Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Radha Charnal vs State Bank Of India on 9 December, 2025

                                       के ीय सूचना आयोग
                               Central Information Commission
                                    बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
                                Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                                  नई िद   ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं         ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2024/642389

 Radha Charnal                                                     ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                          VERSUS
                                           बनाम
 CPIO: State Bank of India,
 Rajsamand, Rajasthan                                        ... ितवादीगण/Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

 RTI : 08.05.2024                 FA      : 12.07.2024             SA      : 21.09.2024

 CPIO : 22.05.2024                FAO : 03.08.2024                 Hearing : 26.11.2025


Date of Decision: 09.12.2025
                                          CORAM:
                                    Hon'ble Commissioner
                                  _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                         ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.05.2024 seeking information on the following points:

1) मुझे मैरी माता . ीमती गीता, प ी . ी अशोक कुमार गुसर िनवासी फतह नगर रोड़, PWD ऑिफस के सामने मावली िजला उदयपुर, जो मैरे िपता . ी अशोक कुमार गुसर के मृ ु होने से पशनर खाताधारक थी। िजनका खाता आपके बक म था एवं उनकी मृ ु होने से मृ ु िदनांक: 12.04. 2015 के बाद के सम लेने दे न की मािणत ित की आव कता है ।

2) इनके नाम FD रही हो उनके भुगतान की ितयाँ

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 22.05.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-

1. वह खाता सं ा कर िजसके बारे म जानकारी चाही जा रही है ।

2. आपके ारा चाही गयी सूचना मृतक खाताधारक के िविधक उ रािधकारी को ही उपल की जा सकती है । इस संदभ म कृपया अपने िविधक उ रािधकारी होने का माण ुत करे ।

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 12.07.2024 stating that she was not aware of the account number and neither had any certificate readily available proving that she is a legal heir. The FAA vide order dated 03.08.2024 stated that:

सूचना के अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 के ावधानों के अंतगत अपीलाथ ारा ेिषत आर.टी.आई. आवेदन, क ीय जन सूचना अिधकारी ारा दान िकये गये उ र / जवाब एवं अपील का अवलोकन िकया गया। अपीलाथ से पु ी होने का माण प लेकर एवं खाता करने के उपरां त, सूचना ेिषत करने का आदे श िदया जाता है ।

4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 21.09.2024.

5. The appellant did not attend the hearing despite service of hearing notice in advance and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Mrinal Meena - CPIO/RM attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant was unable to state the account number about which she sought information and was also not able to submit any proof of being legal heir of the deceased account holder. The respondent contended that vide reply dated 03.03.2025 the appellant was provided the account number of Smt. Gita Bai and related query that no transactions have been done in the account after the date of death i.e. 12.04.2015. The statement of account provided by CPIO was computer generated. In a separate reply dated 28.05.2025 the information related to all the accounts of Shri Ashok Kumar Gusar & Smt Gita Devi were provided to the appellant. The Respondent sought time to submit a detailed written submission Page 2 of 3 enclosing the aforementioned documents and submitted the same subsequently, with the supporting documents.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and hearing the respondent, observed that Respondent had provided information based on available records in terms of provisions of the RTI Act. The Commission finds that the written submission dated 27.11.2025 filed by the Respondent is a comprehensive account of the facts of the case and directs the Respondent to provide a copy of same with all supporting annexures to the appellant within one week of receipt of this order, under intimation to the Commission. No further intervention is found necessary in the instant case under the RTI Act. The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

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

Sd/-

(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 09.12.2025 Authenticated true copy O. P. Pokhriyal (ओ.पी. पोख रयाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO State Bank of India, Regional Business Office -6, Rajsamand (63551), 1st Floor, Hotel Govindam Inn, Tvs Choraha, Nathdwara Road, Kankroli, Rajsamand, Rajasthan -313324

2. Radha Charnal Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)