Appellant sought information about the loans given to self help groups - Respondent: Names of the self help groups, names of their members & the amount disbursed etc. was provided - CIC: No further information like byelaws of the groups is due to him
Date of decision: 17th May 2016
This matter concerns an RTI application filed by the Appellant, seeking information regarding details of loan accounts of self help groups.
The CPIO reply The CPIO provided some information to the Appellant
Grounds of the First Appeal
The Appellant did not receive any information from the CPIO within the stipulated time period.
Order of the First Appellate Authority No order passed.
Grounds of the Second Appeal Not satisfied with the information furnished to him.
Relevant facts emerging during the hearing, Discussion and Decision.
The Respondents stated that the information sought by the Appellant was regarding the loans given by them to self help groups. They submitted that the names of the self help groups to which loans were given and the names of their members were provided to the Appellant, together with the information concerning the number of groups that benefited and the amount disbursed etc. In response to our query, they submitted that loans in this category benefit from subsidy on the principal amount, which is given from government funds. The Appellant stated that the complete information sought by him, including the photographs of members of the self help groups, their BPL numbers and their byelaws etc., has not been provided. He further submitted that since these loans benefit from government subsidy, the above information should not have been denied. He alleged that there has been widespread misuse of funds in granting loans under the scheme to self help groups. Explaining the late filing of his appeal to the Commission, the Appellant stated that he initially filed an appeal to the State Information Commission, who told him nearly two years later that the matter concerned the CIC and, therefore, he filed an appeal to the CIC.
2. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and note from the records placed before us that in his reply dated 11.9.2012, the CPIO, inter alia, provided to the Appellant the list of loans given under the above scheme on a yearly basis and in respect of each account. It was confirmed during the hearing that the names of the beneficiaries have also been provided to the Appellant. Under Section 4 (1) (b) (xii) of the RTI Act, each public authority is required to publish the details of beneficiaries of subsidy programmes. In the above context, we note that the information concerning the loans released, the groups concerned and the names of their members has already been provided to the Appellant and in our view, no further information, such as the photographs of the beneficiaries (which is their personal information) and byelaws of the groups (which is their internal matter) is due to him.
3. In view of the foregoing, intervention by the Commission is not considered necessary in this case.
4. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
5. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Citation: Shri Ram Nandan Bhagat v. Uttar Bihar Gramin Bank in File No. CIC/SH/A/2015/000570