Rating given by the NABARD to a Bank and correspondence between NABARD & RBI in this context was denied a stay by Delhi High Court– CIC: Appellant shall be at liberty to agitate the matter after a decision is taken by the superior courts in the case
1. This matter pertains to an RTI application dated 10.3.2014 filed by the Appellant, seeking information on three points regarding the rating given by the Respondents to the Uttarakhand Rajya Sahkari Bank Ltd., Haldwani on the basis of the inspection carried out by them for the years 200910 to 201213, any comments made to the Head Office of NABARD on the basis of inspection carried out over the last five years and correspondence exchanged by NABARD with the Reserve Bank of India in the context of such inspection and action required as a result of the same. Not satisfied with the response of the Respondents, he has approached the CIC in second appeal.
2. The Appellant was not present in spite of a written notice having been sent to him. The Respondents stated that the information was denied by them as it is exempted from disclosure under Section 8 (1) (a) and (d) of the RTI Act. In this context, they further submitted that some decisions of the Commission, directing disclosure of information regarding inspection of banks by the regulatory authorities, have been stayed by the High Court of Delhi. In this context, they mentioned the cases: Reserve Bank of India vs. Krishan Lal Mittal [W.P. (C) 1388/2012 and CM No. 3020/2012] and National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development vs. Sanjay Sitaram Kurhade [W.P. (C)263/2012 and CM No. 548/2012]. They also stated that the RBI has filed a petition in the Supreme Court to transfer the cases from the High Court to the Supreme Court and cited the case ‘Reserve Bank of India vs. Jayantilal N. Mistry and Ors. [transfer petition (Civil) 707718 of 2012]. In the above context, we also note that taking into account the stay granted by the High Court of Delhi in some cases of a similar nature, we had refrained from giving any direction to the Respondents in our order No. CIC/VS/A/2012/001010/SH dated 12.8.2014. In the light of the foregoing and in order to save multiple litigation, we would refrain from passing an order in this case for the moment. Accordingly, the case is adjourned sinedie. The Appellant shall be at liberty to agitate the matter after a decision is taken by the superior courts in the cases of a similar nature, where stay has been granted.
Citation: Shri Satya Pal Singh Negi v. National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development in File No. CIC/SH/A/2014/000698