Central Information Commission
Rajpal Singh vs Rural / Gramin Banks on 25 May, 2023
Author: Suresh Chandra
Bench: Suresh Chandra
के ीयसूचनाआयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबागंगनाथमाग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीयअपीलसं या/Second Appeal No. CIC/RUGBK/A/2020/118868
... अपीलकता /Appellant
Rajpal Singh
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Prathama UP Gramin Bank,
Amroha ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal
RTI 24.01.2020
FA 13.02.2020 SA : 30.06.2020
CPIO 30.01.2020 FAO 17.02.2020 CNC 27.09.2022
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
SHRI SURESH CHANDRA
ORDER
(18.05.2023)
1. The issue under consideration is the complaint for non-compliance dated Nil (received on 27.09.2022) of CIC's order dated 17.08.2022 in the above matters.
2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application on 24.01.2020 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Prathma UP Gramin Bank, Amroha, UP seeking information as per his RTI application. The CPIO vide his letter dated 30.01.2020 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved with the same, the appellant filed first appeal on 30.02.2020. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) passed order on 17.02.2020. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed second appeal dated 30.06.2020 before the Commission which was heard and disposed of vide order dated 17.08.2022 with the following directions:
"6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that the action was taken against the appellant on the basis of some irregularities done in the aforesaid accounts. The appellant was adversely affected due to certain irregularities in the alleged account and thus, he was not a stranger. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the RTI application be revisited and revised point-wise information/reply may be given to the appellant, within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. With the above observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of. "
3. The appellant has filed the non-compliance complaint dated Nil (received on 27.09.2022) complaining that the CPIO did not comply with the orders and did not provide copies of complaints dated 22.04.2019 and 10.04.2019 The Registry has issued a letter dated 04.10.2022 to the CPIO seeking their comments on the complaint of the appellant.
4. In compliance to the orders and in response to the letter of the Registry, the CPIO by their letter dated 13.10.2022 addressed to the Commission, gave a reply stating that they had already complied with the orders of the Commission by providing all available information. They did not have complaints dated 22.04.2019 and 10.04.2019 on their records and could not find even after thorough search. These two complaints were 13 years old and were not available.
5. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of records, observes that the CPIO has provided available information to the appellant. As regards their assertion that the two complaints were not available, the CPIO is directed to submit their assertions on affidavit before the Commission with copy to the appellant within three weeks from the date of receipt of this Order. With these directions and observations, the complaint of non-compliance is closed.
Sd/-
सुरेशचं ा)
(Suresh Chandra) (सु ा
सूचनाआयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 18.05.2023
Authenticated true copy
आर. सीताराममूत )
R. Sitarama Murthy (
उपपंजीयक)
Dy. Registrar (
011-26181927(०११ २६१८१९२७)
-
Address of the parties:
THE CPIO & Regional Manager,
Prathma UP Gramin Bank,
Azad Road, Near Madho Cinema,
AMROHA - 244221, UP
The FAA & General Manager,
Prathma UP Gramin Bank, HO,
Ramganga Vihar, Phase 2,
MURADABAD - 244001, UP
Shri Rajpal Singh