Non-disclosure of misplaced documents before the Commission
The appellant sought information regarding the recovery of a particular loan. No information was provided to him, even after the directions of the Commission for the disclosure forcing the appellant to approach the Commission again.
View of CIC
During the hearing before the Commission for the second time, the respondents submitted that the relevant document was missing from the file in which the correspondence with the revenue authorities had been made in respect of the recovery of this particular loan. The Commission observed that the officers of the bank did not bother to inform the CIC or the appellant about the loss of the document and that the non-availability of the relevant document was not mentioned during the first hearing which gives a reasonable ground to think that the relevant document has been deliberately misplaced/lost after the first order was passed. The CIC directed the CMD of the Central Bank to institute an enquiry into the loss of the particular document/record and to fix responsibility on the relevant officials and to initiate appropriate disciplinary proceedings against him. For the detriment and loss caused to the appellant, the Commission awarded compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the appellant under section 19(8)(b) In its decision, the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, has the power to require the public authority to compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered; of the RTI Act. A show cause notice was issued to the then PIO to appear before the CIC to explain his inaction on receipt of the RTI application.
Citation: Shri Rahul Gupta v. Central Bank in File No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001372
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2012/CIC/158
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission