Central Information Commission
Mrvirender Singh vs Oriental Bank Of Commerce on 5 May, 2014
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No. CIC/VS/A/2013/000512/SH
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 5th May 2014
Date of decision : 5th May 2014
Name of the Appellant : Shri Virender Singh,
190, M C Colony Road, Bhiwani, Haryana
Name of the Public Authority : Central Public Information Officer,
Oriental Bank of Commerce,
Regional Office: Rohtak, 97, Sonepat Road,
Rohtak124001
The Appellant was not present.
On behalf of the Respondents, Shri S. K. Sodhi, Chief Manager was present.
Information Commissioner : Shri Sharat Sabharwal This matter pertains to an RTI application dated 15.1.2013 filed by the Appellant, seeking information regarding the appointment, promotion, movable and immovable property returns, PAN number and income tax returns etc. of a third party employee of the Respondent Bank. The CPIO responded on 31.1.2013 and denied the information on the ground that it pertained to a third party. Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the Appellant filed an appeal to the First Appellate Authority on 11.2.2013. In his order dated 21.2.2013, the FAA upheld the CPIO's reply. The Appellant approached the CIC in second appeal on 12.3.2013.
2. The Appellant was not present in spite of a written notice having been sent to him. We heard the submissions of the Respondents. Taking into account the records and the submissions made by the Respondents, we note that some points of the RTI application concern the service matters of a third party employee. These matters are between the Respondents and the concerned employee. Some other points of the RTI application concern movable and immovable property returns and income tax returns etc. In this context, we note that in its judgment dated 3.10.2012 in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs. Central Information Commissioner and Ors., the Hon'ble Supreme Court had considered, inter alia, disclosure of information concerning movable and immovable properties and income tax returns of a third party. In the above judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had observed the following: "The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are "personal information" which stand exempted from disclosure under Clause (j) of Section 8 (1) of the RTI Act, unless involves a larger public interest and the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information."
3. The Appellant was not present to make submission(s) regarding any larger public interest that would warrant the disclosure of third party information. Accordingly, we see no ground to interfere with the decision of the Respondents to deny information in this case.
4. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
5. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/ (Sharat Sabharwal) 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) Deputy Registrar