefore, exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The Appellant moved the first appeal against this denial. In his order dated March 12, 2007, the Appellate Authority disposed it off in his order dated April 10, 2007 by reiterating the stand taken by the CPIO. The Appellant has challenged this order in his second appeal.
3. We heard this case through videoconferencing. The Appellant was not present in spite of notice. The Respondent was present in the Bangalore Studio of the NIC. After hearing his submissions, we think that the CPIO had CIC/SM/A/2009/000063 denied the information without any application of mind and routinely invoking an exemption provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act which had no link to the information sought. All that the Appellant had sought are copies of records or documents held by the Bank and, therefore, there is nothing personal about these records.
4. In view of the above, we direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10 working days from the receipt of this order certified copies of all the documents sought by him. In case, any of this is not available with the Bank, the CPIO shall state so in his communication and explain why the desired information is not available accompanied by an affidavit to the effect.
5. With the above directions, the appeal is disposed off.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Assistant Registrar CIC/SM/A/2009/000063