Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Harmeet Singh Sethi vs Union Bank Of India on 8 February, 2022

Author: Suresh Chandra

Bench: Suresh Chandra

                                      के   ीयसूचनाआयोग
                              Central Information Commission
                                  बाबागंगनाथमाग ,मुिनरका
                               Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                               नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीयअपीलसं या / Second Appeal No.CIC/UBIND/A/2019/660026

Harmeet Singh Sethi                                         ... अपीलकता /Appellant


                                       VERSUS
                                     बनाम
CPIO: Union Bank Of India
Acharya J.C. Bose Road,                                  ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Kolkata

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 13.03.2019                FA     : 21.04.2019         SA      : 21.10.2019

CPIO : 17.05.2019               FAO : No Order              Hearing : 11.01.2022


                                         CORAM:
                                   Hon'ble Commissioner
                                 SHRI SURESH CHANDRA
                                        ORDER

(07.02.2022)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 21.10.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through the RTI application dated 13.03.2019 and first appeal dated 21.04.2019:-

(i) Whether any loan/financial accommodation has been availed for by M/s Precision Engineers and Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. from Union Bank of India having its branch at 1/1 camac street police station - Shakespeare, Kolkata -

7000016 for their commercial purposes?

Page 1 of 5

If the answer of (i) above is yes, then kindly provide copies of all such document(s), if any thereof. Also indicate the date(s) execution of such document.

(ii) If any loan/financial accommodation by M/s Precision Engineers and Fabricators Pvt. Ltd., kindly indicate the amount of such financial accommodation?

If the answer of (ii) above is yes, then kindly provide details of such account(s), if any, thereof.

(iii) Whether there is any outstanding amount with regard to such loan as mentioned in query no. (ii) If the answer of (ii) above is yes, then kindly provide the details, if any, thereof.

(iv) Whether any securities/collaterals given by M/s Precision Engineers and Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. to Union Bank of India having its branch at 1/1 camac street, Police Station - Shakespeare sarani, Kolkata - 7000016 with respect to such loan/financial accommodation availed?

If the answer of (ii) above is yes, then kindly provide the details, if any, thereof.

(v) Whether there are guarantors (personal/corporate) for such loan/financial accommodation availed by M/s Precision Engineers and Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. from Union Bank of India having its branch at 1/1 camac street, Police Station

- Shakespeare sarani, Kolkata - 7000016?

If the answer of (i) above is 'yes', then kindly provide copies of all such document(s), id any, thereof, obtained from such guarantors. Also indicate the date(s) of execution of such document.

Page 2 of 5

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 13.03.2019 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Union Bank of India, Kolkata, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 17.05.2019 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 21.04.2019. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) did not pass any order. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 21.10.2019 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 21.10.2019 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 17.05.2019 denied to provide the information u/s 8 (1) (d) and (j) of the RTI Act, 2005. The FAA vide order dated 23.05.2019 forwarded the first appeal to concerned FAA.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Varun Kumar, Deputy General Manager and Regional Head, Union Bank of India, Kolkata, attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that the respondent bank had claimed him to be the guarantor for the company M/s Precision Engineers and Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. before forums including DRT and DRAT. On the other hand, they had denied him the information sought in the RTI application considering him to be a third party. Therefore, the appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to disclose the information.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had not mentioned his nexus with the company M/s Precision Engineers and Fabricators Pvt. Ltd. and that he was the guarantor for the said company. Therefore, they had considered the RTI application as per its contents and had denied the information bona fide. They further stated that they had the information and were ready to hand it over to the complainant before the Commission. The respondent pleaded that the erstwhile CPIO Page 3 of 5 had exercised his judgment on the basis of the contents of the RTI application wherein it was not revealed that the complainant was guarantor of the company.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that the respondent had denied information by claiming exemption under provisions of section 8(1)(d) and (j) of the RTI Act. The appellant clearly brought out that he had filed RTI application because they were treating him as a guarantor in the company. The fact having been admitted by the respondent during the course of hearing, they assured to provide the information to the appellant immediately. In view of the above, the Commission directs the respondent that they may re-look into the RTI information, verify the identity and other relevant details of the appellant being guarantor and provide the information within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order and a copy of the same along with dispatch proof be uploaded on the Commission's web portal within 21 days. With these observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

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

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुसुरेशचं ा) ा सूचनाआयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक/Date: 07.02.2022 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत#) Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :
1. Central Public Information Officer, Union Bank Of India, Regional Office, Alepee Court, 1st Floor 225-a, Acharya J.c. Bose Road, Kolkata, Pin - 700 020 Page 4 of 5 First Appellate Authority, Union Bank Of India, Regional Office, Alepee Court, 1st Floor 225-a, Acharya J.c. Bose Road, Kolkata, Pin - 700 020 Harmeet Singh Sethi Page 5 of 5