Central Information Commission
Smt. Chandro Devi vs Syndicate Bank on 5 October, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/001157/SG/15050
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/001157/SG
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Ms. Chamdro Devi
Village - Sundarpur
P.O Palwal via Pipli
Kurukshetra
Haryana - 136131
Respondent : Central Public Information officer,
General Manager Syndicate Bank, Head office Manipal , Udipi District Karnataka - 576104 RTI application filed on : 05/10/2010 PIO replied on : 21/12/2010 First Appeal filed on : 11/01/2011 First Appellate Authority order on : 31/01/2011 Second Appeal received on : 02/04/2011 Information Sought:
Q.No Query Reply of PIO
1. Please provide information regarding Concerned PIO replied for point 1 & 2
change in nomination. that the information sought by
1. Current rule regarding change in appellant is on the question of law,
nomination. hence cannot be provided under RTI
2. Copy of ruling vide which the Act.
original/ previous nominee is not For query 3, 4, 5 & 6 PIO has replied required to be called for at the that the information is not available time of change in nomination. with him.
3. The depositor was 86 years old deaf and dumb still his wife was called who was natural nominee at the time of change of nomination, in the name of grandson who even did not reside with him.
4. Kindly provide the copy of register / affidavit and other relevant nomination was changed.
5. Kindly provide the copy of registrar and other documents in which nomination was changed.
6. Kindly provide me the details regarding the maturity if FD which had matured on 31/07/2010 before the death of the depositor. Why wasn't it informed during his lifetime so that the deceased could have distributed the wealth according to his own will.
2. Please provide whether any legal notice Concerned PIO replied that they had has been received and application received the summons from the civil challenging the change of nomination court, Kurukshtra alongwith the copy and stopping of payment to change of suit for permanent injunction " Smt. nominee. Chandro Devi V/S Syndiacte Bank, Mohan Nagar Kurukshetra & Ankur s/o Gobind.
3. Please provide whether is it sufficient to Concerned PIO that information stop the payment & if not please supply sought is clarification which does not copy prevalent to the subject. come under the RTI Act.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
PIO had not replied to the query. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
According to the order of FAA the PIO had replied to all the queries and had provided the requisite information to the Appellant , hence the appeal has been dismissed.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Information furnished by the PIO was not satisfactory despite the FAA's order.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a perusal of the papers it appears that the PIO should provide information on query 1 & 2 of the Appellant. If this information is not in existence this should be stated. As regards query 4 & 5 the PIO should either obtain the information from some other officer or state categorically that no such information is available in the matter.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant before 30 October 2011.
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 05 October 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (HA)