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 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr.Nitesh K Tripathi vs Indian Bank on 21 June, 2012

                         CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                             Club Building (Near Post Office)
                           Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                  Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                            Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001324/19325
                                                                    Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001324

Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal

Appellant                             :    Mr. Nitesh Kumar Tripathi
                                           Room No. 101, Boys Hostel
                                           RIMS & R, Saifai, Etawah
                                           Uttar Pradesh- 206301

Respondent                            :    Mr. G. Manoharan,

DGM & CPIO Indian Bank 254-260, Awai Shanmugam Salai, Chennai- 600014 RTI application filed on : 06/01/2012 PIO replied : 18/02/2012 First appeal filed on : 08/02/2012 First Appellate Authority order : No order mentioned.

Second Appeal received on             :    25/04/2012

S. No                             Information Sought                                   Reply of the PIO

1. Please provide copy of the transfer policy and promotion policy for you Information enclosed as bank employees. Annexure I

2. How many employees have taken NOC regarding applying for job The list is not maintained somewhere else since year 2006 up to 2011 and provide class wise and category wise details of employees.

3. What is the total no. of ATM working under your bank all over India The total no. of ATMs in and out of them how many are disabled friendly like having ramp railing the Bank all over India is etc and amount spent on making these ATM barriers free since year 1256. 2006 up to 2012 (year wise and state wise details are required) For other information , no such list is maintained.

4. Please provide details of amount spent on corporate social responsibility The details are given as since 2006 up to 2011 and the schemes through which this amount has annexure been spent (year wise and state wise details are required).

5. Kindly provide copy of GO/Circular for issuing NOC to your employees No such Circular towards applying for new job elsewhere.

6. Please provide the amount permitted to be spent by officers of scale I up The information has been to scale III on entertainment and customer care every month and provided in the annexure allowances, HRA and petrol allowance applicable to officers of scale I up to scale VII at present in every month.

Grounds for the First Appeal:

No information provided by the PIO.
Page 1 of 2
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
No order passed by the FAA.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and no order passed by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Nitesh Kumar Tripathi;
Respondent: Mr. Sudhansu Munshi, Chief Manager on behalf of Mr. G. Manoharan, DGM & CPIO on video conference from NIC-Chennai Studio;
As regards query-2 the PIO has stated that the information sought by the appellant is not maintained. The Appellant states that he would be satisfied the number of employees who have left the bank alongwith their designations is provided to him.
As regards query-03 the Appellant states that there is a RBI circular which requires all Bank that one third of the ATMs must be disabled friendly. The PIO states that he will check and provide the information to the Appellate. The Commission directs the PIO to give one of the following informations to the Appellant:
(i) The number of ATMs which are disabled friendly in the country of the Bank.
    (ii)     No such RBI circular exists in the Bank.
    (iii)    The Bank is not following the RBI circular.

Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the appellant before 15 July 2012.

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 21 June 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (AG) Page 2 of 2