Central Information Commission
Mallacheruvu Kanaka Durga Ahavani vs Department Of Posts on 27 January, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
िशकायत सं ा / Complaint No. CIC/POSTS/C/2023/136676
Mallacheruvu Kanaka Durga ...िशकायतकता/Complainant
Ahavani
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Department Of Posts,
Tenali ... ितवादीगण /Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the complaint:
RTI : 13.12.2022 FA : 03.04.2023 Complaint : 15.05.2023
CPIO : 05.01.2023 FAO : Not on record Hearing : 21.01.2025
Date of Decision: 24.01.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 13.12.2022 seeking information on the following points:
I M.K. Durga Bhavani w/o Mellacheruvu Narayana Murthy r/o 10-14-87, veda patasala street, Repalle wants to bring to your kind notice the following complaint.
My husband drawn a huge amount on 19-04-2021 at head post office Repalle, and I went to the office for other work and I came to know it personally. Immediately I applied in RTI on 22-04-2021 and on 11-06-2021 seeking the transaction details and I was replied for the both letters on same date i.e. 16-06-2021 stating that "As Page 1 of 4 per Chapter 2. Section 8 rule no.4 of RTI act 2005. disclosure of personal information of an individual could cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of that individual and hence cannot be furnished."
Again I went to Divisional office, Tenali and given a representation on 06-09-2021 and I was replied on 04-10-2021 stating that "As per Chapter 2, Section 8 rule no.4 of RTI act 2005. disclosure of personal information of an individual could cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of that individual and hence cannot be furnished."
Next I went to Circle Office Krishna Lanka, Vijayawada and given a representation on 07-12-2021 and they forwarded the complaint to Divisional office, Tenali on 14-12-2021 seeking reply with an intimation to the circle office. But they didn't respond for a long time and after continuous remainders through phones and letters dated 12-07-2022 and 07-10-2022, finally after almost one year delay they replied stating that "it is not possible to provide the account details of an account holder to a person other than the account holder." I humbly submit that a legally wedded wife is always entitled to know the account details of her husband. A wife asking to know the account details of her husband doesn't mean unwarranted invasion of privacy of the husband. In this regard lam enclosing the order copy of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India for your ready reference.
Hence, I request you to furnish the following information of my husband M. Narayana Murthy with the help of his Aadhar card no: *********9028 and pan card no: BR******94D
(i) Account number
(ii) Details of transaction on 19-04-2021
(iii) Last transaction details
(iv) Current status and Balance details
(v) Transfer of amount details.
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 05.01.2023 and the same is reproduced as under :-
Page 2 of 4"It is to inform that the information pertaining to a PO savings Bank Customer is to be treated as confidential and details thereof are not be divulged as per the rules/guidelines on the subject."
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 03.04.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The order of FAA, if any, is not available on the record of the Commission.
4. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of the FAA's order, the Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint dated 15.05.2023.
5. The Complainant and on behalf of the respondent Shri U. Yelamandaiah, CPIO, attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The Complainant inter alia submitted that she was legally wedded wife of Mellacheruvu Narayana Murthy, who was under judicial custody. She further stated that she was aware about the existence of certain postal accounts in the name of her husband, however, did not have the account numbers or other details. She pleaded that the respondent had not provided the requisite information to her, so far.
7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that in addition to their earlier reply they had furnished their latest written submissions dated 11.01.2025 and the operative portion is extracted below:
"Further, it is respectfully submitted that after verification in the database of Postal Department, with the Adhaar, PAN and mobile number of Sri Narayan Murthy, it was revealed that no accounts were opened by Sri M Narayan Murthy at Repalle Post Office. It was also informed that transactions done on 19.04.2021 were also verified with the long book detailed report (list of all transactions of the day). But no transactions were found pertaining to the said Sri M Narayan Murthy. Finally, it was concluded that Shri M Narayan Murthy is not having any post office accounts with his name at Repalle Post Office."
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the respondent had replied to the Page 3 of 4 complainant on 05.01.2023. Further, in their latest written submissions, the CPIO informed that after verification in the database of Postal Department, with the Adhaar, PAN and mobile number of Sri Narayan Murthy, it was revealed that no accounts were opened by Sri M Narayan Murthy at Repalle Post Office. That being so, there appears to be no deliberate attempt on the part of the CPIO to obstruct any information. Accordingly, the complaint is closed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 24.01.2025 Authenticated true copy Bijendra Kumar (िबज कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO O/o. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Supdt., & CPIO, Department Of Posts, Tenali Division, Tenali-522201
2. Mallacheruvu Kanaka Durga Ahavani Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)