Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Reskamla Kanwar vs Department Of Posts on 22 November, 2024

                                      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/POSTS/A/2023/125328

Reskamla Kanwar                                                   ... अपीलकता/Appellant

                                         VERSUS
                                          बनाम
CPIO: Department Of Post,
Shimla                                                      ... ितवादीगण/Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 26.03.2023                 FA      : 25.04.2023             SA     : 03.06.2023

CPIO : 31.03.2023                FAO : 03.05.2023                 Hearing : 19.11.2024


Date of Decision: 21.11.2024
                                          CORAM:
                                    Hon'ble Commissioner
                                  _ANANDI RAMALINGAM
                                         ORDER

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 26.03.2023 seeking information on the following points:

(i) मने टु टू डाकघर का चैक 398588 िदनांक 3-06-22 को क ाण िसंह कंवर के नाम को जारी िकया जो उ ोंने उसी िदन S.B.T. टु टू को खाता 1011***7 101*****7358 उसी िदन जमा करवा िदया।
(ii) ये चैक िबना सही कारण बताए अ ीकार कर िदया और मेरे खाते 274****462 से 118 . काट िलए।
Page 1 of 4

(iii) S.B.T. ने भी खाता 101******358 से 177 . काट िलए इस स मक ाण िसंह कंवर ारा R.T.I. को अ ीकार िकया गया पर कहा

(iv) ह ा र िमलान नहीं आ।

(v) जब िक ये चैक 3-06-22, 7-6-22 और 18-6-22 को clearing म ुत आ यिद ह ा र िमलान नहीं हो रहा था तो S.B.T. टु टू ने चैक तीन तीन बार ों भेजा।

(vi) कृपया सूिचत कर िक 3-06-2022, 7-6-2022 व 18-6-2022 को जो डाक सहायक Clearing Duty पर थे उनके नाम िनयु ितिथ सूिचत कर िवशेष कर िजसने ह ा र िमलान न होने का कारण बताया।

(vii) बक के Return Memo Rehost म िमलान न होने का कोई कारण नहीं बताया गया अिपतु टु टू डाकघर के चैक को घणाह ी डाकघर का चैक बताया गया।

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 31.03.2023 and the same is reproduced as under :-

(i) to (iii): No information required.

(iv) The information has already been supplied vide letter No. CR/RTI/137/21-22 dated 01.11.2022. (Signature Mismatch)

(v) The information relates to SBI Totu.

(vi) The information sought for is a personal information which cannot be provided under section 8 (1)(j) of RTI act 2005. Hence, cannot supplied.

(vii) The information relates to SBI Totu.

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.04.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 03.05.2023 stated as under:

"It has been observed that the information provided to the Appellant by the CPIO- cum -Senior Postmaster Shimla GPO is correct as there was mismatch ln signature ln the cheque. The case was under the consideration of senior Page 2 of 4 postmaster Shimla GPO-cum-CPIO and is dealt accurately. The information asked at point 5 comes within the purview of Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act and cannot be disclosed. The saving bank operations are being performed by the trained sensitized staff having no intention of causing financial loss to anyone. The postal saving operations are operated online and signatures may be seen in any CBS office. The amount of Rs. 118/- has been deducted due to penalty of dishonor cheque as the signature was mismatched and the cheque was returned. The appeal is accordingly disposed of"

4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 03.06.2023.

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Manohar Lal, Senior Postman, attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The respondent while defending their case endorsed the reply given by the erstwhile CPIO on 31.03.2023and stated that an amount of Rs. 118/- was deducted towards charges for dishonouring of cheque due to mismatch in signatures.

7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent 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. Further, in the absence of the Appellant to plead his case or contest the CPIO's submissions, 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: 21.11.2024 Page 3 of 4 Authenticated true copy Col S S Chhikara (Retd) कनल एस एस िछकारा, ( रटायड) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:

1. The CPIO O/o. The Senior Postmaster, CPIO, Department of Post, G.P.O. Shimla - 171001
2. Reskamla Kanwar Page 4 of 4 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)