Central Information Commission
Atul Kumar Mehta vs Punjab National Bank on 12 April, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 302, CIC Bhawan, Baba Gang Nath Marg,
Munirka, New Delhi-110067
CIC/PNBNK/C/2017/192981, dated 10.04.2018
Atul Kumar Mehta vs. CPIO, Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, NOIDA
Relevant dates emerging from the complaint:
8
RTI: 16.07.2016 FA: 17.10.2016 Complaint: 12.12.2016
CPIO: 03.08.2016 FAAO: No Order Hearing: 09.04.2018
ORDER
1. The complainant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, NOIDA, Uttar Pradesh seeking information on seven points, including, inter-alia (i) Account Transaction Statement & KYC documents of the Account of 'N.G. Technology' and (ii) KYC document and Account Transactions Report of Account Nos. 182992100023655 and 182000210002356.
2. The complainant filed a complaint before the Commission on the grounds that the information sought by him has not been provided by the CPIO/FAA. The complainant requested the Commission to punish the Public Authorities for disobeying the provisions of the RTI Act and to direct them to furnish all the information sought in his RTI application.
Hearing:
3. The complainant, Shri Atul Kumar Mehta attended the hearing through audio conferencing and the respondent Shri E. Subramanian, AGM, Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, NOIDA, Uttar Pradesh was present in person.
Page | 1
4. The complainant submitted that he is the account holder of the accounts of which he had sought the information. However, the respondent had denied the information sought for on the grounds that it pertains to a third party and asked him to specify the relationship with the accounts. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the respondent to provide the information sought for.
5. The respondent submitted that since in the RTI application it was not mentioned that the appellant is the account holder, the CPIO had asked the appellant to specify his relationship with the accounts. However, the appellant did not furnish any clarification in this regard. The respondent further submitted that, in case, the appellant submits a document(s) to prove that he is the bonafide account holder of the accounts, under reference, the information sought for will be furnished to him.
Decision:
6. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusing the records, directs the respondent to provide information to the appellant within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy a document to establish that the appellant is the bonafide account holder of the accounts mentioned in the RTI application.
7. With the above observations, the complaint is disposed of.
8. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
(Sudhir Bhargava) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (S.S. Rohilla) Designated Officer Page | 2 Addresses of the parties:
1. The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab National Bank, Complaint Section, Circle Office NOIDA, 3rd Floor, C-13, Sector-1, NOIDA (U.P) - 201301.
2. Shri Atul Kumar Mehta, Page | 3