Central Information Commission
Mrs.Shashi Mathur vs Syndicate Bank on 2 February, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003435/17961
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003435
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Smt. Shashi Mathur,
6/108, S.F.S., Agrawal Farm,
Mansarovar, Jaipur- 3020201
Respondent : Mr. Anil Kumar Gaur
PIO & Chief Manager Syndicate Bank, Regional Office Moradabad, House no. 160/1, MIG Ramganga Vihar, Phase-I, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh RTI application filed on : 27/05/2011 PIO replied : 03/06/2011 First appeal filed on : 13/06/2011 First Appellate Authority order : 19/07/2011 Second Appeal received on : 24 /11/2011 Information Sought:
Particulars of information: Details of Loans/Credit facilities Accounts sanctioned to M/s Choudhary Scrap Traders its Group and their family members where in the charges are leveled against my husband Mr.V.N.Mathur --Ex senior branch Manager at your Gajraula Branch as per details requested in the Annexure enclosed.
Annexure:
1. Details of constitution with, % or stake or partners in business, details of securities, amount of loan sanctioned, Nature of Irregularly and the authority by which the loan was sanctioned etc. In alleged fraud in availing aggregation loans to the tune about Rs. 179 lacs by M/s Choudhary Group at your Gajraula Branch.
2. Copy of the charge taking report along with lrregularities in advances portfolio required to be pointed out by the new -incumbent Mr D.K. Sethy after transfer and relief of Mr.V.N.Matjiur from your Gajraula Branch to your Bikaner Branch in June 2007.
3. Whether the discretionary powers under Syndicate Mortgage Loans, Vehicle Loans, and Agriculture loans are not apart from other the general delegated powers given to the Branch heads for general business loans? Whether these loans are also supposed to be dubbed in Discretionary powers for General Business loan for the purpose of determination of discretionary powers to a single borrower or under Group Approach?
4. Purpose for which the Synd. Mortgage loan can be sanctioned by Senior Branch Manager-as per policy of the bank along with the powers delegated to him in respect or quantum of loan to be sanctioned under such schemes.Page 1 of 5
5. The valuer Mr.S.K Verma and Panel Advocate Mr. Jain Haye denied having giving few valuation reports and legal opinion respected to be forged and fabricated in spite of the fact, that signatures are resembling. If report states-that signatures are forged whether bank probed who signed the above signatures/documents? Whether the said valuation reports apd legal opinions were referred to handwriting experts and forensic experts to confirm or to deny the veracity of their statements. lf yes then copies of such letters along with their confirmation report.
6. Whether the bank has enquired that said Valuer and lawyer have lodged any FIR. against fraudulent use of their alleged letter heads since their prestige and reputation not only with the bank but with the society at large with stack. Copies of which F.I.R report may be submitted to me.
7. Was the audited financial statements were given for taking loans? if yes --then The name of Chartered Accountant who has audited these statements and on whose instance he has audited it without following the norms .Was the complaints against auditors with ICAI was lodged by the bank for audit of falsified financial statements ? If yes, then the copy of statements given by CA. and copy of letter sent to ICAI may be submitted.
8. Name of the investigating authority / inquiry Officer who vitiated the enquiry in V.N.Mathur's case, his grade and scale of pay and also the scale and pay grade of Mr,V.N.Mathur? Is it not true that the Inquiry Authority was not sufficient senior and was not possessing the required skills since he has totally overlooked the statements given by Mr. Arvind Choudhary.
9. Copy of the report on the basis of which the bank Authority has concluded that Mr V.N.Mathur has committed the offence under criminal law under sec-120-B, Sec-466 and 471 and Sec.-12(2) r/w 13(I)(d) of PC Act,1986 acts and act was committed by him in furtherance of common intention and under what direct evidences the criminal conspiracy was established against him, in spite of the (act that the act were done by him in good faith without malafide intentions and mistakes which were errors at judgment in the usual course of business. The statement of loanee /Surety Mr.Arvind Choudhary who has clearly evidenced that Mr. Mathur was not aware of the fraud and falsification in records and criminal breath of trust was done with hire along with the bank by the fraudesters.
10. Bank is conducting risk based Internal audit and RBIA for 2005 to 2011 particularly the executive summary, special report and rating chart along with the marks awarded by the Inspectors under various parameters of credit portfolio of the branch may be furnished.
11. Copy of the Statutory Audit Report for the period 2006.2007, 2008.2009 may be furnished.
12. Information on credit proposals handled by Mr. V.N.Mathur during 2005,20062007 and number of credit proposals failed and % at erroroneus decisions? Whether it is large?
13. In how many cases the non performance of officers was made liable for departmental action by the bank in the year 2005, 2006, 2007.
14. Whether the Sanction taken note by the controlling office does not mean that sanction Is In order from credit policy angle point of view and the sanctioning authority has not exceeded the discretionary powers.
15. is it not true that the controlling office and Head office have first hand information about each and every officer and Important role to play on the functioning of the branch under their jurisdiction. RO have access to the track record of officer. The performance ratings of the officer may now please be conveyed at least for the period from 2004-05,2005-
O6,200&'01,2007- 08,2008-CO along with the comments on appraisal report by Reporting Authority and Reviewing Authority may please be submitted. Is it also not true that Mr.V.N.Mathur was never asked to explain his conduct either orally or In veiling by any of his superiors. In the bank.
16. Has the Bank always been satisfied with the work of Mr.V,N.Mathur? if no, then the explanation letters issued to him during the period he was heading as branch head at Page 2 of 5 Gajraula or any time prior to Gajraula when he was heading the branch. Have the controlling office observed any abnormal signs on honesty, integrity and functioning or the branches. Handled by Mr. V.N.Mathur and if answer is yes, then why-he was posted in the capacity of branch head since 2002.
17. Whether robust loan review mechanism after sanction of loan exist in the bank? if yes, then by whom it is reviewed and what is the normal frame for such review. What is the role of controlling office if the requirements for loan review are not sent by the branch? What is the system of issuing legal compliance and due diligence certificate in bank particularly for limits of Rs. 25 Lakhs and above Rs 25.00 Lacs. and also in the cases when limits are sanctioned by the R.O.
18. Copies of taken note/review or sanction by R.O. , in above loan accounts, review of reports of Internal loan review cell may please be furnished in these loan accounts.
19. Whether the credit history data base is available for verification of credit Information of an individual borrower and firm with the controlling office and whether controlling office is supposed to confirm the defaulters list before taking note of sanctions made by the branch manager at branch level. Whether the name of above borrowers were figuring in the list of defaulters as circulated by RBI/CIBIL at the time of sanction of loans by Mr. V.N. Mathur.
20. Whether Synd. Mortgage was insisted under crass selling of products or not? Existing borrowers were to be given preference or not as per polity of the bank?
21. Inspection ratings of the Gajraula branch since 2004.
22. Inform the ultimate profit communicated by H.O. to Gajrauta branch since 31.03.2004 to
31. 03.2011 year wise.
23. Whether R.O. was satisfied with the transaction of the party before hiking the credit facilities requested by the borrower and recommended by the branch.
24. Whether the offsite monitoring exists in the bank and if yes copy of the letters Issued to the branch informing about Irregularity in the account of above borrowers.
25. When the Legal action under SARFAESI was contemplated then what concerned action the bank has taken under SARFAESI and it is in which stage?
26. How the controlling office ensures that procedural compliances are completed by the branch at the time of sanction of advances. Please furnish copy of the letters Issued from R.O where in the compliances were not made by the branch in above loan accounts. In spite of their lnstruction.
27. Whether RB? has carried out annual financial inspection of the Gajraula branch and if so the copy of Inspection report of these accounts maybe furnished.
28. Whether the assets of sureties Illegal representatives lyining and charged to bank In ordinary course of business can be appropriated for payment of dues under irregular credit accounts of borrowers /sureties outstanding with the branch or not?
29. Provide me the copy of visit report of Mr. A. K. Sharma Marketing Manager Regional Office Ghaziabad who visited these loan accounts during 2005-2007.
30. Whether any complaint of bribery / gratification or likely nature is received by the bank against Mr.V.N.Mathur since 1986 when he became the officer in Bank? If so please furnish copy of such complaint if any.
31. Whether as per Law the realization proceeds of genuine property of the deceased owner's can be appropriated for the personal dues of legal hefts/sureties?
32. The details how exactly the loss has been caused and determined to the bank since the value of genuine properties are sufficient to cover the dues of the borrowers, sureties/legal representatives.
33. Whether system provides the accountability of auditors/inspectors for their failure to report gross irregularity in advances portfolio if any? Whether they observed and reported any Irregularity and if not what action was taken by the bank for failure to report Irregularities in these accounts.
Page 3 of 534. What Is the position or key business parameters like Deposlts, Advances, NPAs as on 31.10.04, 20.06.07, 31.03.08, 31.O3.09, 31.O3.l0, 3l.03.11; of the Gajraula branch.
35. Is It true that one of the persons in above loan accounts Mr. Narendra Singh has expired? If so when and what action the bank has taken to attach the charged and uncharged assets oh him and the progress in this regard may be Informed to me.
36. Whether Mr. V.N. Mathur and his family members were found having the properties disproportionate to his Income he and his wife earned for last 32 years? Furnish the basic of objective evidence and at whose Instance the action against him under sec13 (2), sec.13 (1) (d) and19 of P.C. Act Is contemplated against him without any proper enquiry.
37. Whether the branch head can be made accountable for the lapses of other officers In the branch? Please furnish a list of the duties of Deputy Branch Manager and Advances department officer. Is the Stocks verification Is not the responsibility of an officer handling advances department? Copies of stock statements submitted by the party and verification as and when done by the officer in charge of. Advances department may please period from 2008-2009.
Further whether a manager can be made accountable for diverting the funds by borrower and not crediting sale proceeds to the account after 3 months of his relief from the branch? 38 How much amount have been paid in these loan accounts after relief of Mr. V.N. Mathur from Gajrauia branch in mid June2007.
39 When a mechanism exist In Income tax Department that pending returns can be filed subsequently with penalty, can such returns are prohibited to be considered by the branch head while evaluating loan proposal? Whether bank guideline exists that old year returns should not bear the receipt of even dates by the income tax authorities and If yes copy of such circular may please be given.
40 How the Controlling office ensures that the branch has not followed the applicable procedure in obtaining legal opinion and valuation reports from approved legal advisers or values.
41 When these loan accounts were were first classified as standard C-class assets. Copy of the return received by R.O from the branch may be sent. 42 CRC Migration statement is sent twice a year-yes or no? Produce copies of CRC statement of Gajraula Branch of the relevant period where in these accounts were shown as slipped from higher ratings to tower ratings.
43 Rating chart for loans above Rs 10 ac in above loan accounts was to be confirmed by R.O-What was the CRC in above cases? Copy of the rating chart in above loan accounts for the period 20062007.2008 may be sent.
44 Whether any CGMS scheme for loans up to Rs 50.00 lac to SME borrowers exist In the bank where by no collaterals and third party guarantee Is required? Kindly submit photocopy of the circular of the above scheme.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
The information Sought by you relates to third parties personal information under Section 8(1) (i) of RTI Act 2005 which is exempted from disclosure. The information cannot be revealed as it comes under "Commercial Confidence? exempted under 8 (1) (d) of' RTI Act and Bankers duty to maintain secrecy' of its customers under Section 13 of Banking Companies Act 1970. Further CBI enquiry is going on; the information sought may impede the process of investigation. Hence it is exempted under section 8(1)(h) of RTI Act 2005.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Under RTI Act as Appellate Authority I do not have any Jurisdiction to look into the allegations made by you. They are purely outside the purview of RTI Act. Though as an affected person you have made some allegations that fabricated evidence etc. I do not want to deal with that aspect.Page 4 of 5
"Therefore I do not find anything wrong in the reply furnished by PIO and the grounds raised by you purely fall outside the purview of RTI Act. Therefore appeal is rejected."
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
No information provided by the PIO and the unfair rejection of appeal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Smt. Shashi Mathur on video conference from NIC-Jaipur Studio; Respondent: Mr. Anil Kumar Gaur, PIO & Chief Manager on video conference from NIC-Moradabad Studio;
The appellant had sought information about transaction of M/s Choudhary Scrap Traders which is a customer of the Bank. The information on the transactions of customer is held by bank in fiduciary capacity and hence is exempt under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. However, the Appellant points out that query-44 does not relate to customer and hence this should be provided Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information on query-44 to the appellant before 25 February 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 02 February 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(PRE) Page 5 of 5