Anurag Kumar vs Bank Of Baroda on 4 August, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 2]

Central Information Commission

Anurag Kumar vs Bank Of Baroda on 4 August, 2021

1. The issues under consideration i.e. the reliefs sought by the complainant in his complaint dated 28.12.2018 due to alleged non-supply of information vide his RTI application dated 18.09.2018 are as under:-

 Penalty may be imposed on the concerned CPIO under provisions of section 20 (1) of RTI Act.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the complainant filed an application dated 18.09.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Bank of Baroda, Preet Vihar, seeking following information:

Page 1 of 6

(i) Details of all the mandatory payments under mos. 10.04.2002 to Anurag Kumar at the time of order dt. 14.06.2013 like three months salary in lieu of notice, payments of salary of suspension period, leave encashments, and other benefits as now J N Chopra has admitted before Hon'ble CIC that all the records of Anurag Kumar mandatory salary arrears from 18.08.2004 & Three months notice salary, leave encashment & all other benefits like pension etc. since 31.03.2006, are with DMR- III at the time final order 14.06.2013.

(ii) Photocopy of all the records of terminal benefits & salary records of Anurag Kumar EC 45134 on which basis N Chandrasakeren calculated the three months salary & arrears of salary of suspension period when passed the orders against Anurag Kumar 27.05.2013 & 14.06.2013; when one DGM Ramjass Yadav has admitted in Hon'ble High Court that all the records of Anurag Kumar was sent to D MR-III by letter 16.04.2013 by then DGM H S Kler and order dt. 27.05.2013 was passed by N Chandrasakern another DG M only on the basis of his sharp memory. And now J N Chopra apologized unconditionally from me before CIC on 07.09.2018 for not providing these information as it belongs to DMR-III.

2. The CPIO vide letter dated 26.09.2018 replied to the complainant. Aggrieved by this, the complainant filed a complaint dated 28.12.2018 before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The complainant has filed the instant complaint dated 28.12.2018 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The complainant 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 replied vide letter dated 26.09.2018 that the information sought appeared to be concerning DMR III Indraprasth and the application was accordingly transferred and uploaded on 'RTI Request and Appeal Management Information System'.

Page 2 of 6

Hearing on 29.01.2021:

4.1. The complainant and on behalf of the respondent Ms J Jane Eyre, Manager(Legal), Bank of Baroda, Delhi, attended the hearing through video conference.

4.2. The Commission passed the following directions on 17.02.2021:

"6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observes that the respondent have not provided any proper reply/information to the complainant so far. Further, the CPIO remained absent and the representative could not give any reason for not providing information to the complainant. In view of the above and non-serious attitude of the respondent, Shri K.D. Arora, present CPIO and the then CPIO as on 18.09.2018 are directed to show cause as to why penalty may not be imposed under provisions of section 20 (1) of RTI Act upon each of them for not providing the requisite information within stipulated time. Mr. K.D. Arora is given the responsibility to serve a copy of this order upon the then CPIO and secure his written explanations and ensure his attendance on the next date of hearing. All written submissions/explanations must be uploaded on the Commission's web portal within 21 days."

Hearing on 24.06.2021

5. The complainant and on behalf of the respondent Shri K D Arora, present CPIO, Shri V Shivram, the then CPIO and Shri Vijendra Dev, Law officer, Bank of Baroda, Delhi, attended the hearing through audio conference.

5.1. The complainant inter alia submitted that he had sought information regarding his terminal benefits and that the respondent had failed to provide the requisite information. The complainant further submitted that the respondent had provided documents pertaining to disciplinary proceedings instead of his terminal benefits.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the RTI application sent to Agra Region then transferred to DMR III. The respondent further submitted that although all RTI applications were timely disposed of, there had been an Page 3 of 6 oversight in respect of the instant RTI application. The respondent, Shri B. Shivaram, the then CPIO, in response to the show cause notice explained that the complainant had sought similar information in multiple RTI application and there had been an oversight of the application dated 18.09.2018; that the complainant was in the habit of filing multiple applications regarding leave encashment and had deliberately suppressed the earlier applications. The respondent stated that in respect of the terminal benefits, the CPIO had already informed the complainant about letter dated 08.04.2006 of the Branch wherein the complainant was advised to submit his claim in the format enclosed with letter dated 08.04.2006. Thereafter, the Branch vide its letters dated 28.05.2014 and 21.04.2014 requested the complainant to submit his claim but the complainant had failed to do so. The claim forms were again enclosed with letter dated 18.06.2016. The complainant had already inspected the entire relevant records pertaining to his disciplinary proceedings as available in Agra Region's Office. The above mentioned submissions were endorsed by Shri K.D. Arora, in his written explanations as well. Therefore, the CPIOs pleaded that inspection was availed by the complainant in 2014 and 904 pages of documents were already made available to the complainant in compliance of the Commission's order dated 30.06.2014.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that the no reply was given by the respondent in response to the RTI application dated 18.09.2018. Perusal of RTI application revealed that the complainant sought records pertaining to his terminal benefits including salary payments, leave encashments, etc. However, the list of documents provided by the respondent along with their written explanations did not specifically mention records related to leave encashment as sought by the complainant in his RTI application. It may also be noted that the complainant had specifically requested the information from DMR-III, the custodian of the information. However, it was not confirmed from the explanations submitted by the respondent that the information was supplied by the concerned DMR-III Branch. Further, the information was also not furnished in compliance of the Commission's order dated 17.02.2021. That being so, there appears to be lapse on the part of the respondent not only in terms of the violation of Page 4 of 6 provisions of the RTI Act but also in terms of compliance of the directions passed by the Commission. The failure to discharge of duties may not be pardoned only on grounds of oversight of an RTI application but the said error could be rectified after an opportunity having been given by the Commission. However, the list of documents provided earlier was produced by the respondent instead of providing the information in the specific and prescribed material as sought in the RTI application. Therefore, this appears to be a fit case for imposition of penalties upon both the CPIOs.

6.1. The Commission notes that the negligence of duty as designated CPIOs appears to be deliberate and mala fide is established on part of both Shri B. Shivaram, the then CPIO and Shri K.D. Arora, present CPIO. In view of the above, both are found liable as per section 20 (1) of RTI Act. In view of this, a penalty of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) may be imposed on each Shri B. Shivaram, the then CPIO and Shri K.D. Arora, present CPIO. The total penalty amount of Rs. 10,000/- shall be deducted at Rs.5,000/ PM from each of salaries of Shri B. Shivaram, the then CPIO and Shri K.D. Arora, present CPIO, by the Public Authority and paid by way of demand draft drawn in favour of "PAO, CAT", New Delhi, forward the demand drafts addressed to the Deputy Registrar (CR-II), email: [email protected] Room No. 106, First Floor, Central Information Commission, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi 110067. The penalty amount should reach to the Commission by 01.09.2021. With these directions, the complaint is disposed of.

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

Sd/-



                                                              (Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश चं ा)
                                                 Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु          )
                                                                दनांक/Date: 03.08.2021
Authenticated true copy


R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत )
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७)
                                                                                    Page 5 of 6
 Addresses of the parties:
CPIO :
1. BANK OF BARODA
O/o DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,
PLOT No. 19 & 31, COMMUNITY CENTRE,
NEAR CBSE BUILDING,
PREET VIHAR, DELHI - 110 092


THE F.A.A, BANK OF BARODA,
O/o DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,
PLOT No. 19 & 31, COMMUNITY CENTRE,
NEAR CBSE BUILDING, PREET VIHAR,
DELHI - 110092


CPIO :
1. Shri K. D. Arora (C.P.I.O)
BANK OF BARODA, O/o DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,
PLOT No. 19 & 31, COMMUNITY CENTRE,
NEAR CBSE BUILDING,
PREET VIHAR, DELHI - 110 092


2. Shri K. D. Arora (C.P.I.O)
BANK OF BARODA, O/o DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER,
PLOT No. 19 & 31, COMMUNITY CENTRE,
NEAR CBSE BUILDING, PREET VIHAR,
DELHI - 110 092
(for forwarding to
the then C.P.I.O as on 18-09-2018)


ANURAG KUMAR




                                              Page 6 of 6

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission