Akshay Rohilla vs State Bank Of India on 9 September, 2021

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Akshay Rohilla vs State Bank Of India on 9 September, 2021

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 07.02.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 02.07.2018 and first appeal dated 26.04.2018:-

(i) Provide the detailed and complete information of incidents and accidents whether minor, major, extreme or of any category happened in the SBI bank Branches due to fire only in the district of North West Delhi from the year 2009 till date if don't have complete details about the incident then why, who is responsible for not providing the complete information and details about the incident of fire taken place in the SBI Bank branches?

Page 1 of 6

(ii) Provide the complete evidence and copies of the documents like copies of the complaint (with proper date and time) made by the respective officers of the SBI bank branches to intimate the senior and other authorities as per the procedure given by the Reserve Bank of India about the incident taken place due to fire in their respective bank branches of North - West Delhi District from the year 2009 till date and if any complaint not made then why, what are the reasons for it?

(iii) Copies of the complaint (First Information Report) made to Police to report the incident happened due to fire only in North-West Delhi District from the year 2009 till date with FIR copy and with exact date and time to be mentioned in the reply and if any complaint not made as per the rules and regulations given by the SBI Head Office and by the Reserve Bank of India or any other respective authority, then why, what are the reasons for it?

(iv) Copies and number of the complaint made to fire brigade to report the incident happened due to fire only with proper date and time to be mentioned in the reply in North-West Delhi District from the year 2009 till date and if any complaint not made as per the rules and regulations given by the SBI Head Office and by the Reserve Bank of India or any other respective authority, what are the reasons for it?

(v) Name of the persons who was responsible for the incident and action taken against him/her with complete details and copies of the orders made against him/her?

(vi) Provide the complete details and information about the incident in which any type of customer's documents loss happened or destroyed by the incident of the fire from the year 2009 till date in any of the SBI bank branches in the North-

West Delhi.

Page 2 of 6

(vii) Provide the complete details and reasons about the change in the address taken place of the any SBI Bank branches due to shifting from one place to another within the same city or town from the year 2009 till date and if shifted the address without any valid reason then why? Clarify with whose permission the address of the respective bank branch changed/shifted or by which rule?

(viii) Please provide complete details of any incident in which in any type of customer's related documents lost happened in the SBI bank branches situated in North-West Delhi, during the procedure of shifting bank branches from one place to another within the same city or town from the year 2009 till date and if shifted the address without any valid reason then why and complete details of the person or officer who was responsible for the customer's related document and complete details of the action taken against him/her?

(ix) Provide the complete details of any incidence of the SBI bank branches situated in North-West Delhi in which any type of customer's related documents lost happened from the year 2009 till date and also provide the complete details of the person who was responsible for that incident and complete details and copies of the action taken against him/her?

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 02.07.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of India, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 01.09.2018 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the CPIO's reply, the appellant filed first appeal dated 26.04.2018. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 18.12.2018 disposed of the first appeal. In compliance of the FAA's order, the CPIO vide letter dated 01.01.2019 provided revised information on point nos. 8 and 9 of the RTI application. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 07.02.2019 before this Commission which is under consideration.

Page 3 of 6

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 07.02.2019 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO vide letter dated 01.09.2018 gave point-wise reply/information on all the points wherein against point no. 1 of the RTI application, they informed that no fire incident was reported by SBI Branches under District of North- West Delhi since 2009; against point no. 2, they stated that no complaint was made by any officers of SBI Bank Branches of District of North- West Delhi since 2009; against point no. 3, it was stated that no FIR was lodged to police since 2009 from any Branches under District of North- West Delhi; against point no. 4, it was informed that no complaint was made to Fire Brigade since 2009; against point no. 5, they replied that in the absence of any incident since 2009, no person was held responsible; against point no. 6, they replied that not a single customer's documents was lost from any of the SBI in the North- West Delhi District Branches since 2009 because of fire incident; against point no. 7, they stated that information sought was in the nature of reasons and clarifications which was not covered under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act; against point nos. 8 and 9, it was stated that information would be provided soon. The FAA vide his order dated 18.12.2018 advised the CPIO to give suitable reply on point nos. 8 and 9 of the RTI application within 15 days. Accordingly, the CPIO vide letter dated 03.01.2019 replied that type of customer's related documents lost in the bank's branches during process of shifting was not available and further denied to provide the details of the officers responsible and action taken against them under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Yashpal Matta, AGM & CPIO and Shri B.S. Bharti, Manager &CAPIO, SBI, New Delhi attended the hearing in person.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted thathe sought information on seven points in his RTI application out of which information provided by the respondent on point nos. 7 to 9 was not satisfactory. He further expressed his satisfaction over the information provided on remaining points.

Page 4 of 6

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had provided point-wise information vide their letter dated 03.01.2019. They further submitted that information sought on point no. 7 of the RTI application was in the nature of seeking reasons and clarifications which did not squarely fall within the definition of "information" as defined under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. Further against point nos. 7 and 9, they informed that type of customer's related documents lost in the bank's branches during process of shifting was not available with them. Besides, they denied to provide the details of the officers responsible and action taken against them under section 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that due reply was given by the respondent vide their letters dated 01.09.2018 and 03.01.2019. Moreover, the information sought on point nos. 7 to 9 of the RTI application was not specific and definite and the same did not squarely fall within the definition of "information" as defined under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. The public authorities are not under any obligation to create the information to satisfy the appellant. In view of this, there appears to be no public interest in further prolonging the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुरेशचं ा) Information Commissioner (सूचनाआयु ) दनांक/Date: 08.09.2021 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत ) Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Page 5 of 6 Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :

STATE BANK OF INDIA PREMISES & ESTATE DEPARTMENT LOCAL HEAD OFFICE 5TH FLOOR, 11, SANSAD MARG NEW DELHI - 110 001 THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, GENERAL MANAGER (NW-I), STATE BANK OF INDIA, 10TH FLOOR, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, 11, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 001 SH. AKSHAY ROHILLA Page 6 of 6

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission