The public interest in disclosing information under the RTI Act may outweigh the commercial confidence of third parties, especially when the requestor has a direct stake in the matter.

Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 8(1)(d) - Disclosure of information sought by the Appellant regarding auction notice and loan details related to Tulsiani Constructions & Developers Pvt Ltd - CPIO denied information citing commercial confidence and third-party interests - Appellant contended larger public interest and personal stake in the auctioned properties - Commission found Respondent's submissions lacking clarity and insufficient to justify exemption under Section 8(1)(d) - Opportunity given for further submissions and rebuttal. (Paras 1.1, 2.1, 8, 9)

Facts of the case:
The Appellant sought information regarding a loan sanctioned to Tulsiani Constructions & Developers Pvt Ltd and properties mortgaged against it, which were put up for auction by the Bank of Baroda. The CPIO denied the request, citing commercial confidence and third-party information. The Appellant argued that he was an interested party as his property was included in the auction.

Findings of Court:
The Commission noted the Respondent's failure to adequately rebut the Appellant's claims and acknowledged the potential larger public interest in disclosing the information sought.

Issues: The main issues included whether the information sought was exempt under Section 8(1)(d) and the relevance of the Appellant's status as an interested party.

Ratio Decidendi: The Commission emphasized that the Respondent's justification for withholding information was insufficient and that the public interest in disclosure may outweigh the claimed commercial confidence.

Result: The Respondent was directed to provide further written rebuttal and appear for an in-camera hearing.

O R D E R

Second Appeal No. CIC/BKOBD/A/2023/635115

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 02.05.2023 seeking information on the following points:

 “This RTI query is related to ZSARB BoB Prayagraj auction notice dated 02.07.2022

1. When and how much loan was sanctioned to M/s Tulsiani Constructions &

Developers Pvt Ltd for which aforementioned auction notice has been issued?

2. Please provide details of flats/ properties put on mortgage against this loan?

3. Whether any report regarding the status of properties kept on mortgage (like properties already sold/ unsold/ intended to be sold etc.) was checked by the bank. Please provide the report prepared in this regard.

4. Whether bank has issued NOC for some of the properties kept on mortgage. If yes, kindly provide the list of such properties and basis on which this NOC was provided.

5. Please provide copies of reports prepared by the bank regarding the project.”

1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 30.05.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:- “The information sought by you contains commercial confidence, which would harm the competitive position and also the said information pertains to information of third party. Hence disclosure of the information is exempted under section 8 (1)(d) of RTI Act, 2005.”

1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 07.06.2023. The FAA vide order dated 23.06.2023 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 28.06.2023.

Second Appeal No. CIC/BKOBD/A/2023/639230

2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.06.2023 seeking information on the following points:

1. “Kindly allow me for inspection of records related to ZSARB BoB Prayagraj auction notice dated 02.07.2022. (copy attached)

2. It is also requested to provide details of property mortgaged in the year 2013 against the company i.e., Tulsiyani Construction & Developers Ltd for the loan provided to them.

3. Kindly provide the copies of NOC provided against various flats of Tulsiyani Construction & Developers Ltd.”

2.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 05.07.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:- “The information sought by you contains commercial confidence, which would harm the competitive position of third party. Hence disclosure of the information is exempted under section 8(1)(d) of RTI Act, 2005.”

2.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 17.07.2023. The FAA vide order dated 31.07.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

2.3. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 11.08.2023 stating inter alia as under:

“a. Bank of Baroda (will be referred as Bank henceforth) sanctioned a loan to M/s Tulsiani Constructions & Developers Pvt Ltd (will be referred as the builder henceforth)

in the year 2013 (year is to the best of my knowledge)

b. While sanctioning this loan, Bank of Baroda has kept certain properties as mortgage, which were already sold by the builder.

c. When builder failed to repay the loan, Bank issued an e-auction notice dated

02.07.2022 in which already sold properties were also put on auction.

d. One of such property also belongs to undersigned and that's why my right has been affected and I have also become a party to the commercial transaction between the bank and the builder.

e. Information asked by me relate to this loan and with the auction notice in which my property has been also put on auction by the Bank.

8. Appeal grounds for prayer/ relief:

a. The information sought by me has been rejected by the PIO on the grounds of

8(1)(d).

b. In the present case the information sought by me could have been considered commercial information between two parties if there would have been no interest of other parties. However in present case I am also an interested party in the case as my flat has been put under

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2024 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 3609

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONANANDI RAMALINGAM, JRAHUL KUMAR SACHAN – AppellantVersusBank of Baroda – RespondentCIC/BKOBD/A/2023/639230

The public interest in disclosing information under the RTI Act may outweigh the commercial confidence of third parties, especially when the requestor has a direct stake in the matter.

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
ANANDI RAMALINGAM, J
RAHUL KUMAR SACHAN – Appellant
Versus
Bank of Baroda – Respondent
CIC/BKOBD/A/2023/639230