Ramautar Singh vs Rural / Gramin Banks on 8 October, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Ramautar Singh vs Rural / Gramin Banks on 8 October, 2020

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 18.09.2018 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 12.06.2018 and first appeal dated 30.07.2018:-

(i) #ाथ& क' एफद आर खाता स. ००३/३९६ कस तार ख को बंद कया गया इस म0 #ाथ& क' सहमित क' #मा2णत छाया #ित #दान कर0 I Page 1 of 4

(ii) खाता बदले जाने के समय #ाथ& से कन खातो म0 सहमित ली गयी उस सम6त सहमित प7ी क' #मा2णत छाया #ित #दान कर0 I

(iii) #ाथ& को ०१.०१.२००६ से ०९.०१.२०१३ तक का6टे टम0ट क' #मा2णत छाया #ित #दान कर0 I सभी खाता चालू व एफद आर क' सम6त 6टे टम0ट #दान कर0 I

(iv) #ाथ& क' कतनी एफद आर तथा कतने बचत खाता वतमान म0 चल रहे ह< इसक' िल2खत व #मा2णत छाया #ित #दान कर0 I

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the Appellant filed an application dated 12.06.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Baroda Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank, Kanpur, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO replied on 25.07.2018. Dissatisfied with the response of the CPIO, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 30.07.2018. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) disposed of the first appeal vide its order dated 04.09.2018.

The CPIO complied with the order of the FAA vide letter dated 13.09.2018. Aggrieved by this, the Appellant has filed a Second Appeal dated 18.09.2018 before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant filed the instant appeal dated 18.09.2018 inter alia on the grounds that complete information on point nos. 3 of the RTI application was not provided by the respondent. The appellant has requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information on point no. 3 of the RTI application.

4. The CPIO vide letter dated 25.07.2018 gave point-wise reply to the RTI application wherein they provided partial information on point no. 3 of the RTI application. The FAA vide his order dated 04.09.2018 directed the CPIO that if the account statement for the period 01.07.2006 to 30.04.2008 as sought on point no. 3 of the RTI application was available with them, then the same could be given upon payment of necessary fee. In compliance of the order of the FAA, the CPIO vide letter Page 2 of 4 dated 13.09.2018 expressed their inability to provide the complete account statement as the same was not available with them.

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent, Shri S.B.Saxena, Regional Head & CPIO, Baroda Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank, Kanpur attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had already furnished point-wise reply/information to the appellant vide letter dated 25.07.2018. They further submitted that the appellant was aggrieved by not receiving his account statements from 01.07.2006 to 30.04.2008. They informed that the Govt. of India vide its notification dated 23.02.2006 amalgamated 7 RRBs of Eastern Uttar Pradesh and 2 RRBs of Western Uttar Pradesh sponsored by Bank of Baroda. Thus, emerged two new corporates called Baroda Eastern Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank and Baroda Western Uttar Pradesh Gramin Bank with their Head Offices in Raebareli and Bareilly respectively. After a short while from this restructuring, Govt. of India vide notification dated 31st March 2008, two banks amalgamate to form a new entity called Baroda U.P. Bank with its Head Office in Raebareli. They further submitted that due to these structural changes their Finacle system was changed many times, therefore, account statement for the period 01.07.2006 to 30.04.2008 as sought on point no. 3 of the RTI application was available on their record.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observes that due reply had been given by the respondent vide letter dated 25.07.2018 and 13.09.2018. Moreover, the appellant has neither filed any objection/reply nor appeared before the Commission to controvert the averments made by the respondent. Hence, the submissions made by the respondent are taken on record. The Commission further feels that no public purpose would be served in further prolonging the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

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

Page 3 of 4

Sd/-

                                                                    सुरेशचं ा)
                                                  (Suresh Chandra) (सु      ा
                                                                 सूचनाआयु>)
                                       Information Commissioner (सू
                                                        दनांक/Date: 08.10.2020
Authenticated true copy

R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत&)
Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक)
011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७)


Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :
BARODA UTTAR PRADESH GRAMIN BANK
Regional Office,
117/N/26,Kakadeo,
Kanpur - 25

THE F.A.A,
Baroda Uttar Pradesh GraminBank,
Head Office,
A-1, Civil Lines,
Raebareli (U.P.) - 229 001

RAMAUTAR SINGH




                                                                     Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission