Central Information Commission
Dr.Adarsh Saksena vs Reserve Bank Of India on 23 September, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001545/SG/14815
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001545/SG
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Dr. Adarsh Saxena
B-17 Shastri Nagar
Bikaner- 334003
Rajasthan
Respondent : Mr. Ashok Joshi
CPIO & General Manager Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Department of Human Resource Development, Central Office, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai- 400001 RTI application filed on : 02/06/2010 PIO replied : 30/06/2010 First appeal filed on : 24/07/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 02/09/2010 Second Appeal received on : 04/03/2011 Information Sought:
The Appellant has sought information over Crime of Forgery committed by the officers of RBI, Mumbai in the most offhand, prejudicial and arbitrary manner under a conspiracy hatched 3 years ago at RBI Mumbai to protect the criminal officers of the RBI guilty of the Crime of Forgery.
1) Names of the persons who got forgery done 2 months later at Mumbai on the letter which had been sent to Jaipur 2 months earlier.
2) Names of the officers who ordered the committing of the Crime of Forgery at Mumbai.
3) The details of the letter from the top portion of which this Forgery was committed at Mumbai.
4) The purpose of Forgery.
5) How forgery could be got committed at Mumbai 2 months later on the letter which was actually sent to and received at Jaipur and not Mumbai 2 months earlier?
6) Why the copy of the Appellant's letter of 03/05/2007 sent in the name of CPIO, Mumbai is not being sent to the Appellant despite the clear order given 3 years back by the Appellate cum Deputy Governor Sh. V. Leeladhar?
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
No information can be provided in this regard as the information sought is not clear and specific.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA): The appeal was disposed off as the FAA is satisfied with the information provided and directed the PIO to provide a copy of the Appellant's letter to PIO dated 30/05/2007 in query no. 5. Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete information provided by the PIO and unfair disposal of the appeal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts Emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Dr. Adarsh Saxena;
Respondent: Mr. Jonaki Sain, Dy. Legal Advisor on behalf of Mr. Ashok Joshi CPIO & General Manager on video conference from NIC-Mumbai Studio; The Appellant claims that he has sent one letter to RBI Mumbai and another to RBI Jaipur. He Appellant is showing that the copy of a fax which appears to have been sent by Fax from RBI Jaipur to RBI Mumbai. He is insisting that this is forgery. The Commission is not able to see anything that would suggest a forgery nor could understand any reason for RBI to commit a forgery on any such letter.
Decision:
The Appeal is dismissed.
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 23 September 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision mention the complete decision number) (NB)