Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Mr.V K Srivastava vs Reserve Bank Of India on 9 January, 2012

                        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                            Club Building (Near Post Office)
                          Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                 Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                         Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002980/16719
                                                                 Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002980

Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal

Appellant                          :      Mr. V. K. Srivastava
                                          Central Administrative Tribunal,
                                          Opp. Sardar Patel Stadium, Navrangpura,
                                          Ahmedabad - 380009.

Respondent                         :      Dr. N. Krishna Mohan,

PIO & Chief General Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Dept. of Banking Supervision, Central Office, Centre - I, Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai - 400005 RTI application filed on : 21/04/2011 PIO replied : 01/06/2011 First appeal filed on : 14/06/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 25/07/2011 Second Appeal received on : 20/10/2011 S. No Information Sought Reply of the PIO

1. What condition merger of employees including officer and We advise you that staff of Bank of Rajasthan with ICICI Bank was done in the information respect of following subjects: sought by you is A) Seniority not available on

i) Officer Cadre our records.

ii) Manager Cadre B) Promotion

i) Officer Cadre

ii) Manager to Sr. Manager

iii)Sr. Manager to Chief Manager

iv) Chief Manager to Asst. General Manager C) Pay structure of all above. D) Leave Rules.

E) LTC/LTA/Travelling Rules. F) Medical Facilities.

G) Children Education Allowance. H) Advances.

I) Pension Rules.

J) Whether demotion of official in any cadre if any, please indicate in which cadre.

Grounds for the First Appeal:

Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):

"Thus a CPIO is expected to provide the information available with him. He is not required to collect and compile the information on the demand of a requester nor is he expected to create a fresh one merely because someone has asked for it."

Grounds for the Second Appeal:

Unsatisfactory reply.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present Appellant: Mr. V.K. Srivastava;

Respondent: Ms. Jonaki Sain, Dy. Legal Advisor on behalf of Dr. N. Krishna Mohan, PIO & Chief General Manager via video - conference from NIC Studio- Mumbai; The Appellant had sought information which is not held by the Bank. The information being sought by the appellant is likely to be with ICICI Bank which is not a public authority. Since ICICI bank is not a public authority RBI cannot transfer the RTI application to ICICI Bank. However, the Appellant points out that RBI has approved the merger and hence they would have some information about the guidelines on how the employees would be absorbed. The respondent states that the approval is based on broad guidelines about employee's absorption which are available with RBI. The Commission directs the PIO to send the broad guidelines available for merger to the Appellant.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the appellant before 30 January 2012.

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 09 January 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PG) Page 2 of 2