Adarsh Kumari vs Punjab National Bank on 14 September, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Adarsh Kumari vs Punjab National Bank on 14 September, 2020

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 25.09.2018 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through her RTI application dated 31.10.2017 and first appeal dated 29.12.2017:-

Page 1 of 4

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the Appellant filed an RTI application dated 31.10.2017 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab National Bank, New Delhi, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO replied on 05.12.2017. Dissatisfied by the response of the CPIO, the Appellant filed First Appeal dated 29.12.2017. The FAA disposed of the first appeal vide order dated 01.02.2018. Aggrieved by this, the Appellant has filed a Second Appeal dated 25.09.2018 before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant filed the instant appeal dated 25.09.2018 inter alia on the grounds that the respondent did not provide the requisite information.

4. The CPIO vide letter 05.12.2017 replied and provided the details of pay scale.

The FAA concurred with views taken by the CPIO.

Page 2 of 4

5. The appellant attended in person and on behalf of the respondent Shri Ranjit Singh, Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank, Delhi, attended the hearing through audio conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that although she received the response given by the respondent, she desired to know the category to which the increment as referred to in RTI application was applicable.

5.2. The respondent while defending their reply dated 05.12.2017 submitted that the scale pay for JMG I and concerned circular dated 20.06.2016 was furnished to the appellant. Further, another appeal with identical issues (CIC/PNBNK/A/2018/116043) was heard and disposed of by the Commission on 21.11.2019.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that due reply was given vide CPIO's letter dated 05.12.2017. The appellant has raised her grievance relating to non- applicability of increment and further raised additional queries which may not be addressed at this forum. Moreover, the second appeal CIC/PNBNK/A/2018/116043 arising out of RTI application seeking identical information was disposed by the Commission earlier vide order dated 21.11.2019. The principles of res judicata would be applicable in this matter and the appeal with identical issues having been disposed of, there appears to be no public interest in further prolonging the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

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

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश चं ा) ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक/Date: 11.09.2020 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत ) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :

1. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Head Office(MARD), 2nd Floor, East Block, Sector 10, Dwarka, New Delhi- 110008 THE F.A.A, Punjab National Bank, Head Office (MARD), 2nd Floor, East Block, Sector 10, Dwarka, NewDelhi-110008 ADARSH KUMARI Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission