Suresh Chandra DECISION
Suresh Chandra, Information Commissioner
1. The issues under consideration arising out of second appeal dated 25.09.2017 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through his RTI application dated 23.05.2017 and first appeal dated 16.06.2017:
(i) When Finance Ministry became aware on the case of 32 lakhs debit cards compromised.
(ii) Is any internal enquiry done on this case, Please provide the enquiry report on Case of 32 lakh debit cards compromised.
(iii) Please provide copy of all letters/Memo/Emails sent or received by finance ministry on Case of 32 lakh debit card compromised.
(iv) How many FIRs registered on the Case of 32 lakh debit cards compromised and provide all FIR Numbers.
(v) Which investigating agency investigated this Case of 32 lakh debit card compromised please provide the name of the agency and investigation officer names.
(vi) Is Investigation completed on the above case.
(vii) Is any Commission formed by the govt. to investigate the case. If yes, please provide the commission members details. And copy of commission report.
(viii) Please provide total loss in Rupees due to 32 lakh debit card compromised with their bank details.
(ix) Please provide loss of amount by Bank.
(x) Please provide loss of amount by Bank's Customers.
(xi) Please provide the compensation details given to customers by Bank by Govt. of India.
2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 23.05.2017 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter called the RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Reserve Bank of India, Colaba, Mumbai, seeking the aforesaid information. The CPIO replied on 13.06.2017. Not satisfied with the response of the CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal dated 16.06.2017. The First Appellate Authority disposed of the first appeal vide order dated 24.07.2017. Aggrieved by this, the appellant has filed the second appeal dated 25.09.2017 before this Commission which is under consideration.
3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 25.09.2017 inter alia on the grounds that the information has been wrongfully denied by the CPIO whereas in this case disclosure of the information outweighs the protected interest of wrong doers who have conspired in compromising the financial data of huge number of citizens. He requested the Commission to direct the concerned CPIO to supply complete information sought by the appellant and impose penalty as per section 20 of RTI Act. He also requested the Commission to direct the public authority to make entry in service book/annual performance appraisal report of the CPIO for defying the provisions of the Act.
4. The CPIO denied the information vide his reply dated 13.06.2017 on point No. 2 and 3 of the RTI application by taking recourse to the provisions of section 8(1)(a) and (d) of the RTI Act. The CPIO stated that the information relating to point No. 1 of the RTI application is available at their web portal and information on point No. 4 and 5 of the RTI application is not available with them. The FAA furnished revised response on all points of the RTI application.
5. The appellant and the respondent Ms. Leela Ramesh, Assistant Legal Advisor, Reserve Bank of India, Bandra, attended the hearing through Video Conferencing.
5.1. The appellant submitted that the respondent is misusing the provision of section 8(1) of the RTI Act to deny information. He alleged that the public authority took cognizance of the matter relating to fraudulent transactions carried out in case of 32 lakh debit cards only when it was highlighted through news channels. He stated that the public authority either omitted to respond or provided misleading information with respect to point No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 11 of the RTI application.
5.2. The Appellant contended that the Appellate Aut........