Central Information Commission
Shri.Bihari Singh vs Allahabad Bank on 18 June, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001239/19290
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001239
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Bihari Singh
Behind Little Flower Public School,
Prabhat Vihar Colony, Satna,
Madhya Pradesh
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Allahabad Bank Head Office, Civil Lines, Satna, Madhya Pradesh RTI application filed on : 29/12/2011 PIO replied : 28/01/2012 First appeal filed on : 13/02/2012 First Appellate Authority order : 10/03/2012 Second Appeal received on : 19/04/2012 S. No Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Provide certified copy of the letter It is under consideration of the Arbitration Appellate no. SSB/HO/VIG/01771 Satna dated Authority, whose hearing has been scheduled. As per Section 06/06/94. 8(b) of the RTI Act, information regarding any proceedings in the Court of Law or Tribunal is exempt from disclosure.
2. Provide certified copy of the agenda The information sought is not in public interest. Thus, the that was send to the Board of information cannot be made public and thus cannot be directors regarding the board provided.
meeting on 26/12/2011.
3. Provide certified copies of the This information can be provided as the proceeding is affidavits by the bank on episode no. pending on the Arbitration Tribunal. As per Section 8(b) of PMA/MCJ/12/2002 in Arbitration, the RTI Act, information regarding any proceedings in the New Delhi. Court of Law or Tribunal is exempt from disclosure.
4. Provide certified copies of the Copy of the suspension order has been enclosed.
suspension order no. ----193- 94/8849 dated 03/02/94.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA disposed off the appeal enclosing the copy of the information provided by the PIO and thus upholding the PIOs decision/reply.Page 1 of 2
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a perusal of the papers it appears that the PIO has denied information on query 01 & 03 under Section 8(1)(b) of the RTI Act. Section 8(1)(b) of the RTI Act exempts, "information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court;". The PIO has incorrectly applied this exemption and denied the information on the ground that any proceedings in a court of law or tribunal are exempt. The Lawmakers have specifically exempted information which has been expressly forbidden by any court of law of tribunal but not exempted matters merely because they are subjudice. No evidence has been shown that the information on query 01 & 03 has been prohibited from disclosure by any Court of Law or Tribunal. In view of this the Commission does not accept the claim of exemption by the PIO with regards to query 01 & 03 of the RTI Application.
The PIO has refused to disclose the information on query-02 on the ground that there is no public interest in disclosure of this information. The Appellant does not have to show any public interest in disclosure of the information unless an exemption under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act applies to the information. Only if an exemption under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act is applicable the Appellant may still disclosure of information as per the provisions of Section 8(2) of the RTI Act. In such an event a larger public interest in disclosure has to be shown. In the instant case the PIO has not established any claim for exemption as per Section 8(1) of the RTI Act and hence there is no need for the appellant to show any public interest in this disclosure.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information on query 01, 02 & 03 to the appellant before 05 July 2012.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 18 June 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (IN) Page 2 of 2