Central Information Commission
Kailash vs State Bank Of India on 20 January, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2023/143693
Kailash ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
State Bank of India, ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Rajsamand, Rajasthan
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 13.02.2023 FA : 27.03.2023 SA : 13.06.2023
CPIO : 08.03.2023 FAO : Not on record Hearing : 15.01.2025
Date of Decision: 17.01.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.02.2023 seeking information on the following points:
(i) ीमती गंगा बाई प ी . ी गणेश लाल ी िनवासी ाम बामन टॅ कडा के पे शन खाता मांक ******8356 की िदनांक 01.07.2013 के अंत तक की रािश जमा िनकासी (िवडॉल) स ी प ों की मािणत ितिलिप दान करने की कृपा कर
(ii) उ पशन खाते की िदनांक 01-07-2013 से अ तक की मािणत ितिलिप दान करने की कृपा कर I
(iii) ाथ ारा पूव म िदनां क 1.11.2022 को आपके ित आवेदक की छाया ित दी जाये I Page 1 of 3
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 08.03.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-
आपके सूचना का अिधकार अिधिनयम 2005 के अंतगत आवेदन िदनां क 13.02.2023 जो िक हमारे कायालय को िदनांक 21.02.2023 को ा आ ह, के मा म से आप ारा ेिषत द ावेजों से आपका ीमती गंगाबाई का िविधक उ रािधकारी होना िस नहीं होता है । तथा आप ारा चाही गयी सूचना मृतक खाताधारक के िविधक उ रािधकारी को ही दे सकते ह, अतः अपने िविधक उ रािधकारी होने का अ कोई माण तथा िनधा रत शु के साथ अपना आवेदन ुत कर।
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 27.03.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading, which was not adjudicated by the First Appellate Authority.
4. Aggrieved with the non-receipt of FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 13.06.2023.
5. The appellant attended the hearing in-person and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Mohan Singh Rathor, CPIO, attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The appellant inter alia submitted that no information has been provided by the respondent. He further submitted that a copy of Will made by late husband of late Ms. Gangabai has been produced to the respondent, but no information has been provided.
7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that a response to the RTI application had been furnished to the appellant vide their letter dated 08.03.2023, wherein, the appellant has been informed that the information may be provided to the legal heir of late Ms. Gangabai and the same has not been submitted by the appellant till date, hence no information has been provided.
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO has provided an appropriate reply to the RTI Application as per the provisions of the RTI Act vide letter dated 08.03.2023. The Commission notes that information sought pertains to late Ms. Gangabai Page 2 of 3 and the appellant has not submitted legal heir certificate and other relevant documents to the respondent authority. In view of the above, the Commission finds no scope of intervention in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 17.01.2025 Authenticated true copy Bijendra Kumar (िबज कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO State Bank of India, RM & CPIO, Regional Business Office - Rajsamand (63551), 1st Floor, Hotel Govindam Inn, TVS Choraha, Nathdwara Road, Kankroli, Rajsamand, Rajasthan -313324
2. Kailash Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)