Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 5314
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
ANANDI RAMALINGAM, J
Abhishek Arvind Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent
CIC/SBIND/A/2023/649158
Information related to third-party confidentiality is exempt from disclosure under the RTI Act, as per Sections 8(1)(e) and (j).
Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 8(1)(e) and (j) - Second Appeal regarding information sought about an employee's legal issues and departmental actions - CPIO denied information citing third-party confidentiality and exemption provisions - Appellant's dissatisfaction led to First Appeal, which was upheld - Commission found no grounds for intervention. (Paras 1.1, 2.1, 3.1, 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The Appellant filed multiple RTI applications seeking information about ongoing legal cases against an SBI employee, alleging false declarations made by her. The CPIO denied the requests based on exemptions under the RTI Act.
Findings of Court:
The Commission upheld the CPIO's responses, stating that the information sought was exempt under the RTI Act and that appropriate replies were provided.
Issues: The main issues included whether the information sought was rightly denied under the RTI Act and the implications of third-party confidentiality.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the information sought pertained to a third party and was exempt from disclosure under the RTI Act, emphasizing the fiduciary nature of the information held by the respondent.
Result: Appeals dismissed.
O R D E R
Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2023/649165
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Kindly find attached the Conduct of SBI Employee Mrs. Shefali Gupta (SBI Employee, P.F. ID-59***20), which mentions about the Legal/Criminal/Forgery Court Cases ongoing against her and the RTI Reply stating that she has not intimated SBI about any of the ongoing Legal cases against her.
Since, all the criminal cases against Mrs. Shefali Gupta are ongoing since 2016, there is every likelihood that she has been giving false declarations to her esteemed employer SBI, about the same.
Pertaining to the above, kindly advise the following:
(i) Kindly provide the number of false declarations furnished by Mrs. Shefali Gupta to SBI, stating that no Criminal Court Cases are ongoing against her.
(ii) Kindly provide me a copy of each false declaration since 2016, where Mrs.
Shefali Gupta has stated to SBI that no Criminal Court Cases are ongoing against her.
(iii) Kindly specify, if Mrs. Shefali Gupta is eligible for continuance of service, given that there are Criminal and Forgery Cases ongoing against her.
(iv) Kindly specify, if Mrs. Shefali Gupta is eligible for continuance of service, given that there have been at least 2 instances, when Non Bailable Warrants have been issued against her.
(v) Kindly specify, if Mrs. Shefali Gupta is eligible for promotion upto the rank of Asst. Manager, given that there are Criminal and Forgery Cases ongoing against her, etc./ other related information
1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 11.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
“Information sought cannot be provided under section 8(1)-(e)&(j) of RTI act 2005.”
1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.09.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 26.09.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
1.3. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 18.10.2023.
Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2023/649161
2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.08.2023 seeking information on the following points:
With ref. to my Complaint dtd. 16 May 2023 (attached), against SBI Employee Mrs.
Shefali Gupta (SBI PF ID: 59***20), (i) Kindly specify, what conclusive legal action has been taken against Mrs. Shefali Gupta, as per SBI Rules, Regulations and Code of Conduct.
(ii) Kindly specify, what conclusive departmental action has been taken against Mrs.
Shefali Gupta, as per SBI Rules, Regulations and Code of Conduct.
(iii) Kindly specify, that on what basis, this complaint was closed, without seeking the approval / satisfaction of the complainant.
(iv) Kindly specify, why no complaint number was allocated to this complaint, despite several requests and reminders over the Email to SBI Customer care, by the complainant.
2.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 13.09.2023and the same is reproduced as under:-
“Point 1&2: Information sought cannot be provided under section 8(1)-(e)&(j) of RTI act 2005.
Point 3: Complaint 231865221 was done to Thakur Complex branch, Mumbai Circle on CRM portal. Mentioned complaint number was closed by Concerned department of Mumbai Circle & you were suitably advised "To be in contact with concerned branch"(copy attached). Complaint done by you through email/letter to GM, Customer Service Department Mumbai & no information is available at our end.
Point 4: Complaint number are allocated to all online complaints received on CRM portal. Complaint done by you through email/letter to GM, Customer Service Department Mumbai & no information is available at our end.”
2.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 15.09.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 20.09.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
