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

Vishal Daga vs Allahabad Bank on 7 September, 2020

Author: Suresh Chandra

Bench: Suresh Chandra

                                 के    यसूचनाआयोग
                           Central Information Commission
                              बाबागंगनाथमाग,मुिनरका
                            Baba GangnathMarg, Munirka
                            नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067


     तीयअपीलसं!या / Second Appeal No. CIC/ALDBK/A/2018/158321

Vishal Daga                                              ... अपीलकता/Appellant


                                   VERSUS
                                    बनाम
CPIO: Indian Bank
Kolkata                                              ..."ितवाद गण/Respondents
(Earlier Allahabad Bank)

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 02.05.2018             FA    : 17.06.2018          SA        : 19.09.2018

CPIO : 01.06.2018            FAO : 28.06.2018            Hearing : 02.09.2020


                                      CORAM:
                                Hon'ble Commissioner
                              SHRI SURESH CHANDRA
                                     ORDER

(07.09.2020)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 19.09.2018 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 02.05.2018 and first appeal dated 17.06.2018:-

The detailed service tenure of each individual who has served as Chariman, MD and CEO in all the Public Sector Banks. The list should state details including their:-(a) names,(b) age as on the date of being appointed as Chairman/MD/CEO, Page 1 of 4
(c) appointment/relieving dates as Chairman/MD/CEO and (d) months served under the abovementioned designations.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the Appellant filed an application dated 02.05.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO),Allahabad Bank (now Indian Bank), Kolkata, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO replied on 01.06.2018. Dissatisfied with the response of the CPIO, the appellant filed First Appeal dated 17.06.2018. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) disposed of the first appeal vide its order dated 28.06.2018. Aggrieved by this, the appellant has filed a second appeal dated 19.09.2018 before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant filed the instant appeal dated 19.09.2018 inter alia on the grounds that the reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant has requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information immediately and take necessary action as per sub-section (1) of section 20 of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO, vide its letter dated 01.06.2018 furnished information about the last three Chairmen, MDs and CEOs of the bank. The FAA, vide its order dated 28.06.2018 agreed with the views taken by the CPIO.

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent, Shri R.G. Pattnaik, Asstt. General Manager, Indian Bank, Kolkata attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The respondent endorsed their reply dated 01.06.2018 wherein they had given information of the last three Chairman/MD/ CEO. The respondent submitted that the appellant sought information regarding details of Chainman, MD and CEO who served in the respondent bank. They further informed that the appellant had not mentioned any period hence it was thought reasonable to provide the information about the last three chairman/MD CEO of the bank. They stated that the appellant in his first appeal clarified that he sought information about all the Chairmen/MDs/CEOs of the bank since its inception i.e. 24.04.1865. In response to this, the FAA vide order dated 28.06.2018 informed to the appellant that information sought by the appellant was voluminous, Page 2 of 4 collection and compilation of such huge data would divert the resources of the bank, hence, it was exempted under section 7 (9) of the RTI Act.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records observed that due reply had already been given by the respondent vide their letters dated 01.06.2018 and 28.06.2018. Moreover, the appellant neither presented himself during the course of hearing nor submitted any objection in the matter. Hence, the averments made by the respondent were taken on record. 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/-

                                                                                  सुरेशचं ा)
                                                                (Suresh Chandra) (सु      ा
                                                                         सूचनाआयु&)
                                               Information Commissioner (सू
                                                                      दनांक/Date: 07.09.2020
Authenticated true copy

R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत')
Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक)
011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७)


Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :
INDIAN BANK
Zonal Office, 4th Floor,
3/1, R N Mukherjee Road,
Kolkata - 700001
(EARLIER ALLAHABAD BANK)

THE F.A.A,
INDIAN BANK,
Zonal Office,
4th Floor, 3/1, R N Mukherjee Road,
Kolkata - 700 001
                                                                                   Page 3 of 4
 VISHAL DAGA




              Page 4 of 4