ORDER

( 27 .01.2021)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 28.11.2018 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 09.08.2018 and first appeal dated 10.09.2018:-

(i) Number of CCTV cameras which are installed targeting towards the cabin of Branch Manager, Punjab & Sind Bank, Bank Bazar Bathinda.

(ii) CCTV Footage of all the CCTV Cameras which are targeting towards the cabin of Branch Manager since the date of his joining at Punjab & Sind Bank, Bank Bazar Bathinda up to 08.08.2018.

(iii) Total number of payments made, total number of payment received, along with record of entering, posting and verification on 04.08.2018 with details who done the same on dated 04.08.2018.

(iv) Rules/procedure required for transfer of an employee from one branch to other.

(v) Rules/procedure under which Sonika Gupta PF code s-33330 who was transferred on late evening on 04.08.2018.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 09.08.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab & Sind Bank, Bhatinda, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 07.09.2018 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with this, the appellant filed first appeal dated 10.09.2018. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 15.10.2018 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by this, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 28.11.2018 before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 28.11.2018 inter alia on the grounds that the CPIO refused to provide the information sought. 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 07.09.2018 that the information in respect of point no. 1 of the RTI application was not covered within the definition of “information” under section 2 (f) of RTI Act; information in respect of point no. 2 of the RTI application was exempted under section 8 (1) (d) of RTI Act; information in respect of point no.3 of the RTI application including the names of the officials posted was exempted under section 8 (1) (j) of RTI Act; and that point nos 4 and of the RTI application were relating to transfer of employees which were normally governed by service rules. The FAA observed that the CPIO had not provided complete and satisfactory reply and directed the CPIO to review its order and reply to the CPIO within 20 days.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Devender Kumar, CPIO, Punjab and Sind Bank, Bathinda, attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that she was an employee in the respondent bank and the information sought was relating to her complaint regarding an incident of on 04.08.2018. The appellant further submitted that she had filed a complaint and reported her colleague’s misbehavior with her. The appellant pleaded that the CCTV footage was crucial for her case. The appellant further stated that information was deliberately not being disclosed to her and the appellant alleged that the respondent authority was trying to protect their employee.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the CCTV footage was denied to the appellant on security and privacy grounds. The respondent further submitted that the disclosure of information would cause invasion of privacy of third parties, hence, was exempted under section 8 (1) (j) of RTI Act.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO did not review its order dated 07.09.2018 in compliance of the FAA’s order dated 15.10.2018. Further, the appellant has contended that she had filed a complaint regarding misbehavio