Central Information Commission
Mrb S Saroha vs Rural / Gramin Banks on 17 August, 2016
Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No. CIC/SH/A/2015/001194
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 17th August 2016
Date of decision : 17th August 2016
Name of the Appellant : Shri B. S. Saroha, Advocate
Chamber No. 365, District Court Complex,
Bhiwani, Haryana 127021
Name of the Public : Central Public Information Officer,
Authority/Respondent Sarva Haryana Gramin bank,
Regional Office: Bhiwani, 102, HUDA City
Centre, Bhiwani, Haryana
RTI Application filed on : 15/09/2014
CPIO replied on : 01/10/2014
First Appeal filed on : 18/10/2014
First Appellate Authority order on : 11/11/2014
2nd Appeal received on : 06/04/2015
The Appellant was not present.
On behalf of the Respondents, Shri S. N. Sharma, Regional Manager and CPIO
was present in person.
Information Commissioner : Shri Sharat Sabharwal
File No. CIC/SH/A/2015/001194
Information sought
This matter concerns an RTI application filed by the Appellant, seeking information on ten points regarding the pension loan sanctioned in 2008 to late Shri Mahabir Singh, recovery of the said loan and related issues.
The CPIO reply The CPIO provided information on point nos. 1 & 7 and denied the remaining information under section 8 (1) (e) & (j) of the RTI Act.
Grounds of the First Appeal Not satisfied with the CPIO's reply.
Order of the First Appellate Authority The FAA upheld the CPIO's reply and also stated that the legal heir of the deceased account holder, whose information was being sought, had specifically, through a written communication, refused to disclose any information. Grounds of the Second Appeal Not satisfied with the response of the Respondents.
File No. CIC/SH/A/2015/001194 Relevant facts emerging during the Hearing, Discussion and Decision The Appellant was not present in spite of a written notice having been sent to him. The Respondents stated that the matter concerns a loan given to a defence pensioner, who is no more. Therefore, the loan has devolved upon his widow. The Appellant is the advocate of the guarantor of the loan, Shri Telu Ram. However, he has not given an authorization from Shri Telu Ram to get the information concerning the above loan on his behalf. The Respondents further submitted that when they contacted the widow of the borrower, she asked them vide her letter dated 18.9.2014 not to provide any documents concerning the loan to the Appellant as she is the heir of the borrower.
2. We have considered the records and the submissions of the Respondents and note that the Appellant stated clearly in the RTI application that he was seeking the information on behalf of Shri Telu Ram son of Shri Dei Ram, VPO Bapoda who, as stated by the Respondents, is the guarantor of the loan. It is seen from the records that Shri Telu Ram has had to repay Rs. 10,000/ towards the loan. In view of the foregoing, he cannot be treated as a third party to the loan and the information cannot be denied to him. It is noted that information of a general nature sought at point No. 1 and the information concerning Shri Telu Ram's passbook sought at point No. 7 has already been provided. The Appellant may submit to the CPIO an authorization from Shri Telu Ram to get the information sought in the RTI application dated 15.9.2014. In the event of his doing so, the CPIO is directed to provide the information on the remaining points of the RTI application, File No. CIC/SH/A/2015/001194 free of charge, within thirty days of the Appellant submitting an authorization from Shri Telu Ram as above, under intimation to the Commission.
3. With the above direction and observations, the appeal is disposed of.
4. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/ (Sharat Sabharwal) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar File No. CIC/SH/A/2015/001194