O R D E R

(05.06.2023)

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 09.06.2021 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 03.08.2020 and first appeal dated 14.09.2020:- (i) The date when Sri Jayanta Ganguly ,s/o Prabir Ganguly, linked his AADHAR number with the Permanent Account Number (ALtpG6827A )

(ii) The profession of Sri Jayanta Ganguly shown or mentioned in the Application praying for issuance of Permanent Account Number.

(iii) The residential postal address of Sri Jayanta Ganguly mentioned ih the application praying for issuance of PAN card.

(iv) The provisions or the form number by which PAN can be corrected or updated and the internet site of availability of such provision or form.

(v) The mode of verification made by income Tax Department, Government of India, before issuance of PAN in respect of Sri Jayanta Ganguly.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 03.08.2020 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services, Mumbai, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 12.09.2020 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 14.09.2020. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 29.09.2020 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 09.06.2021 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 09.06.2021 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 12.09.2020 and the same is reproduced as under:- “ln this connection, we write to inform you that the UTI Infrastructure Technology And Services Ltd is processing the PAN Applications for issue of PAN Cards and maintaining the applications and other documents of issued PAN on behalf of Government of India Income Tax Department in fiduciary capacity u/s 8(l)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005 and the information/ detail /documents Form etc. of PAN holders, are the personal information/ documents of the PAN holders u/s 8(1) (j) of the RTI Act, 2005. In this regard, an appellant may refer the judgments of CIC in Application Nos. CIC/MA/A/2006/00722, CIC/MA/A/2006./00723, CIC/MA/A/ 2006/00724 and CIC/MA/A/2006/00725 dated 25.01.2007 and also refer order dated 2/i04/2008 in case of Ms. Anumeha C/O Association for Democratic Reforms, New Delhi. Also please refer Case No 05/lC (AyCIC/2006 dated of Arun Verma, New Delhi and Appeal No.CIC/UTSL/A/2017/102276 dated 02/05/2018 in the Appeal of Shiraz Karim Merchant Vs UTI infrastructure Technology And Services Ltd. in view of the above, we are unable to accept your request to provide the information/documents in respect of PAN ALIPG6827A of Shri Jayanta Ganguly as requested by you in your above mentioned application under the above provisions of the RTI Act, 2005”.

The FAA vide order dated 29.09.2020 agreed to the reply given by the CPIO.

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Sandeep Rajashirke, Asstt. V.P., UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services Limited, Belapur (Mumbai) attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had sought personal details and documents of a third party Sri Jayanta Ganguly. They further stated that in absence of any larger public interest being involved in the matter, they had denied the information under the provisions of section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observed that due reply w