Devender Singh Patwal vs Punjab National Bank on 26 May, 2020

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Devender Singh Patwal vs Punjab National Bank on 26 May, 2020

1. The issues under consideration i.e. the reliefs sought by the complainant in his complaint dated 23.04.2018 due to alleged non-supply of information vide his RTI application dated 17.03.2018 are as under: -

Issue the summons to the respondent for not giving the information under the RTI Act.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the complainant filed an RTI application dated 17.03.2018, under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the CPIO, Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, Rajendra Place, New Delhi, seeking inter alia the following information:-

Page 1 of 4

The CPIO did not reply to the RTI application. Aggrieved by this, the complainant filed complaint dated 23.04.2018, before this Commission.

3. The complainant has filed a complaint dated 23.04.2018 inter alia on the ground thatinformation sought was not provided by the then CPIO within the stipulated time period.

4. Perusal of the documents submitted by the complainant reveals that the CPIO did not reply to the RTI application.

5. The complainant and on behalf of the respondent, Ms. Priyanka Gupta, Sr. Manager (Law), Punjab National Bank, Delhi attended the hearing through audio conference.

5.1. The complainant inter alia submitted that he vide letter dated had made a request to the Bank on 25.01.2018 for transfer of his saving bank account and withdrawal of money in the said account. He informed the Commission that his account was transferred after lapse of three moths from his request and he faced Page 2 of 4 difficulties in making transactions in his account. Hence, he filed this RTI application which was not replied by the respondent properly.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had already replied to the complainant vide letter dated16.04.2018 wherein he was informed that due to migration of system to Finacle X, an error was persisting in making the account KYC complaint without which the account could not be transferred. They further submitted that when the error was removed the complainant's account was transferred. They also tendered unconditional apology for the inconvenience caused to the complaint.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, notes that information sought by the complainant in the form of questions which did not fall within the definition of "information" as defined under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. The Commission feels that due reply has already been given by the respondent vide letter dated 16.04.2018. There appears to be no merit in the complaint filed by the complainant and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed.

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

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश चं ा) ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक/Date: 18.05.2020 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत ) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Page 3 of 4 Addresses of the parties:

CPIO :

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Circle Office, RajendraBhawan, Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110008 THE F.A.A, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, Circle Office, Rajendra Bhawan, Rajendra Place, New Delhi-110008 DEVENDER SINGH PATWAL Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission