Central Information Commission
Neelam Hitesh Trivedi vs Bank Of India on 8 July, 2021
Author: Suresh Chandra
Bench: Suresh Chandra
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No.CIC/BKOIN/A/2019/603453
Neelam Hitesh Trivedi ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Bank of India,
Rajkot. ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 26.11.2018 FA : 04.02.2019 SA : 22.02.2019
CPIO : 11.01.2019 FAO : 15.02.2019 Hearing : 01.04.2021
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
SHRI SURESH CHANDRA
ORDER
(08.07.2021)
1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 22.02.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through her RTI application dated 26.11.2018 and first appeal dated 04.02.2019:-
Copy of loan agreement in respect of loan account No. **********32 of along with Annexure, undertaking, Deed of Guarantee if any, Memorandum if any.
2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 26.11.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Bank of India, Zonal Office, Rajkot, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 11.01.2019 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the CPIO's reply, the appellant filed first appeal dated 04.02.2019 The First Page 1 of 3 Appellate Authority vide order dated 15.02.2019 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 22.02.2019 before this Commission which is under consideration.
3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 22.02.2019 inter alia on the grounds that desired information was not provided by the CPIO. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act for not providing the information.
4. The CPIO vide letter dated 11.01.2018 denied the information on the ground that it contained information of their commercial confidence. Moreover, they asked the appellant to inspect the documents at any day with prior permission of the competent authority at the branch. They also stated that no records available with them about the sanction of Credit Link Capital Subsidy Scheme (CLCSS) subsidy. The FAA vide order dated 15.02.2019 dismissed the first appeal stating that the same was not made within the time so not maintainable.
5. The appellant's representative Shri Hitesh Trivedi and on behalf of the respondent Shri Deepak Kumar Rawat, CPIO and Dy. Zonal Manager, Bank of India, Rajkot attended the hearing through video conference.
5.1. The representative of the appellant inter alia submitted that the appellant had taken home loan from the respondent bank and she was eligible for CLCSS subsidy but due to mistake of the bank's officials she could not get subsidy of Rs. 2.71 lacs as they had not processed her request under CLCSS subsidy scheme. Further, the appellant sought information regarding her loan account however the same was arbitrarily denied by the bank.
5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia reiterated the CPIO's reply dated 11.01.2019 and the FAA's order dated 15.02.2019.
6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observes that reply given by the respondent was evasive and misleading. The appellant sought information regarding his housing loan Page 2 of 3 account and she was entitled to get every information/document related to her loan account. Moreover, the respondent during the course of hearing failed to justify as to how the disclosure of information sought would include commercial confidence of the bank as claimed by the then CPIO in their reply 11.01.2018. In view of the same, the respondent may revisit the RTI application and revised information be made available to the appellant, within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. With the above observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश चं ा) ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक/Date: 08.07.2021 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत ) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:
CPIO : BANK OF INDIA ZONALOFFICE RAJKOT, PARA BAZAR, M G ROAD, RAJKOT - 360 001 THE F.A.A, BANK OF INDIA, ZONAL OFFICE RAJKOT, PARA BAZAR M G ROAD, RAJKOT - 360 001 MS. NEELAM HITESH TRIVEDI Page 3 of 3