Ravindra Kumar Kashyap vs Punjab National Bank on 30 April, 2020

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Ravindra Kumar Kashyap vs Punjab National Bank on 30 April, 2020

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 26.05.2018 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 27.01.2018 and first appeal dated 25.03.2018:-

Page 1 of 4

(i) बचत खाता सं या xxxxx०२९८० सुलखान कु शवाहा, शाखा फतेहपुर म . ४२३२५/-

के Neft ारा Wrong Transaction होने के स ब ध म ाथ ने आपके ब क म माननीय क ीय सूचना के आदेश (के स सं या CIC/MP/A/2016/001716 का हवाला देते 'ए )दनांक ३०.१२.२०१६ को Wrong Payment के Reversal स बंिधत प+ वाया ईमेल भेजा था, आपको ा- 'आ या नह. य)द ा- 'आ तो उस पर कृ त काय1वाही से माण सिहत अवगत कराये / सूिचत करे |

(ii) ाथ को आपक3 ब क से प4ा करने पर 5ात 'आ है )क 7गत खाता म Effective Balance तथा Available Balance के 8प म धन रािश है, कृ पया सूिचत करे )क माननीय क ीय सूचना आयोग के आदेश )दनांक १६.०१.२०१७ का स मान करते 'ए उनक3 िसफा:रश / Recommendation के तहत उपल;ध धन रािश से Neft का Reversal )कस िनयम के तहत नह. )कया जा रहा है |

(iii) 7गत खाता सं या xxxxx०२९८० =ी सुलखान कु शवाहा के खाते म Effective तथा Available Balance )कतना है, कृ पया सूिचत करे सं5ान ले क3 उ> खाते म Neft ारा Wrong Payment 'आ है िजसके पु ता व मािणक सूचना LIC of India तथा ाथ ारा भी आपको दी जा चुक3 है जो क3 Neft फ3ड करता है, तथा उसपर िवभागीय दबाव है |

(iv) उ> खाते म (xxxxx०२९८०) जो भी राशी अवशेष / उपल;ध है उससे Wrong Neft Payment (Name Differ होने के बावजूद) क3 धनरािश LIC के खाते म वापस करने म कौन से िनयम बाधा बन रहे है, कृ पया मािणत सूचना दान करे |

(v) आपके ारा सूिचत )कया गया है )क 7गत =ी सुलखान कु शवाहा का खाता A3ज है, कृ पया सूिचत करे )क उ> खाता सं या xxxxx०२९८० )कस आधार या िशकायत के आधार पर आपके ारा )कस तारीख को A3ज )कया गया है, इस समय उसम )कतनी धनरािश है, सूिचत करे |

(vi) माननीय क ीय सूचना आयोग के आदेश )दनांक १६.०१.२०१७ के अनुपालन से स बंिधत खाते से )कस ितिथ तक धनरािश वसूल करके आंिशक या पूण1 जो भी धनरािश उपल;ध हो LIC के खाते म वापस क3 जाएगी, य)द नह. तो )कस िनयम के आधार पर |

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 27.01.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab National Bank, Sangam Place, Civil Line, Allahabad, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO replied on 19.03.2018 Dissatisfied with the response of the CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal dated 25.03.2018. The First Appellate Authority did not pass any order. Aggrieved by this, the appellant has filed a second appeal dated 26.05.2018 before this Commission which is under consideration.

Page 2 of 4

3. The appellant filed the instant appeal dated 26.05.2018 inter alia on the grounds that the respondent had not provided the requisite information.

4. The CPIO replied vide reply dated 19.03.2018 denied the information under section 8 (1) (d), (e) and (j) of RTI Act. The FAA did not pass any order.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Y N Pandey, CPIO, Punjab National Bank, Allahabad, attended the hearing through audio conference. 5.1. The appellant submitted that he was an employee of Life Insurance Corporation and he was assigned the duty to feed the details of customers and transfer the LIC amount. However, in the present case the respondent bank had only provided the account number and not the name of the account holder . Therefore, the transaction resulted in wrong payment and he was questioned by higher authorities for the same. The appellant further submitted that he had sought the RBI guidelines regarding role and responsibility of the bank in such cases of wrong payments and that in this case respondent bank was accountable and therefore necessary action need be taken against the respondent bank. 5.2. The respondent submitted that they had provided revised response vide letter dated 23.04.2020 and provided the details of amount transferred to the a/c no. xxxxxx2980 on 30.05.2014 which was wrongly credited as per Lucknow LIC. The appellant was provided point-wise information to the appellant regarding more transactions wherein amount was wrongly credited. The respondent further clarified that the appellant had sought information in individual capacity whereas the wrong payments were held to be carried by LIC. Moreover, the disclosure of any other details except for those provided b them vide letter dated 23.04.2020 details of individual third party's account would cause unwarranted invasion of of his/her privacy.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, feels that the due reply has already been provided vide letter dated 23.04.2020. Further, the appellant has requested to initiate action against the respondent bank and the same appears to be a complaint/grievance. The redressal of Page 3 of 4 grievance is not the remedy available under RTI Act and the appellant may approach appropriate forum for the same. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.

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

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश चं ाा)) Information Commissioner (सू सूचना आयु ) )दनांक/Date: 27.04.2020 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत ) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :

1. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Circle Office, 1st Floor, Sangam Place, Civil Lines, Allahabad - 211 001 THE F.A.A, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, Circle Office, 1st Floor, Sangam Place, Civil Lines, Allahabad - 211001 RAVINDRA KUMAR KASHYAP Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission