Central Information Commission
Mr. Manpreet Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India on 3 May, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2012/000796/18727
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2012/000796
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Manpreet Singh
Director
Creation Decors Pvt Ltd.
F-12, Industrial Area
Shahjahanpur, Alwar,
Rajasthan
Respondent (1) Mr. G. Jagan Mohan Rao
PIO & CGM Reserve bank Of India Department of banking Supervision Central Office, Cuffe Parade Colaba, Mumbai- 400005 Respondent (2) : Mr. Deepak Singhal Public Information Officer & Chief General Manager Department of Banking Operations and Development Reserve Bank of India Central Office 12th Floor, Central Office Building Shahid Bhagat Singh Road Mumbai - 400 001 RTI application filled on : 04/07/2011 PIO replied : 03/08/2011 First appeal filed on : 07/09/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 18/11/2011 Second Appeal received on : 09/03/2012 The Appellant had sought information regarding the RET Brochure explaining RBI's Role.
S. No Information Sought Reply of the PIO
5. Whether RET Brochure explaining RBI's role and firnction in brief Yes.
(http://rbidocs.rbi.org.in /rdocsfPublicatiOfls/PDF5/'RB12904 1 0BC.pd details in page 40 that "The Department of Banking Supervision (DBS) undertakes supervision of commercial banks, including the local area banks and all-India financial institutions" and further more in page 45 says that "There are four financial institutions
-- Exim Bank, National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), National Housing Bank (NI-TB) and Small Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI) which are under full-fledged regulation and supervision of the Reserve Bank", and thus is SIDBI is Page 1 of 3 under full fledged regulation and supervision of the Reserve Bank of India?
6. Whether Code of SIDBI's Commitment to Micro, Small and Medium As regards whether the Code Enterprises of November 2008 (http://www.sibdi.com! of its Commitment to Micro, codeofcommitment.asp) statement in page 7, that "The Code does not Small and Medium replace or supersede regulatory or supervisory instructions issued by Enterprises of November 2008 has been issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and we will comply with such SIDBI, this information may instructions/directions issued by the RBI from time to time" and thus be obtained from SIDBI are RBI instructions/directions binding upon SIDBI has been issued by directly. SIDBI has to SIDBI, and thus is SIDBI bound to comply with RBI directions, as per comply with the directions, SIDBI's own code hosted on SIDBI's website. guidelines issued by RBI from time to time.
13 Whether it is the duty and responsibility of the Department of Banking The applicant has sought Supervision (Reserve Bank of India) which regulates and. supervises an opinion and not SIDBI to ensure that RBI directives / instructions not flouted by 'information' as defined SIDBI, and thus. should Department of Banking Supervision direct under Section 2(t) of the STDBI to forthwith remove the name of Creation Decors Private Right to Information Act, Limited from published list of willful defaulters of RBI on CIBIL 2005. website.
17. What is the action proposed to be taken by the Department of Banking The applicant has sought Supervision against serving officers who have given false reports an opinion and not certificate on 37 or more occasions that ' RBI instruction have been, 'information' as defined strictly followed, when no no,tióe, time of days to file reply : to notice under Section 2(t) of the and ,no personal hearing has, been granted prior to declaring borrower Right to Information Act, as willful Defaulter as directed by RBI circular. 2005.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply by the PIO on query 5, 6, 13, and 17. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
FAA ordered to provide the certified copy of all the documents / certificates/ reports and entire correspondence between SIDBI and RBI for declaring our company a willful defaulter, since the very beginning till today.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply by the PIO and the FAA as well.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. M. S. Anand representing Mr. Manpreet Singh; Respondent: Ms. Jonaki Sain, Dy. Legal Advisor on behalf of Mr. Deepak Singhal and Mr. G. Jagan Mohan Rao, PIO & Chief General Manager on video conference from RBI-Mumbai The PIO has given most of the information but is now directed to give the following information to the Appellant:
1- Query-8: A copy of the letter dated 17/08/2007 received from SIDBI shall be given to the Appellant. If there is any information in the letter which is exempt under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act will be severed under Section-11 and the Appellant will informed the reasons for severing.
2- Query-28: If there are any communications with regard to query-28 which are with RBI relating to the last two years and which are not destroyed and are available in Hard Copy or Soft Copy will be provided to the Appellant.Page 2 of 3
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant before 25 May 2012.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 03 May 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PG) Page 3 of 3