Affirmation of RTI Act Exemptions for Personal and Fiduciary Information in D Shekhar v. Department of Posts: Central Information Commission

Introduction

The case of D Shekhar v. Department of Posts was adjudicated by the Central Information Commission on July 14, 2020. The appellant, D Shekhar, filed a Right to Information (RTI) application seeking detailed financial information regarding medical claims, traveling allowances, and transfer allowances submitted by the staff of the Postal Department between 2010 and 2018. The petitioner alleged corruption within the Postal Department as the motive behind seeking this information. The respondent, the Department of Posts, denied access to the requested information citing exemptions under Section 8(1)(d), (e), and (j) of the RTI Act, 2005, arguing that the information pertained to personal data and was held in a fiduciary capacity.

Summary of the Judgment

The Central Information Commission (CIC) reviewed the appeals lodged by D Shekhar after his initial RTI request was denied. Upon examination, the CIC upheld the Department of Posts' refusal to disclose the information. The Commission relied on several precedents to affirm that the data sought fell under the exemptions provided by the RTI Act, specifically those related to personal information and fiduciary relationships. The decision stressed that without substantial evidence of larger public interest, personal and fiduciary information remains protected from disclosure to prevent unwarranted invasion of privacy.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The CIC extensively cited landmark judgments to substantiate its decision. Notably:

Reserve Bank of India & Ors. v. Jayantilal N. Mistry & Ors. (2016) 3 SCC 525: Defined fiduciary relationships and emphasized the duty of protection over such information.
Central Board of Secondary Education v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors. (2011) 8 SCC 497: Elaborated on fiduciary relationships within the RTI framework, detailing various scenarios where such relationships exist.
Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner & Ors. (2013) 1 SCC 212: Highlighted that personal performance-related information of employees is exempt from disclosure unless a larger public interest is demonstrated.
Subhash Chandra Agarwal v. Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India (2019): Provided an exhaustive list of personal and professional information deemed exempt under the RTI Act.
Satpal v. Central Information Commission & Ors. (2018): Clarified that personal information submitted by employees is confidential unless overriding public interest warrants disclosure.

Legal Reasoning

The Court's legal reasoning was anchored in the interpretation of Section 8 of the RTI Act, which delineates exemptions to ensure the protection of personal and sensitive information. Central to the judgment was the concept of a fiduciary relationship, where the Department of Posts held the requested information in trust for its employees. The CIC reasoned that disclosing such data without a compelling public interest would breach privacy and confidentiality obligations.

Furthermore, the appellant's allegation of corruption was deemed insufficient to override the statutory exemptions. The Commission emphasized that unsubstantiated claims cannot serve as a basis for breaching established privacy protections unless substantiated by concrete evidence indicating a larger public interest.

Impact

This judgment reinforces the boundaries of information disclosure under the RTI Act, particularly concerning personal and fiduciary data held by public authorities. It underscores the necessity for appellants to demonstrate a significant public interest to warrant the disclosure of exempted information. Future cases involving similar requests will likely reference this judgment to balance transparency with privacy rights, ensuring that exemptions are not broadly interpreted to compromise individual confidentiality without substantial justification.

Additionally, the decision may prompt public authorities to implement more robust data protection measures, ensuring that personal and sensitive information is appropriately safeguarded in alignment with RTI provisions.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Fiduciary Relationship

A fiduciary relationship is a legal or ethical relationship of trust between two or more parties. In this context, the Department of Posts holds information on behalf of its employees, meaning it has a duty to protect and manage that information responsibly.

Section 8 of the RTI Act

Section 8 lists specific exemptions where information need not be disclosed. Subsections 8(1)(d), (e), and (j) specifically protect:

Trade secrets or commercial confidence (8(1)(d))
Personal information held in a fiduciary relationship (8(1)(e))
Information relating to assets and liabilities (8(1)(j))

Conclusion

The judgment in D Shekhar v. Department of Posts serves as a pivotal reference in understanding the limitations and safeguards embedded within the RTI Act concerning personal and fiduciary information. By upholding the exemptions under Section 8, the Central Information Commission reinforced the principle that transparency does not come at the expense of individual privacy and confidentiality. This balance ensures that while public authorities remain accountable, the rights and personal information of individuals are vigilantly protected unless a clear and compelling public interest dictates otherwise.

Stakeholders, including public authorities and information seekers, must navigate these provisions with a clear understanding of the boundaries set to maintain both transparency and privacy within the governance framework.

Affirmation of RTI Act Exemptions for Personal and Fiduciary Information in D Shekhar v. Department of Posts