CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2008/01494
Dated, the 09th March, 2009.
Appellant : Shri Manik Dadu Pawar
Respondents : The Oriental Insurance Company Limited
This second-appeal came up for hearing on 04.03.2009 following the
Commission’s notice dated 06.02.2009. Appellant was absent when called.
Respondents were represented by Shri P.K. Jha, DGM & CPIO and
Shri V.V.Mohlla, Manager.
2. Appellant’s RTI-application dated 11.06.2008 related to a variety of
details covering a period from 01.07.1989 to 31.12.2007 regarding certain
categories of insurance policies and its related matters. (A copy of the RTI
application is enclosed to this order).
3. Respondents through CPIO’s reply dated 04.07.2008 and the Appellate
Authority’s decision dated 04.09.2008, provided information to the appellant
corresponding to several queries for a period covering three years. As regards
the information for the period prior to the previous three years, respondents cited
RTI Act Section 7(9) to decline to disclose the requested information as, in their
judgement, it would lead to avoidable diversion of the public authority’s
resources.
4. In response to certain other parts of the queries, viz. items 3(C)(I)(c) to
3(C)(I)(p), appellant was informed that information was not readily available in
the format in which he requested it. To the queries numbered 3(C)(II)(a) and
3(C)(II)(b), respondents declined to disclose any information because, according
to them, the queries were hypothetical.
5. Appellant, in his written-submission, has stated nothing about how the
disclosed information was either inadequate or deficient and why the respondents
should be directed to disclose all the information which the appellant had
requested through his RTI-application. All that appellant has mentioned in his
second-appeal is that the Nationalized Insurance Companies were “looting the
people in broad daylight” by withholding insurance-related information.
Appellant, who sees himself in the role of a Good Samaritan, wants to create
AT-09032009-08.doc
Page 1 of 2
public awareness for promoting the welfare of the insurance companies and all
the Indian citizens.
6. These averments are insufficient for the Commission to decide how the
information withheld needed to be disclosed to the appellant within the
provisions of the RTI Act. I also noticed that given the range and the scope of
the information requested by the appellant, respondents were entirely within their
right to decline to disclose it under Section 7(9) of the RTI Act. Their decision
not to disclose information, which was hypothetical and not centrally maintained
in the form requested by the appellant, was also entirely within the provisions of
the RTI Act.
7. In view of the above, I uphold the decision of the Appellate Authority.
8. Appeal disposed of with these directions.
9. Copy of this decision be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-09032009-08.doc
Page 2 of 2