Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 6]

Central Information Commission

Shri K Sanjeeva Rao vs Andhra Pradesh Grameena Vikas Bank on 8 December, 2009

                             Central Information Commission
               Appeal No.CIC/SM/A/2009/000008 & 140 dated 20-05-2008
                   Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)


                                                       Dated: 8 December 2009
Name of the Appellant              :   Shri K Sanjeeva Rao
                                       R/o 4-7-146, Balajinagar,
                                       Near Zion School, Sangareddy,
                                       Medak District, Andhra Pradesh.
                                       Pin - 502 001.

Name of the Public Authority       :   CPIO, Andhra Pradesh Grameena Vikas
                                       Bank, Head Office Warangal,
                                       H.No.2-5-8/1, Ramnagar,
                                       Hanamkonda, Warangal.


The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.

On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:-

        (i)      Shri Narsimah Rao, CPIO,
        (ii)     Shri Sudhakar, GM


The Appellant has filed two separate appeal cases which we have clubbed together for hearing today. The brief facts are as under.

2. In two separate applications both dated 20 May 2008, the Appellant had sought a large number of information with regard to the recruitment and promotion of various categories of employees of the Bank including all the RRBs. The CPIO replied on 2 July 2008 denying part of the information as too voluminous to disproportionately divert resources of the Bank. The Appellant, thereafter, approached the Appellate Authority on July 10 and July 16, 2008. The Appellate Authority disposed of the appeal by endorsing the order of the CPIO. Consequently, the Appellant has come before the CIC in second appeal.

3. We heard these cases through videoconferencing. The Appellant was not present in spite of notice. The Respondent was present in the Warangal studio of the NIC. He submitted that the present Andhra Pradesh Grameen Bank had come into being in 2006 after the merger of several RRBs. He CIC/SM/A/2009/000008 & 140 further submitted that providing the information about the recruitment and promotion of all the employees for all the RRBs for a period ranging from 13 to 32 years would indeed cause serious diversion of the resources of the Bank from its core function. He however agreed to provide the information for the period since the merger took place and the new entity in the form of the present Bank came into being in 2006. We are inclined to accept this position looking to the elaborate information which the Appellant has sought over a long period of time and for all the employees of the Bank. Therefore, we direct the CPIO now to provide the desired information in both these cases for the period for 2006-07 and 2007-08 within 10 working days from the receipt of this order.

4. With the above direction, both these cases stand disposed off.

5. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.

(Satyananda Mishra) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.

(Vijay Bhalla) Assistant Registrar CIC/SM/A/2009/000008 & 140