MANU/SC/1463/2015

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Transferred Case (Civil) No. 91 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 707 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 92 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 708 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 93 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 711 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 94 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 712 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 95 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 713 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 96 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 715 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 97 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 716 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 98 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 717 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 99 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 718 of 2012), Transferred Case (Civil) No. 100 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 709 of 2012) and Transferred Case (Civil) No. 101 of 2015 (Arising out of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 714 of 2012)

Decided On: 16.12.2015

Appellants: Reserve Bank of India and Ors. Vs. Respondent: Jayantilal N. Mistry and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
M.Y. Eqbal and C. Nagappan

JUDGMENT

M.Y. Eqbal, J.

1. The main issue that arises for our consideration in these transferred cases is as to whether all the information sought for under the Right to Information Act, 2005 can be denied by the Reserve Bank of India and other Banks to the public at large on the ground of economic interest, commercial confidence, fiduciary relationship with other Bank on the one hand and the public interest on the other. If the answer to above question is in negative, then upto what extent the information can be provided under the 2005 Act.

2. It has been contended by the RBI that it carries out inspections of banks and financial institutions on regular basis and the inspection reports prepared by it contain a wide range of information that is collected in a fiduciary capacity. The facts in brief of the Transfer Case No. 91 of 2015 are that during May-June, 2010 the statutory inspection of Makarpura Industrial Estate Cooperative Bank Ltd. was conducted by RBI under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Thereafter, in October 2010, the Respondent sought following information from the CPIO of RBI under the Act of 2005, reply to which is tabulated hereunder:

3. On 30.3.2011, the First Appellate Authority disposed of the appeal of the Respondent agreeing with the reply given by CPIO in query No. 2, 3 & first part of 4, relying on the decision of the Full Bench of CIC passed in the case of Ravin Ranchochodlal Patel and Anr. v. Reserve Bank of India. Thereafter, in the second appeal preferred by the aggrieved Respondent, the Central Information Commission by the impugned order dated 01.11.2011, directed RBI to provide information as per records to the Respondent in relation to queries Nos. 2 to 6 before 30.11.2011. Aggrieved by the decision of the Central Information Commission (CIC), Petitioner RBI moved the Delhi High Court by way of a Writ Petition inter alia praying for quashing of the aforesaid order of the CIC. The High Court, while issuing notice, stayed the operation of the aforesaid order.

4. Similarly, in Transfer Case No. 92 of 2015, the Respondent sought following information from the CPIO of RBI under the Act of 2005, reply to which is tabulated hereunder: