Central Information Commission
Akshay Kumar Malhotra vs Canara Bank on 11 December, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/CANBK/A/2023/629128+
CIC/CANBK/C/2023/640620
Akshay Kumar Malhotra ...अपीलकता/Appellant/Complainant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
Canara Bank, ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Delhi
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
SA/Complaint :
RTI : 25.02.2023 FA : 17.04.2023
14.06.2023 & 21.08.2023
CPIO : 22.03.2023 FAO : 11.05.2023 Hearing : 02.12.2024
Date of Decision: 11.12.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant/Complainant filed an RTI application dated 25.02.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) Please inform me the name and designation of officer of the Pitampura branch, Delhi (CB 1565) who is been authorized and given the responsibility of taking care of locker operations of customers inside Locker cum strong room.
(ii) Please inform me, as per SOP, the designation of officer who are been given the responsibility of moving inside Locker strong room, either for customers lockers operations or for other bank branch activities.Page 1 of 5
(iii) Please inform me and provide me with they copy of the SOP (Standard Operating Procedures) in respect of operations of lockers inside Strong room.
(iv) Please inform me that did you (canara bank) secure the CCTV footage outside Strong for Pitampura Branch as in my communication to Canara Bank, I had requested for securing the CCTV footage of the Pitampura Branch (CB 1565) for 14.02.2023 between time period 1030 AM till 1200 Noon, when I visited branch to operate my locker, as this is the hard evidence in support of my complaint, as CCTV is installed on the ceiling roof of the area with coverage outside the strong room and clearly showing all the staff sitting outside Strong room as well as covering the entry point inside Strong room, which clearly shows that who is moving in/out of the strong room.
(v) Please inform me the action taken on my complaint in this respect which were submitted by me on various platforms viz Email/Canara bank website/CPGRAM/DPG etc. ..., etc./ other related information
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 22.03.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
i. Mrs. Anuja Jha (officer) has been authorized and given the responsibility of taking care of locker operations of customers. ii. Mrs. Anuja Jha (officer) has been given the responsibility of taking care of locker operations of customers.
iii. Relevant information regarding SOP (Standard Operating Procedures) in respect of operations of Lockers inside Strong Room is available in public domain in Canara Bank website https://canarabank.com under link :
https://canarabank.com/MEDIA/4562/SAFE%20DEPOSIT%20LOCKER%20 ANDX20SAFE%20CUSTODYR2OSERVICES.pdf iv. Yes, the concerned section in Regional Office North Delhi has secured the CCTV footage outside strong room for Pitampura branch as per your communication.Page 2 of 5
v. Reply to para 5 to 23: The matter has been reported by Regional Office to DA Cell, Circle Office, Delhi for taking necessary action in the matter.
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant/Complainant filed a First Appeal dated 17.04.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 11.05.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant/Complainant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal/Complaint dated 14.06.2023 & 21.08.2023.
5. The appellant/complainant remained present in person and the respondent remained absent during the hearing.
6. The appellant/complainant inter alia submitted and raised concerns about serious security breach at Canara Bank's Pitam Pura branch. The appellant/complainant alleged that the strong room cum locker room security was compromised when an unauthorized individual, seemingly a contracted employee, was allowed access to the strong room with the entire set of keys by a bank officer, Ms. Anuja. This individual not only accessed the strong room but also operated the appellant's locker in violation of security protocols. The appellant raised this issue as a grave risk to the belongings of all locker holders and the bank's assets, emphasizing that the lapse reflects systemic negligence and lack of adherence to RBI guidelines on locker safety.
He stated that out of 23 queries he has received a proper reply only on query No. 3 and 4 of the RTI application. On query No. 1 and 2 the exact designation has not been provided by the Respondent. Further for query No. 5 to 23, the application is neither transferred to the concerned branch nor the CPIO has collected and furnished nay information as per Section 5(4) of the RTI act.
7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Appellant/Complainant and perusal of records, for Second Appeal No. CIC/CANBK/A/2023/629128, directs the CPIO to furnish a suitable reply on point No. 1 and 2 of the RTI Application as per the provisions of the RTI Act. Further the CPIO is Page 3 of 5 directed to obtain relevant information on point No. 5 to 23 of the RTI Application from the concerned custodian of the record, if required also by invoking Section 5 (4) of the RTI Act and provide a reply to the Appellant, within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. The CPIO is further directed that while complying with the directions of the Commission, all the personal information/identifying particulars of third parties, if any, should be adequately redacted/blackened out.
In addition, since the CPIO remained absent during the hearing proceedings to present their case, the CPIO is directed to send a proper written explanation for disregarding the Commission's notice of hearing by not appearing before the Commission. The written explanation of the CPIO shall be sent to the Commission both through post and via uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add within 15 days of the receipt of this order. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
For complaint No. CIC/CANBK/C/2023/640620 the Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of records, notes that the instant matter is a Complaint under the RTI Act where no further direction for disclosure of information can be given and it is only required to be ascertained if the information has been denied with a malafide intention or due to an unreasonable cause. However, the CPIO is directed to send a proper written explanation for providing inaccurate information on point No. 5 to 23 of the RTI Application. The written explanation of the CPIO shall be sent to the Commission both through post and via uploading on http://dsscic.nic.in/online-link-paper-compliance/add within 15 days of the receipt of this order. The Complaint is reserved for final order.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 11.12.2024 Page 4 of 5 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कनल एस एस िछकारा, ( रटायड) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO Canara Bank, CPIO, Regional Office: (North): Delhi, Plot No. 10-11, L.S.C. D.P. Block, Opp. Maurya Enclave Police Station, Pitampura, Delhi -110032
2. Akshay Kumar Malhotra Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)