Pate Meera Pandharinath vs Central Bank on 29 December, 2022

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Pate Meera Pandharinath vs Central Bank on 29 December, 2022

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 08.12.2020 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 18.09.2020 and first appeal dated 24.10.2020:-

(i) Provide Central Bank of India's reply documents copy for complaint no.MH000062512017 & MH000065922018

(ii) Provide information data point wise reply as per PMOPG/E/2017/0640284 & PMOPG/E/2018/0001615

(iii) Provide detailed information of following three notices how and when deliver/given to the appellant by Central Bank of India as

a) 15/10/2017

b) 30/11/2017 & Page 1 of 5

c) 26/12/2017

(iv) Branch Manager having any approvals letter from their Regional Offices or Upper Authority of Central Bank of India for consulting the appellant at home for signing back dated three notices regarding to PMEGP proposal provide detailed information.

(v) Why bank don't use of postal services, mobile phone, emails for contacting the appellant during handling his PMEGP proposal at branch further consultation at home without transparent procedure were done provide detailed information.

(vi) According to RBI circular RPCD MSME & nfs.bc.no.5/06.02..31/2013-2014 dated on 01.07.2013. Which objective of circular follows by branch during handling her PMEGP proposal please give detailed information?

(vii) How many time Central Bank of India staff go at customers home for giving notices provide dates & time wise detailed information with inward & outward copy (notices entry with dates) register with remark.

(viii) Banking standards codes of India which objectives follow by branch during proposal handling provide detailed information.

(ix) Central Bank of India can gives any counseling and guidance to her under MSME Act/PMEGP Scheme Guidelines. Provide detail information.

(x) We contact Central Bank of India at following e-mails for raised issue with bank but Central Bank of India never reply on that point to her & CPGRAMS portal so it is assume that that details not opened/share by Central Bank of India in front of Hon'ble Indian Courts & Indian Parliament and CPGRAMS portal if that details open/share with parliament & Indian court then that detail information requesting Central Bank of India please provide information to us as e-mail dates.

a) 02/01/2018 to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

b) date 12/01/2018 To [email protected]

c) 20/02/2018 To - [email protected] Page 2 of 5

d) date 24/01/2018 and date 28/02/2018 [email protected]

e) date 10/09/2018 to [email protected] [email protected] in

f) Provide information how many times Central Bank of India received her e- mails with date & action taken report copies by central bank of India

g) Provide point-wise information as per data PMOPG/E/2018/0001615

h)how many times & when Central Bank of India Pathardi branch login to PMEGP portal provide login history page copy for his PMEGP proposal.

Provide details information Central Bank of India's reply send to the appellant as per point number (10) A to H

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 18.09.2020 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Central Bank of India, Pune, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 18.09.2020 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 24.10.2020. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 07.12.2020 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 08.12.2020 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 08.12.2020 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO did not reply to the RTI application. The FAA vide order dated 07.12.2020 stated that the RTI application was not received by CPIO and the FAA hence could not replied. However, the FAA stated that they had already dealt with the appellant's complaint.

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri P M Shinde, Deputy Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Pune, attended the hearing through video conference.

Page 3 of 5

5.1. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that RTI application and the first appeal was not received by them hence reply to the same could not be given to the appellant. They further submitted that the appellant had applied for loan under PMEGP which was rejected by the competent authority on the ground economic viability. They stated that after rejected of the appellant's loan application she had filed complaints at different forum. They informed that each and every complaints of the appellant were closed by the competent authority on its merits.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observed that no reply was given by the respondent. The respondent during the course of hearing submitted that neither the RTI application nor the first appeal was received by the appellant hence the same could not be replied to the appellant. However, the respondent informed that the appellant's complaints regarding rejected of his loan application were closed by the competent authority on merits. Assuming that the respondent had not received the RTI application earlier, they could have obtained the relevant documents including the RTI application from the Registry or accessed the file from the Commission's web portal upon receipt of the hearing notice. However, the respondent has not made any such efforts and therefore, he is cautioned to be more careful in future. Further, the respondent is directed to procure the RTI application and provide proper reply/information to the appellant, within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. With the above observation and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

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

Sd/-

                                                                                 सुरेश चं ा)
                                                              (Suresh Chandra) (सु        ा
                                                                              सूचना आयु )
                                                   Information Commissioner (सू
                                                                    दनांक/Date: 28.12.2022
Authenticated true copy

R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत )
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७)




                                                                                    Page 4 of 5
 Addresses of the parties:
The CPIO
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,
REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND/3RD
FLOOR, 317, M.G.ROAD, PUNE
CAMP, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA-411001

First Appellate Authority CENTRAL BANK OF
INDIA,
REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND/3RD FLOOR, 317,
M.G.ROAD, PUNE
CAMP, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA-411001

Shri Pate Meera Pandharinath,




                                            Page 5 of 5

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission