Complete information on rules about re-appointment of retired employees of Canara Bank after their retirement mentioning, norms for monetary & other benefits, facilities etc. available for post-retirement assignments - CIC: Complaint disposed as withdrawn
O R D E R
1. The issues under consideration i.e. the reliefs sought by the complainant in his complaint dated 06.08.2018 due to alleged non-supply of information sought vide his RTI application dated 25.03.2018 are as under:- • Initiate penalty proceeding under section 20 (1) of RTI Act against the concerned CPIO
2. Succinctly facts of the case include that the Complainant filed an RTI application dated 25.03.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Canara Bank, Bangalore, seeking following information:
(i) Complete information on rules about appointment of retired employees of Canara Bank in Canara Bank after their retirement mentioning also norms for monetary and other benefits, facilities etc available for their post-retirement assignments at Canara Bank.
(ii) Complete information about number of retired employees of Canara Bank presently employed at Canara Bank mentioning also according to post-retirement designations and salary-scales.
(iii) Complete information including names and offices of posting about retired employees of Canara Bank presently employed at Canara Bank having provided facility of car also.
The CPIO did not reply. Aggrieved by this, the Complainant had filed a complaint dated 06.08.2018 before this Commission which is under consideration.
3. The complainant filed the instant appeal dated 06.08.2018 inter alia on the grounds that the respondent did not provide the requisite information.
4. As per records presented by the complainant. CPIO did not give any reply.
5. The complainant attended the hearing through audio conference and on behalf of the respondent, Shri P V Hari, CPIO, Canara Bank, Bengaluru, attended the hearing through video conference.
5.1. The complainant inter alia submitted that the information requested for was general in nature the disclosure of which was in larger public interest. Further, the information must be placed in public domain. During further course of hearing, the complainant acknowledged the response given by the respondent and assurance that the replies given in response to RTI applications seeking genuine information concerning larger public interest are placed in public domain.
5.2. The respondent submitted that it was not a case of non-response and that they had replied vide letter dated 04.09.2018 and provided the web link sharing all details regarding cumulative number of employees of their bank. Further, the data was also placed and updated at their web portal.
6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observed that due reply was given by the respondent. The public authorities being institutions of public accountability and transparency are expected to share information pertaining to their functioning in public domain in compliance of the provisions of section 4 (1) (b) of RTI Act and the respondent affirmed to have done so on the lines of proactive disclosure. The complainant during the hearing acknowledged the said reply and expressed his willingness to withdraw the complaint. Accordingly, the complaint is disposed as withdrawn.
Citation: Subhash Chandra Agrawal v. Canara Bank in Complaint No. CIC/CANBK/C/2018/149295, Date: 09.09.2020