Central Information Commission
Shri.Vijendra Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India on 15 September, 2011
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001637/SG/14618
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001637/SG
Appellant : Mr. Vijendra Singh,
E-19, Janakpuri Society
Ajanta Colony,
GArh Road, Meerut,
UP-250004
Respondent : Mr. Coppo
PIO & Dy. General Manager Reserve Bank of India, RPCD, C.O. Fort Mumbai-400001 RTI application filed on : 08/07/2010 PIO replied : 13/08/2010 First Appeal filed on : 18/08/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 15/09/2010 Second Appeal filed on : 06/10/2010 Sl. Information Sought Reply of PIO
1. The Information on budget expenses details on dissemination of -The Respondent Bank information on financial literacy of agricultural borrowers for past 10 had no information on years. Also provide the information disseminated. this.
2. Provide notings and all copies of the action taken on representation Copy of the Respondent's addressed to Governor, RBI dated 06/07/2010 of Appellant's son office note and letter sent to regarding his education loans problem. son of Appellant enclosed.
3. Finance Minister as well as the RBI instructed all the banks 8 years ago to -Request was not specific grant education loans upto Rs. 4 lakhs without obtaining any collateral and voluminous as 8 security or guarantee. But all the banks had been flouting that security years data sought. norms; and had been insisting on security offer or third party guarantee. -Indicate specific RBI knew the violation very well and frequently. Inform on all the actions complaint against a bank. against the erring banks taken by RBI in the past 8 years.
4. Commercial Banks in pretext to Commercial decision have been -Request was not specific shrewdly, cryptically flouting the RBI's instructions frequently in cases of and voluminous as 40 priority sector lending. Provide the Appellant public complaints in this months data sought. regard received by RBI in past 40 months. Also inform on the action -Indicate specific taken reports on these and the actions (punitive) taken against these complaint against a bank. banks.
5. Appellant's Son Amrit Bhal -Complaint was forwarded to the Lucknow office vide letter submitted letter dated 10/03/2006 dated 24/03/2006 advising them to ascertain factual position to G.P. Borah, DGM, RBI, CO, from Bank of Baroda, Meerut Branch. Mumbai, reg. "Harassment in No official note had been recorded at Respondent's end in this getting education loan". Provide regard. However, a copy of the note recorded by Respondent's ATR along with notings and Regional Office, Lucknow in this regard was enclosed Copies.
Table 2:
Sl. Grounds of First Appeal FAA Order (Appeal Dismissed)
1. Reply not satisfactory. No Infirmity in PIO Reply.
2. Incomplete Information provided as no status New information appears to be sought by the report on complaint was disclosed. Appellant hence no infirmity in PIO Reply.
3. Information is specific and not exempted. Appellant asked to be specific by PIO so that information can be provided effectively. No Infirmity in PIO Reply.
4. As Above. As Above
5. Information was Incomplete as no action taken No Infirmity in PIO Reply.
report was supplied with, either by RBI or Bank of Baroda, Meerut.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
As Mentioned above in table 2 Grounds for Second Appeal:
The CPIO was not able to furnish correct and complete information hence reply of CPIO not satisfactory.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Vijendra Singh on video conference from NIC-Meerut Studio; Respondent: Mr. Coppo, PIO & Dy. General Manager on video conference from NIC-Mumbai Studio;
The PIO will provide the specific information regarding query-3 for the period 01/04/2011 to 30/09/2011.
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 15 September 2011 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (Ank)