Arvind Singh vs State Bank Of India on 30 September, 2022

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Arvind Singh vs State Bank Of India on 30 September, 2022

Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta

                             के   ीय सूचना आयोग
                      Central Information Commission
                          बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका
                       Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                       नई  द ली, New Delhi - 110067

ि तीय अपील सं या/Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2021/610622

Mr. Arvind Singh                                      ... अपीलकता /Appellant
                                    VERSUS
                                     बनाम
CPIO                                                  ...!ितवादी/Respondent
State Bank of India
RBO, Region-6, Gaucher (FIMM)
2nd Floor, 90/2, Haridwar, Dehradun
Uttrakhand-248001

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:-

 RTI : 01-09-2020             FA    : 13-11-2020           SA       : 24-03-2021

 CPIO : 15-09-2020            FAO : 14-01-2021             Hearing : 28-09-2022

                                   ORDER

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of India, Haridwar, Uttrakhand. The appellant seeking information is as under:-

Page 1 of 3

2. The CPIO vide letter dated 15-09-2020 has provided information as sought by the appellant. Being dissatisfied with the same, the appellant has filed first appeal dated 13-11-2020 and requested that the information should be provided to him. The FAO vide order dated 14-01-2021 the CPIO is instructed to send a copy of reply again to the appellant within '10 days of receipt of this order and appeal is disposed of accordingly. He has filed a second appeal before the Commission on the ground that information sought has not been provided to him and requested to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

Hearing:

3. The appellant attended the hearing through video-conferencing. The respondent was not present despite notice.

4. The written submissions of the appellant are taken on record.

5. The appellant submitted that he is not satisfied with the response given by the CPIO on his RTI application dated 01.09.2020. The appellant further raised his grievance that complete loan amount was not sanctioned to him.

Decision:

6. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of the respondent and after perusal of records, observes that the appellant has sought information regarding the documents related to his loan disbursement and he is not satisfied with the response given by the CPIO on his RTI application. The Commission observes that the respondent instead of giving information in material form has furnished explanations in its response. Nonetheless, the CPIO is not expected to create information; or to interpret information; or to furnish clarification to the appellant under the ambit of the RTI Act. As per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, the reasons/opinions/advices can only be provided to the applicants if it is available on record of the public authority. The CPIO cannot create information in the manner as sought by the appellant. The CPIO is only a communicator of information based on the records held in the office and hence, he cannot expected to do research work to deduce anything from the material therein and then supply it to him.

7. However, in the interest of justice, the Commission directs the respondent to give copy of note-sheets/order-sheet w.r.t non-disbursement of loan amount to the appellant or any other reasons accorded in documentary form for not giving loan to the appellant, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.

Page 2 of 3

8. The Commission further issues strict warning to the CPIO for not attending the hearing before the Commission and directed to be careful in future otherwise strict action will be taken against him.

9. The appellant is advised to approach appropriate forum in order to redress his grievance.

10. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.

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




                                                           नीरज कु मार गु ा)
                                       Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज           ा
                                                               सूचना आयु )
                                     Information Commissioner (सू

                                                        दनांक / Date : 28-09-2022
Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मािणत स यािपत ित)


S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा ),
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक),
(011-26105682)




Addresses of the parties:

1.    CPIO
      State Bank of India
      RBO, Region-6, Gaucher (FIMM)
      2nd Floor, 90/2, Haridwar, Dehradun
      Uttrakhand-248001

2.    Mr. Arvind Singh




                                                                        Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission