Central Information Commission
Mr. Subhash Ch. Tiwari vs Reserve Bank Of India on 19 June, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001282/19302
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001282
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Subhash Chandra Tiwari
452/AB European Colony,
Mughalsarai, Chandauli 323101
Respondent : Ms. Uma Subramaniam,
Public Information Officer & CGM Department of Non-Banking Supervision Reserve Bank of India Central Office (1st Floor) Centre-1 World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005 RTI application filed on : 11/11/2012 PIO replied : 23/01/2012 First appeal filed on : 31/01/2012 First Appellate Authority order : 07/03/2012 Second Appeal received on : 10/04/2012 Information Sought: Following details of the investment in Golden Forest which was annexed in the original application :
1. Present status of W.P. filed by SEBI in Bombay High Court hearing no. 344/98 dt. 23.11.98, which has been logged under orders dt. 12.09.03 of Hon'ble Supreme Court.
2. Present status of arrested eight Directors group of GFIL due to contempt petition number 128/2001 of Hon'ble Supreme Court.
3. Present status of claims received by the Committee (GFIL), Jharmari, Patiala-140501 under chairmanship of Justice Prndsee.
4. Reason id such delay.
5. Policy of disbursement i.e. the original maturity value or capital+(?)% of interest.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO): The entity by name Golden Forest is not registered as Non-Banking Finance Company with RBI as such information is not available with us.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Reply given by CPIO is complete.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.Page 1 of 2
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. B. S. Bohra, Assistant Legal Advisor on behalf of Ms. Uma Subramaniam, Public Information Officer & CGM on video conference from NIC-Chandauli Studio; The Respondents have stated that they have no information with regard to investment in Golden Forest. It also appears that the appellant is aware of which authority holds this information. It is only prudent that an appellant applies to the public authority that holds the information and no send it to the authority that is not holding the said information.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
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 19 June 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(NA) Page 2 of 2