Respondent: points 3 to 20 were transferred u/s 6(3) as it to pertained to Simdega office; could not confirm when the information has been provided - CIC: procure the information from the concerned offices and send a consolidated response to RTI applicant
Action taken on the complaint regarding alleged misuse of public money by granting loans in connivance with the bank officers - Respondent: points 3 to 20 were transferred u/s 6(3) as it to pertained to Simdega office; could not confirm when the information has been provided - CIC: procure the information from the concerned offices and send a consolidated response to the RTI application
O R D E R
1. The appellant filed an RTI application with the PIO on 3.9.2012 seeking information about the action taken on the complaint dated 4.7.2012 addressed to Chairman, SBI, regarding misuse of public money by granting loans in connivance with the bank officers. In all, information has been sought on 20 points. The CPIO, while giving information on first two points, informed the appellant on 18.9.2012 that his RTI application was being transferred to PIO/SBI Ranchi for reply on the other points who, in turn, again forwarded it to CPIO, SBI, Chaibasa on 1.11.2012
2. Not satisfied with the reply of the PIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 25.10.2012 with the first appellate authority (FAA). No reply of the FAA is available on the file. However, CPIO, SBI, Chaibasa denied the information on 7.11.2012 under section 8(1)(e) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information; & (j) of the RTI Act. The appellant approached the Commission on 18.12.2012 in second appeal.
3. The appellant did not participate in the hearing.
4. The respondent participated in the hearing through video conferencing and stated that the RTI application of the appellant dated 3.9.2012 comprised of 20 points about the action taken on his complaint dated 4.7.2012 sent to the Chairman, SBI about the alleged misuse of public money by granting loans to the ineligible persons.
5. The respondent stated that points 1 and 2 were addressed by the CPIO, but the other points, i.e., points 3 to 20 pertained to the Simdega office and, therefore, were forwarded to that office for necessary action under section 6(3) of the RTI Act. The respondent stated that it is their impression that the Simdega office has responded to the RTI application.
6. When the respondent was asked about the date of furnishing the information to the appellant by Simdega office, the respondent stated that he does not have the information right now.
7. The respondent is directed to procure the information from the concerned offices and send a consolidated response to the RTI application within 30 days of this order. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be given free of cost to both the parties.
Citation: Shri Deepesh Kumar Nirala v. State Bank of India in Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2013/000308/05662