Khem Chand Sharma vs State Bank Of India on 19 July, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Khem Chand Sharma vs State Bank Of India on 19 July, 2021

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 22.02.219 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 02.05.2018 and first appeal dated 01.09.2018:-

(i) मेरे सेवा िनवृ के समय सोसाईटी के ऋण के बकाया प मेरे खाते पर हो िकस आधार पर लगाया गया I ा बक को सोसाईटी से कोई प ा आ था कृ ा इस प की ितिथ बताय I Page 1 of 4

(ii) १ के संदभ म सोसाईटी का प बक को िकस ितिथ को ा आ था अगर ये मेरी सेवा िनवृित की ितिथ से पहले ा आ था तो आपने इस पर तु र करवाई ों नहीं की I

(iii) सोसाईटी से प की ा एवम मेरे खाते पर हो लगाने के बारे म बक ने ा मुझे िकसी प के मा म से सूिचत िकया गया यिद हाँ तो कृ ा इस प की एक ित मुझे दी जाये I

(iv) बक ने माच २००४ से सेवा िनवृित तक सोसाईटी के ऋण की कटौती ब कर दी इस संदभ म सोसाईटी ारा िक़ ब करने के िनदश की ित उपल कराई जाये I

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 02.05.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of India, Chandigarh, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 11.05.2018 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the CPIO's reply, the appellant filed first appeal dated 01.09.2018 The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 04.10.2018 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 22.02.219 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 reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. 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.

4. The CPIO vide letter dated 11.05.2018 gave point-wise reply wherein it was informed that the appellant's account was put on hold in compliance of the order dated 13.05.2015 of liquidator of Delhi Chandigarh Circle Cooperative Society. The FAA vide order dated 04.10.2018 directed the CPIO to provide proper reply on point no. 4 of the RTI application within 15 days. In compliance of the FAA's order, the CPIO, Page 2 of 4 Chandigarh vide letter dated 16.01.2019 informed that records related to the query no 4 of the RTI application was destroyed as per the banking rules.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Ranbir Singh, AGM & CPI, SBI, Chandigarh attended the hearing through audio conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that he was an ex-employee of the bank who took a loan from Delhi Chandigarh Circle Cooperative Society in November 1993 which was fully repaid in February 2004 and consequently, the loan account was closed. He had obtained settlement letter from the society and submitted to the concerned branch from which loan's installment was deducted from his salary and on the basis of such letter the bank had stopped deducting any amount from his salary. In the year 2016,the appellant retired from the bank and that time it was informed to him that his account was put on hold. In this regard, the appellant filed this RTI application and sought aforesaid information. However, proper reply was not received by him. He also contended that the letter on the basis of which his account was put on hold was not provided by the respondent till date.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had already provided point-wise information on the basis of the record available with them vide letter dated 11.05.2018. They further stated that in compliance of the FAA's order, it was informed to the appellant that information sought against point no. 4 of the RTI application was destroyed.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observed that reply given by the respondent was evasive and incomplete. The appellant's account was put on hold on the basis of a letter and the appellant has every right to get this document. Moreover, the respondent had expressed their inability to provide the information sought against point no. 4 of the RTI application on the ground that it was destroyed. However, they failed to provide any document to substantiate his claim. In view of this, the Commission feels that proper and complete information has not been provided even after lapse of around three years from Page 3 of 4 the date of filing of this RTI application. Hence, Shri Vinod Dhar, the then CPIO and Shri Ranveer Singh, the present CPIO are show caused as to why action under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be initiated against each of them. The present CPIO is given a responsibility to serve a copy of this order as well as show cause notice to the then CPIO and secure his written explanations. All the written explanations (from both the CPIOs) must reach the Commission within three weeks. Meanwhile, the respondent is directed to revisit the RTI application and provide complete revised information/reply to the appellant, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

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

(Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश चं ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक/Date: 16.07.2021 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत ) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

CPIO:

STATE BANK OF INDIA SME BRANCH, SCO 43-48, SEC. - 17B, CHANDIGARH - 160 017 THE F.A.A, GENERAL MANAGER (NW-1), STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, SEC. - 17A, 2 / 3 CHANDIGARH - 160 017 SHRI KHEM CHAND SHARMA 1402/1, PHASE 10, MOHALI PUNJAB, SAHIBZADA AJIT SINGH (SAS) NAGAR (MOHALI),160062 Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission