Central Information Commission
Mr.Sompal vs State Bank Of India on 3 January, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
CLUB BUILDING (NEAR POST OFFICE)
OLD JNU CAMPUS, NEW DELHI110 067
TEL: 01126179548
Decision No.CIC/DS/C/2011/002317/VS/01684
Appeal No.CIC/DS/C/2011/002317/VS
Dated: 312013
Appellant: Shri Sompal
Sr. Section Engineer (E)
North Railway, Luxar
Haridwar (Uttrakhand)
Respondent: Public Information Officer,
State Bank of India
Region8, Uttrakhand Admn Office
Dehradun.
Date of Hearing: 312013
ORDER
Facts:
1. The appellant filed an RTI application on 732011 seeking information on a savings bank account and other related issues.
2. The PIO responded on 1342011. The appellant filed an appeal with the first appellate authority (FAA) on 2242011. The FAA did not respond. The appellant filed a second appeal with the Commission on 2992011.
Hearing:
3. I heard both the parties through videoconferencing.
4. The appellant stated that his grievance against the bank in the context of the RTI Act is this that his RTI application with 5 specific points had been responded to by the bank in a very evasive way which depicted that the bank was concealing the reasons for the delay in the encashment of a cheque deposited earlier. The appellant said that the reason for his RTI application is the fact that the branch manager misbehaved with him when he approached him on account of the intransigent attitude of the bank staff. He was compelled to resort to the RTI Act with the hope that his grievance would be redressed.
5. The respondent stated that the RTI application, in the background of what had just been stated in the hearing, would be given full attention and a comprehensive reply would be sent to the appellant within two weeks or so.
6. The appellant said that he could not understand the system about the calculation of interest and he finds himself in a position that he cannot approach the bank even for the full understanding of his statement of accounts.
7. The respondent said that the matter would be addressed promptly and the information sought by the appellant would be provided. The respondent stated that they had no intention to withhold any information and that he has all the documents to show that the bank had acted as per due process in respect of the payment. The respondent further stated that any charges imposed were in accordance with the RBI mandate and the bank would have not given any wrong information.
8. The respondent said that in respect of the appellant's grievance, any shortcomings in respect of the response to the RTI application, that would be attended to promptly.
9. The RTI applicaltion needs to be addressed fully by the respondent.
Decision:
10. The respondent is directed to ensure that a comprehensive reply on all the points mentioned in the RTI application of 732011 is sent to the appellant within 15 days from the issuance of this order.
The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Vijai Sharma) Information Commissioner