ORDER

(12.12.2022)

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 28.01.2021 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 15.05.2020 and first appeal dated 24.06.2020:-

(i) Statements from 15-01-2020 to 15-05-2020 from the SB A/c. No. **********9668 of the Late VeeraReddy Laxminarasamma, W/o. Jagannath Reddy died on 30-01-2020.

(ii) Particulars of Claim form duly filled and filed by the "Nominee" Veerareddy Ramana Reddy.

(iii) Particulars of the account and bank nominee to which the balance of funds of V. Laxmi Narasamma has been transferred.

(iv) Current address of the Nominee Veerareddy Ramana Reddy.

(v) CCTV Camera recorded footage of the Branch Manager cabin and that of Bank premises of timings from 10.30 a.m. to 11.30 a.m. on 15-05-2020 written on a compact disk (CD).

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 15.05.2020 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Union Bank of India, Warangal, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 30.05.2020 replied to the appellant. Aggrievedby the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 24.06.2020. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 07.08.2020 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved bythat, the appellant filed second appeal dated 28.01.2021 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 28.01.2021 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 replied vide letter dated 30.05.2020 and the same is reproduced as under:-

“In this context, we submit that the above information cannot be share/disclose because of the following reason.

According to RTI Act Sec.8 (1) (d) says that "information including commercial confidence trade secrets or intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information" andAccording to RTI .,Act Sec.8 (1) (e) says there shall be no obligation to give any citizen the "information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information.

The FAA vide order dated 07.08.2020agreed to the reply given by the CPIO.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Md. Vazir Sultan, Dy. Regional Head, Union Bank of India, Warangal attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that he sought information regarding account No. ************668 of his deceased mother Veerareddy Laxmi Narsamma who died on 31.01.2020. He further submitted that his younger brother Veerareddy Ramana Reddy, being nominee of the said account claimed the fund left behind by his deceased mother. Therefore, he sought information regarding account of his deceased mother which was denied by the respondent.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had not submitted copy of the legal heir certificate or succession certificate therefore information sought was denied under section 8 (1) (d) & (j) of the RTI Act. They further submitted that account of the deceased Veerareddy Laxmi Narsamma was settled in favour of the nominee as per the rules/guidelines of the bank.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed thatreply given by the respondent was evasive. It may not be out of place to mention that under the RTI Act for providing information of the deceased person to the legal heir, succession certificate