O R D E R

(31.03.2022)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 29.12.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through the RTI application dated 28.09.2019 and first appeal dated 15.11.2019:-

(i) “आपके मंडल काया(cid:4)लय क(cid:6) शाखा जटमुझेडा म(cid:8) वष(cid:4) 2015 म(cid:8) काय(cid:4)रत शाखा अिधकारी

िश(cid:15)पी कुमारी (P. F. No. 313419) को वष(cid:4) 2016 म(cid:8) दी गयी chargesheet क(cid:6) पूण (cid:4)

स(cid:21)यािपत (cid:22)ितिलिप सिहत!

(ii) आपके मंडल काया(cid:4)लय क(cid:6) शाखा जटमुझेडा म (cid:8) वष (cid:4) 2015 म (cid:8) काय(cid:4)रत शाखा अिधकारी िश(cid:15)पी

कुमारी (P. F. No. 313419) को वष(cid:4) 2016 म(cid:8) दी गयी charge sheet क(cid:6) पूण(cid:4) जांच का

showcase स(cid:21)यािपत (cid:22)ितिलिप सिहत!

(iii) शाखा अिधकारी िश(cid:15)पी कुमारी (P. F. No. 313419) क(cid:6) पूण (cid:4) enquiry report क(cid:6)

स(cid:21)यािपत (cid:22)ितिलिप सिहत!

(iv) शाखा अिधकारी िश(cid:15)पी कुमारी (P. F. No. 313419) क(cid:6) पूण(cid:4) Order क(cid:6) स(cid:21)यािपत (cid:22)ितिलिप सिहत!

(v) शाखा अिधकारी िश(cid:15)पी कुमारी (P. F. No. 313419) क(cid:6) पूण (cid:4) Appeal क(cid:6) स(cid:21)यािपत (cid:22)ितिलिप सिहत!

(vi) शाखा अिधकारी िश(cid:15)पी कुमारी (P. F. No. 313419) क(cid:6) पूण (cid:4) Appeal Order क(cid:6)

स(cid:21)यािपत (cid:22)ितिलिप सिहत”!

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 28.09.2019 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab National Bank, Uttar Pradesh, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO did not reply to the appellant. Aggrieved with the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 15.11.2019. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 09.12.2019 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 29.12.2019 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 29.12.2019 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO vide letter dated 30.09.2019 forwarded the RTI application to CO MZN. The FAA vide order dated 09.12.2019 denied to provide the information under Section 8 (1) (d), (e) & (j) of the RTI Act, 2005.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Shyam Kishore, CPIO, Punjab National Bank, Muzaffarnagar, attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that the bank had raised allegations against him that he had misused used-ID of other employees in the biometric system. Therefore, he had sought the information relating to the appeals and orders passed in similar cases of other bank employees in order to defend himself.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had sought copies of enquiry reports, charge sheets and orders passed in cases of third parties, disclosure of which might have caused unwarranted invasion of their right to privacy and had no relation to any public interest or activity. Therefore, the information was denied to the appellant under provisions of section 8 (1) (d), (e) & (j) of the RTI Act, 2005.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that due reply was given by the FAA on 09.12.2019. Further, the appellant failed to establish any larger public interest outweighing the right to privacy of third parties i.e. employees of the bank in this case. Therefore, the appellant’s request pleading that the disclosure of the information merely for the preparation of his defense in the case, may not be allowed. There appears to be no infirmity with the FAA’s order dated 09.12.2019. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to th