Central Information Commission
No.CIC/PB/A/2008/00896-SM dated 03.10.2007
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated 02.06.2009
Appellant : Shri S.N. Bhat
Respondent : Canara Bank
The Appellant is represented by Shri Vithal.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following are present:-
(i) Shri Mohan Shanker, Senior Manager
(ii) Shri Pravatisharan
(iii) Shri Ajit Nayar, Senior Manager
The brief facts of the case are as under.
2. The Appellant had, in his application dated 3 November 2007, requested the
CPIO for providing him with a number of information regarding the distribution of gold
coins to the staff members of the bank on the occasion of the centenary celebrations.
The CPIO replied on 7 December 2007 and denied the information on the ground that
it was personal information the disclosure of which was exempt under Section 8(1) (j)
of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Not satisfied with this reply, he preferred an
appeal before the first Appellate Authority on for January 2008. The first Appellate
Authority endorsed the stand taken by the CPIO in denying the information. The
Appellant has preferred the second appeal to the CIC against the above order of the
first Appellate Authority.
3. The hearing was conducted through videoconferencing. Both the sides were
present in the respective NIC studio. We heard the submissions of the Respondent. He
argued that the Appellant had asked several questions, seeking more of an
interpretation or clarification from the CPIO on various issues rather than any
information. After carefully examining the contents of the Appellant’s application for
information, we find that the CPIO’s argument does not have much merit in it. It is
noted that even though the Appellant has framed his requests in the form of
questions, it is quite easy to decipher the exact information he is seeking. For
example, he wants to know who decided to present gold coins to staff members, or if
No.CIC/PB/A/2008/00896-SM
any quotation was invited for procuring those gold coins and, if so, for the details of
the bidders and their quotation etc. Surely, there are records in the Bank containing
the details about the authority which decided on presentation of gold coins to the
staff members and the bids and quotations received from the bidders and so on. To
claim that such information is personal information or that these do not constitute
information at all is clearly an attempt to deny information.
4. In view of the above, we are inclined to direct the CPIO to provide to the
Appellant within 10 working days from receipt of this order, all the information sought
by him.
5. With the above direction, the appeal is disposed off.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Satyananda Mishra)
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)
Assistant Registrar
No.CIC/PB/A/2008/00896-SM