Brij Mohan Shivare v. R. K. Sharma

Second Appeal received on : 27/01/2011 The Appellant asked Information on the following questions out of which PIO replied only for 2 points. No. Information Sought Reply of PIO

1. Whether any complaint of steal/theft is received by the bank regarding Cheque No.050177, dated 3/8/2009 deposited in an account no.4788.If yes, then on which date? Exempt u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI ACT.

2. Whether Mr. Vijay Pavayya has filed an application to stop the payment of the Cheque No.050177,if yes then on which date? Exempt u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI ACT.

3. Do you enclose the receipt of stop payment or loosing of cheque anywhere ? If yes, then where? Exempt u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI ACT.

4. Details as to when and till how many days the amount of the above mentioned account was Rs.4,00,000 within the time period from 03/05/2009 to 21/01/2010? Exempt u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI ACT.

5. Can Bank return the Cheque due to other reasons even after receipt of stop payment On receipt of stop payment of cheque from the drawer, there is nothing in the account through the system.

6. Kindly ,issue the certified copy of the statements from the time period 03/05/2009 to 03/08/2009 of Account No.4788. Exempt u/s 8(1)(j) of RTI ACT.

7. Issue the certified Copy of the Application Letter given by Mr. Vijay Pavayya in accordance to the Stop Payment of the Cheque No.050177. There may be more then one reason for returning of cheque. Grounds for First Appeal : Unsatisfactory Information provided by the PIO No order Grounds for Second Appeal : Out of nine questions only two were answered ,Incomplete Information, Ambiguous Reply. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present: Appellant: Mr. Brij Mohan Shivare on video conference from NIC-Agra Studio; Respondent: Mr. Dinesh Saxena, Branch Manager representing Mr. R. K. Sharma, CPIO & AGM on video conference from NIC-Agra Studio; The appellant had sought information about a customer of the bank. The Bank has denied the information claiming exemption under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act exempts information which is held in a fiduciary capacity by the public authority. Section 8 (1) (e) of the RTI Act exempts from disclosure 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 traditional definition of a fiduciary is a person who occupies a position of trust in relation to someone else, therefore requiring him to act for the latter's benefit within the scope of that relationship. In business or law, we generally mean someone who has specific duties, such as those that attend a particular profession or role, e.g. doctor, lawyer, financial analyst or trustee. Another important characteristic of such a relationship is that the information must be given by the holder of information who must have a choice,- as when a litigant goes to a particular lawyer, a customer chooses a particular bank, or a patient goes to particular doctor. An equally important characteristic for the relationship to qualify as a fiduciary relationship is that the provider of information gives the information for using it for the benefit of the one who is providing the information. All relationships usually have an element of trust, but all of them cannot be classified as fiduciary. Information provided in discharge of a statutory requirement, or to obtain a job, or to get a license, cannot be considered to have been given in a fiduciary relationship. In the instant case very clearly a fiduciary relationship exists, since customers of a Bank come to it because of the implicit trust they have; and they provide information to the Bank for their own benefit. Customers also have a choice of which bank they wish to approach. Hence unless a large public interest is shown the information is exempted from disclosure. In the instant case no larger public interest has been demonstrated. Decision: The appeal is disposed. The information sought by the Appellant is exempted under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act. Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner

22 September 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (BK))