Central Information Commission
Katari Kesavulu Chetty vs Union Bank Of India on 28 March, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/UBIND/A/2022/143999
Katari Kesavulu Chetty ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Union Bank of India
Chittoor ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 17.05.2022 FA : 30.05.2022 SA : 09.09.2022
CPIO : 22.05.2022 FAO : Not on record Hearing : 22.03.2024
Date of Decision: 22.03.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.05.2022 seeking information on the following points:
(i) "Names & Designations of the staff working at Union Bank of India, Kattamanchi, Chittoor branch.
(ii) Working hours & Business hours of Union Bank of India, Kattamanchi, Chittoor branch.
(iii) Names & Designations of the staff working at Union Bank of India, Kattamanchi, Chittoor branch those who are staying in bank's leased accommodation provided by the Union Bank of India and amount of monthly lease paid by the Union Bank of India to each leased accommodation.Page 1 of 3
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 22.05.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"Point (i) - The name and designation of staff of our kattamanchi branch as on 20.05.2022.
1. K. Harshvardhan - Branch Head
2. A. Pratyusha - Head Cashier
3. A. Manisha - Clerk
4. Kusuma Kumari - PTS Point (ii) - Our Kattamanchi branch business hours are 10.00 A.M. to 4.00 P.M. Working hours may extend beyond business hours depending upon the work on that day.
Point (iii) - The information sought by you is personal and hence denied u/s 8 (1)
(j) of the RTI Act, 2005."
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 30.05.2022 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA's order, if any, is not available on record.
4. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of any FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 09.09.2022.
5. The appellant remained absent during the hearing and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Abhishek Dwivedi Assistant Manager attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that information on point No. 1 and 2 of the RTI application had already been furnished to the appellant vide their letter dated 22.05.2022. He stated that the information sought in point No. 3 was related third-party, disclosure of which had no relationship to any public activity or interest. Accordingly, they claimed exemption under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act.
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that due reply was given by the respondent vide letter dated 22.05.2022. The information sought on point no. 3 pertained to the 3rd party who were entitled to preserve their privacy. The appellant in his RTI application as well as in the first appeal failed to bring out any larger public interest warranting the Page 2 of 3 disclosure of the information which the respondent had denied. Hence, the submissions made by the respondent were taken on record. There appears to be no public interest in further prolonging the matter. With this observation, the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलं गम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनां क/Date: 22.03.2024 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) (कनल एस एस िछकारा, ($रटायड)) Dy. Registrar (उप पं जीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Union Bank of India, Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell, Regional Office: Tirupati, S. V. University, Tirupati, Chittoor, A.P.- 517505
2. Katari Kesavulu Chetty Page 3 of 3