CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2009/000281
Dated, the 31st July, 2009.
Appellant : Shri S.S. Jain
Respondents : Life Insurance Corporation of India
This second-appeal came up for hearing on 30.06.2009 in the
presence of appellant, respondents ⎯ represented by Ms.Richaa
Kapoor, Secretary (P&IR), Shri Vivek Sharma, Assistant Secretary (P&IR)
and Shri Gagan Dua, AAO (RTI) ⎯ and the representatives of the
third-parties, viz. the All India LIC Employees Federation, the All India
Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes & Buddhists LIC Employees’ Welfare
Association and the Northern Zone Insurance Employees’ Association.
2. Appellant’s RTI-application dated 18.11.2008 comprising the
following queries was filed before the Regional Manager (Marketing) &
CPIO, LIC of India, New Delhi:-
“1. Please let me know the meetings held between
Management of LIC in Northern Zonal Office with the
Unions and the welfare associations with dates and
Agendas of such meetings during the last 5 years. Also
provide me the certified copies of all such agendas.
2. The discussions held item wise in the respective Agendas of
the respective unions and the welfare associations during
the last 5 years.
3. The conclusions arrived at after the aforesaid discussions
between the Management, Unions and Welfare
Associations.
4. The compliance of the decisions taken in the aforesaid
meetings.”
3. CPIO referred the matter to the Employees’ Unions, who were
treated as third-parties in respect of the information sought by the
appellant. According to the CPIO, the Trade Unions objected to
disclosure of the Agendas for those discussions and hence the
AT-31072009-32.doc
Page 1 of 3
information was denied to the appellant. Appellate Authority, through
his order dated 22.01.2009, largely upheld the CPIO’s contention.
4. Appellant, through his second-appeal, has questioned the denial
of the information to him by the CPIO.
5. It is fairly obvious that this RTI-petition owes its origin to Trade
Union rivalry in which the agenda for discussion of one with the public
authority is sought to be accessed by another. CPIO was asked to file a
formal statement about the public authority’s position regarding
disclosing contents of the discussions held with Trade Unions. Such a
statement has been filed by them on 30.06.2009. The sum-total of
their submission is, that while it is true that informal meetings between
the trade union representatives and the public authority are held off
and on; the minutes of the meetings, however, in most cases, are not
recorded and, in cases where such minutes are recorded, these are
circulated only to the Trade Unions to which these relate.
6. Appellant had argued before the Commission that the Trade
Unions represent the workers’ interests and, therefore, the discussions
which they hold with the public authority regarding the employees’
welfare could not be treated as confidential between those Trade
Unions and the public authority. All workers are entitled to know as to
what decisions were made through the intervention of the Trade Unions
to promote their welfare and to redress their grievances. In that light,
discussions between Trade Union representatives and the public
authority could not be an exclusive and secret affair between the two,
to which others could not be made privy.
Decision:
7. It is directed that a copy of the CPIO’s communication to the
Commission dated 30.06.2009 shall be provided to the appellant as the
respondents’ response to his queries.
8. I see no reason why the Trade Unions’ discussions with the public
authority could be treated confidential between the Trade Unions and
the public authority, rivalry between Trade Unions notwithstanding.
Insofar as these discussions are only about employee welfare and
grievance redressal, it is just and proper that these are allowed to be
held in the open so that all employees are aware of the conservations
between the Trade Unions and the public authority and how far their
welfare was promoted through these contacts. By its very nature, such
AT-31072009-32.doc
Page 2 of 3
information cannot be characterized as private, secret or confidential.
No exemption Sections of the RTI Act prohibit such disclosure.
9. It is accordingly directed that all records as held in this matter by
the public authority, i.e. the Life Insurance Corporation of India shall be
disclosed to the appellant, through inspection of the records, within
three weeks of the receipt of this order by the CPIO. A notice may be
given by the CPIO to the Appellant indicating the time and date when
he can inspect the relevant records. He shall be authorized to take
copies of the inspected records on payment of such fee as may be
admissible.
10. Appeal disposed of with these directions.
11. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-31072009-32.doc
Page 3 of 3