Central Information Commission
Shripathi P. S. vs Bank Of India on 11 January, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/BKOIN/A/2022/637344
Shripathi P. S. ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO:
Bank of India,
Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu ... ितवादीगण/Respondent
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 19.03.2022 FA : 20.04.2022 SA : 08.07.2022
CPIO : 18.04.2022 FAO : 16.05.2022 Hearing : 08.01.2024
Date of Decision: 10.01.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 19.03.2022 seeking information on the following points:
(i) "I obtained a mortgage loan and cash credit loan in loan number 8215310000093 from RS Puram Branch, of Bank of India at Coimbatore by providing my original title deeds to my house property as security. Both these loans were repaid in Oct2011 and Aug 2016 respectively. Since I have repaid the entire loan amount which is also acknowledged by the bank by issuing a no due certificate, the bank is supposed to cancel the MOD 5337-2009 and return the original title deeds. But it has been over 6 years and the bank has not done Page 1 of 4 so yet. I have raised the matter with various bank managers and officials that have served the bank during these 6 years and I have received various responses from trying to find the documents, documents being lost, etc but no step has been taken to either find the documents or do the necessary steps to create new title deeds in place of the ones lost and misplaced by the bank like filing an FIR with the police station regarding the lost documents, publishing an advertisement in local, national and vernacular newspapers that the documents have been lost, presenting the FIR and letter from police department stating that the documents have been lost and are not traceable and the copy of the advertisement to the registrar to strike down the legal validity of the lost documents and to issue a certified copy of the title deeds which will act as the valid title deeds going forward and finally cancelling the MOD executed and clearing any encumbrance created on these documents. Please do the needful to remedy the situation at the earliest."
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 18.04.2022 stating as under:
"We observe that you have filed a complaint against the Bank before the Consumer Dispute Redressal forum, Coimbatore, regarding the same subject matter and the same is pending consideration before Hon'ble CDRF Coimbatore. Since the matter is Sub judice, we are unable to provide the information sought by you under section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act 2005."
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 20.04.2022. The FAA vide order dated 16.05.2022 reiterated the reply of the CPIO and offered to facilitate the Appellant if he was ready to cooperate with the Bank for completing the process as per extant guidelines.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 08.07.2022.
Page 2 of 45. The Appellant was present through video conference and on behalf of the Respondent, Hari KG, Chief Manager & CPIO attended the hearing through video conference.
6. The Appellant referred to the grievance as narrated in the RTI Application and submitted that he has suffered loss of business in the course of pursuing this grievance.
7. The Respondent submitted that through the instant RTI Application, the Appellant asked for certain remedial action and as such as on date the case filed by him with the Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum has been also settled in April, 2023 and the order of the Consumer Forum has also been complied with.
8. The Commission, after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, and perusal of records, observes that the Appellant has not sought for any relief amenable to the scope and ambit of the RTI Act. The RTI Act enables the citizens to access "information" as defined in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. For the sake of clarity, the provision of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act is reproduced hereunder:
"2. Definitions.--In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,--
(f) "information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force;.."
RTI Act does not entrust the CPIOs and FAAs or the Commission to take direct remedial actions or redressal of grievances. The Appellant is advised to acquaint himself with the mandate of the RTI Act to be able to judiciously exercise his right to information in the future.
9. The Appeal is dismissed accordingly.
Page 3 of 4Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
आनंदी राम लंगम)
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं म
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 10.01.2024
Authenticated true copy
Suman Bala (सुमन बाला)
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26180514
Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO
Bank of India,
Dy. ZM & Nodal CPIO, RTI Cell,
Coimbatore Zone Office, Star House, 324,
Oppanakara Street, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu- 641001
2. Shripathi P. S. Page 4 of 4