Central Information Commission
Mr. Saheblal vs Reserve Bank Of India on 29 February, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003662/17475
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003662
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Saheblal
In front of kabir Dwara
Devgard Dist Rajsamand
Rajasthan
Respondent : Dr. Krishna Mohan,
Public Information Officer & CGM Reserve Bank of India Department of Currency Management 4th Floor, Amar Building, Fort, Mumbai RTI application filed on : 20/05/2011; 20/06/2011 PIO replied : 27/06/2011, 21/07/2011, 04/07/2011, First appeal filed on : 18/08/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 26/09/2011 Second Appeal received on : 20/12/2011 RTI NO.-I:
S. No Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Provide with the certified copy of the investigation Photocopy of issued Letter dated 31 Jan 2007 made by RBI on the letter of applicant K.R.S. No.44/07.38.003/2006-07 by our department.
2. Applicant is seeking information regarding list of No information is available in this regard.
beneficiaries of Rajsamand Distt. Of Rajasthan where RBI with other banks had carried out anti poverty drive.
RTI NO.-II: dated 20/06/2011 1 Action taken on my letter dated 07/04/2011 mentioned in the communication no. DCM(NPD) no. 6603/09.11.00/2010-11 dated 06.06.2011. The desired notesheet of the office enclosed.
2. Action on last para of my letter dated 07.04.2011.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
FAA replied that he did not find any scope to direct PIO to furnish information regarding Query No 1 and in query 2 The CPIO is expected to provide such information only if it is held by authority or under its control. Information cannot be invented by PIO.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and unfair disposal of appeal by FAA.Page 1 of 2
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Saheblal on video conference from NIC-Rajsamand Studio; Respondent: Mr. Unni Krishna, Assistant Legal Advisor on behalf of Dr. Krishna Mohan, Public Information Officer & CGM on video conference from NIC-RBI Studio; The PIO states that he has provided the information as per available records tot eh Appellant. As regards anti poverty measures undertaken by Banks the PIO states that he has no information regarding this and hence is unable to transfer the RTI applications any specific banks. The information available on the records has been provided.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
Information available on the records has been provided. This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 29 February 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(SH) Page 2 of 2