Central Information Commission
Smt.Lalita Mondal vs State Bank Of India on 29 August, 2013
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
CLUB BUILDING (NEAR POST OFFICE)
OLD JNU CAMPUS, NEW DELHI110067
TEL; 01126179548
Decision No. CIC/VS/A/2012/001394/04566
Appeal No. CIC/VS/A/2012/001394
Dated: 29.8.2013
Appellant: Smt. Lalita Mondal,
W/o late Madan Mohan Mondal,
Barganda (Nr New Bridge),
Giridih815301 (JH)
Respondent: Public Information Officer,
State Bank of India,
Regional Manager, R.B.O.,
(SBLC Campus, Baramasia),
Deoghar814112
Date of Hearing: 29.8.2013
O R D E R
RTI application
1. The appellant filed an RTI application with the PIO on 17.5.2012 seeking information about the amount of provident fund and gratuity in respect of her late husband. Besides, she also sought attested photocopy of the service book of her husband. The CPIO responded pointwise on 30.6.2012.
2. However, before receiving the reply of the PIO, the appellant filed an appeal on 20.6.2012 with the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA directed the CPIO on 14.7.2012 to again send a copy of his reply dated 30.6.2012 to the appellant. The appellant approached the Commission on 6.9.2012 in second appeal.
Hearing
3. The appellant and the respondent both participated in the hearing through video conferencing.
4. The appellant referred to his RTI application of 17.5.2012 and stated that the response of the bank has been evasive and confusing on her RTI application in which she was seeking information about her late husband's provident fund and retirement benefits due from the respondent bank.
5. The appellant stated that the points in her RTI application have been stated with clarity, as under:
(i) the mode of payment of provident fund and to whom was the payment made along with the documents involved in the payment process;
(ii) a copy of the service book of her husband; and
(iii) the amount of gratuity that was paid to her husband and the mode of its payment.
6. The respondent stated that the three points were responded to in the CPIO's reply of 30.6.2012. The respondent stated that this is a matter where the calculation of the benefits and the payments due to the appellant's husband were done taking into account the fact that the appellant's husband had been subjected to a departmental proceeding consequent to which the bank's rule applied where certain contributory provisions payable by the bank were forfeited on account of the departmental action as per rule, but the information was provided pointwise.
Decision
7. The respondent is directed to do the following:
(i) explain to the appellant the position regarding the rules referred to in para 6 above, along with providing copy of the rules;
(ii) undertake action under section 6(3) of the RTI Act with reference to the service book sought by the appellant under point 2 of her RTI application;
(iii) provide the calculation sheet of the payments made to the appellant and information about any dues still remaining to be paid;
(iv) enable the appellant to inspect the file of her late husband along with providing photocopies of the pertinent documents; and
(v) comply with the above within 30 days of this order.
The appeal is disposed of. Copy of the decision be given free of cost to both the parties.
(Vijai Sharma) Information Commission Authenticated true copy (V.K. Sharma) Designated Officer