Central Information Commission
Sitaram Prasad vs Department Of Information Technology on 25 September, 2018
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग , मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या /Second Appeal No.-CIC/DITEC/A/2017/182372
Sitaram Prasad ...अपीलकता /Appellant
Versus
बनाम
Central Public Information Officer, ... ितवादी/Respondent
M/O. Electronics & I. T.,
Department of Electronics & I.T.,
Unique Identification Authority of India,
Regional Office, Ranchi, 1st Floor,
RIADA Building, Namkum Industrial Area,
Lowadih, Ranchi, Jharkhand- 834010.
Dated of Hearing:- 24-09-2018
Dated of Decision:- 24-09-2018
RTI Application filed on:- 10-08-2017
CPIO replied on:- 19-09-2017
First Appeal filed on:- 16-10-2017
FAA's order:- 03-11-2017
2nd Appeal received on:- 12-12-2017
ORDER
Facts:
1. The appellant filed RTI application dated 10-08-2017 seeking documents on the basis of which Aadhaar card was issued by some other person who had illegally withdrawn the money from the Bank account of his wife.
2. The appellant filed second appeal on 12-12-2017 before the Commission on the ground that information should be provided to him. Hearing:
3. Both the parties participated in the hearing through video conferencing.
Mr. Deo Shankar (ADG) represented the respondent. The written submissions are taken on record.
4. The appellant informed that after demise of his wife, Smt. Sumitra Devi on 17-02-2015, some other person managed to get issued this Aadhaar card impersonating herself as his wife, Smt. Sumitra Devi by using his residential address. Further, the said person also managed to get issued an ATM card in her name and withdrew an amount of Rs. 4,65,000/- from Smt. Sumitra Devi's Bank account, wherein, he was the nominee. In this regard, he requested for the sought information.
5. The respondent stated that the information sought by the appellant is a third party information u/Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. Therefore, they have denied the same. He further stated that as per Sections 28 and 29 r/w Section 33 of The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016, the demographic and biometric data of an individual enrolled under Aadhaar programme is confidential in nature. However, he agreed to verify the authenticity of the Aadhaar card. Discussion/ observation:
6. This Commission observed that as a legal heir of Late Smt. Sumitra Devi, the appellant is entitled to get this information. However, the appellant should provide sufficient proof and details of his deceased wife to the respondent to enable them to confirm her identity. The respondent should provide this information to the appellant within the next 15 days from the date of receipt of the documents from him.
Decision:
7. The respondent is directed to take action as per para 6 above.
8. The respondent is advised to investigate the matter and take action as per their policy and if found necessary suspend/cancel the Aadhaar card.
The appeal is disposed of. Copy of the order be given to the parties free of cost.
Radha Krishna Mathur (राधा कृ ण माथुर) Chief Information Commissioner (मु य सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) S.C. Sharma Dy. Registrar एस. सी. शमा , उप-पंजीयक एस. सी.
(011-26186535)