Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/PB/A/2008/01234-SM dated 14.03.2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section 19
Dated: 25 August 2009
Name of the Appellant : Smt. Urmila Pandey,
25/1A, Lane 36, Indra Park,
Palam Colony,
New Delhi.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Corporation Bank,
Zonal Office 32,
Rajendra Bhawan,
Rajendra Place, New Delhi.
The Appellant was represented by Shri N.C. Pandey.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri S.C. Jain, Chief Manager, was
present.
The brief facts of this case are as under.
2. The Appellant had, in this application dated March 14, 2008,
requested the CPIO for a number of information regarding the details of the
Current Bank account of M/s Bharatendu Investments and Financial Services
Private Limited. Although the Appellant had not enclosed a copy of the
CPIO’s reply, from the order of the Appellate Authority, it appears that he
had replied on March 28, 2008 and had denied the information claiming
exemption under Section 8(1) (j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The
Appellant had filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority on May 24,
2008. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal in his order dated June
10, 2008 by endorsing the decision of the CPIO. The Appellant has now
moved the CIC in second appeal against the denial of information.
3 During the hearing, both the parties were present and made their
submissions. The Respondent argued that the Appellant had sought to know
the current account details of a third party customer claiming her
CIC/PB/A/2008/01234-SM
association with that party as a promoter, former Director and shareholder
and since she was not the unauthorised representative of the said customer,
the desired information could not have been disclosed to her as it was held
by the Bank in commercial confidence. The CIC has consistently held that
account details of customers cannot be disclosed to unconnected third
parties as the disclosure of such information is exempt under Section 8(1)
(d) of the RTI Act. In this case, no ostensible larger public interest will be
served if the desired information is disclosed and therefore, there is no
ground for us to differ with the stand taken by the CPIO and the first
Appellate Authority.
4. The appeal is, thus, disposed off.
5. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(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
CIC/PB/A/2008/01234-SM