Central Information Commission
Anita Halder vs State Bank Of India on 22 May, 2023
Author: Saroj Punhani
Bench: Saroj Punhani
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/SBIND/A/2021/627383
ANITA HALDER ......अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
STATE BANK OF INDIA, NODAL
CPIO, RTI CELL, REGIONAL
BUSINESS OFFICE-3, KOLKATA,
BIDHANNAGAR, C.I.T. SCHEME VII
M, PREMISES, No.-1/16, V. I.
P. ROAD, KOLKATA, W.
B.-700054 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 16/05/2023
Date of Decision : 16/05/2023
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Saroj Punhani
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 31/05/2021
CPIO replied on : 02/06/2021
First appeal filed on : 02/06/2021
First Appellate Authority order : 30/06/2021
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : NIL
Information sought:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.05.2021 seeking the following information:1
"SUBJECT I AM FILING RTI TO DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE TO GET THE REPLY FROM THE CHIEF MANAGER OF STATE BANK OF INDIA OF BRANCH STORE BAZAR ICHAPUR IFSC SBIN0001797 AS THE COMPLAINT THAT I HAVE FILED AGAINST THIS CHIEF MANAGER OF BRANCH STORE BAZAR ICHAPUR IFSC SBIN0001797 WITH REGISTRATION NUMBER DEABDslashEslash2021slash34814 IS NOT BEEN GIVEN SUITABLE REPLY AND MY QUERIES HAS NOT BEEN RESOLVED AND I AM NOT SATISFIED AS I WANT TO GET THE REPLY FROM THIS BRANCH THAT HOW ACCOUNT NUMBER 11223465316 HAS BEEN LINKED WITH MOBILE NUMBER 9874805867 WHEN THIS MOBILE NUMBER WHICH BELONGS TO ANITA HALDER HAS NOT ARRIVED AT SBI BANK OF BRANCH STORE BAZAR ICHAPUR IFSC SBIN0001797 TO REGISTER HER MOBILE NUMBER WITH BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER 11223465316 AND TODAY A REPLY HAS BEEN GIVEN BY CHIEF MANAGER OF BIDHANNAGAR TO MY EMAIL ID kalyanhalder11atthedategmaildotcom THAT With reference to the trail mail and as per our record there has been no updation in recent times of Mobile details or SMS alert details in account number 11223465316 as to the best of our knowledge In case you require to change Mobile number please provide an application along with KYC duly authorized under the registered signature of the account holder to the branch to proceed with the same I WANT TO SAY TO DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE THAT THIS CHIEF MANAGER OF BIDHANNAGAR IS TRYING TO HIDE THE MALPRACTISE DONE BY ANY SBI BANK STAFF OF BRANCH STORE BAZAR ICHAPUR IFSC SBIN0001797 AND THIS MANAGER OF BIDHANNAGAR IS REPLYING TO MY MAIL ID that there has been no updation done in mobile number 9874805867 linked with account number 11223465316 but I want to say to him that why mobile number change or updation is required when the mobile number 9874805867 which belongs to anita halder has not been registered for the first time by anita halder for bank account number 11223465316 If she would register her mobile number 9874805867 with bank account number 11223465316 and if she want to change her mobile number 9874805867 then it would require updation by providing an application along with kyc I want to say to chief manager of bidhannagar that donot try to act very smart before me and donot change the topic What I want to know just reply to that only and I want to know that how anita halders mobile number 9874805867 has been registered and linked with bank account number 11223465316 I am not asking you for any updation or change in mobile number linked with bank account number 11223465316 Without getting consent from anita halder how could the bank staff of BRANCH STORE BAZAR ICHAPUR IFSC SBIN0001797 has registered mobile number 9874805867 with 2 bank account number 11223465316 And if the bank staff would not register the mobile number 9874805867 with bank account number 11223465316 then how anita halder is getting sms details and account balance of this bank account number 11223465316 to her mobile number 9874805867."
The CPIO furnished a reply to the appellant on 02.06.2021 stating as under:
"No information sought. However, in case Account Holder require to deactivate SMS alert or change mobile details, please forward w written application to the branch for rectification of the same."
Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 02.06.2021. FAA's order, if any, dated 30.06.2021, held as under:-
"Account details are held by the bank under commercial confidence and fiduciary capacity, hence restricted from disclosure u/s 8(1)(d) & (e) of RTI Act respectively to any person other that the account holder. After applying free and fair mind, it seems that the CPIO had given the correct information for the query. Therefore, I uphold the reply of the CPIO and reject the appeal. A copy of the order be communicated to the appellant directly as well as by the CPIO."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Ms. Nandini Ghosh Banerjee, Manager & CPIO present through video conference.
The CPIO reiterated the reply provided to the Appellant and also referred to the written submissions filed by her on behalf of respondent.
Decision:
The Commission observes upon a perusal of the facts on record that the Second appeal under reference has not been filed as per the provision of Section 6(1) of 3 RTI Act as it has been filed by Ms. Anita Halder; while the RTI application and the First Appeal have been filed by another person , namely Kalyan Halder.
While Section 3 of the RTI Act bestows the right to information on all 'citizens', the enabling provision of Section 6(1) of the RTI Act prescribes as under:
6. Request for obtaining information.--
(1) A person, who desires to obtain any information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English or Hindi in the 3 official language of the area in which the application is being made, accompanying such fee as may be prescribed, to--
(a) the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of the concerned public authority;
(b) the Central Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as the case may be, specifying the particulars of the information sought by him or her:
Provided that where such request cannot be made in writing, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable assistance to the person making the request orally to reduce the same in writing.
In view of above, since the RTI application and first appeal have been filed by Mr Kalyan Halder while second appeal has been filed by a different person namely Ms. Anita Halder; for the said reasons, the Commission is not going into the merits of the CPIO's reply and deems the instant appeal as not maintainable.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Saroj Punhani (सरोज पुनहािन) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) 4 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित) (C.A. Joseph) Dy. Registrar 011-26179548/ [email protected] सी. ए. जोसेफ, उप-पंजीयक दनांक / 5