Central Information Commission
Shri Abraham Joesph vs State Bank Of India on 21 December, 2009
Central Information Commission
File No.CIC/SM/A/2009/00062 & 284
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated: 21 December 2009
Name of the Appellant : Shri Abraham Joesph
Cherayil House,
Near Muttom Church,
Cherthalai.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, State Bank of India,
Local Head Office,
S.S. Kovil Road, Thampanoor,
Thiruvananthapuram.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Madhu, ACPIO was present.
The same Appellant has filed two separate appeals. We have clubbed both the cases together for hearing. The brief facts are as follows.
2. In two separate applications dated 6 September 2008, the Appellant had requested the CPIO (a) for the details regarding the discount offered by the Tata Motors to borrowers whom the ADB Branch, Alleppey, had sanctioned loans for purchase of Trucks during 2004-05 and (b) certain details about the loan sanctioned to Ms. Vidhyadhiraja School.
3. The CPIO responded to these requests in his letters dated 25 August and 15 September 2008 respectively by declining to disclose any information claiming exemption under Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The Appellant, thereafter, filed appeals against the denial of information by the CPIO. In one of the cases (000062), the Appellate Authority passed an order on 17 September 2008 endorsing the decision of the CPIO while in the other case it is not clear if the appeal was disposed of at all. Eventually, the Appellant has come before the Central Information Commission in second appeal.
4. We heard this case through videoconferencing. The Appellant was not present in spite of notice whereas the Respondent was present in the Thiruvananthapuram Studio of the NIC. After hearing his submissions and CIC/SM/A/2009/00062 & 284 after carefully examining the queries made by the Appellant in both these cases, we think that the following information should be provided to him:-
(i) the number of loans disbursed by the ADB, Alleppey Branch during the year 2004-05 in a Tie-up arrangement with M/s Tata Motors, clearly also indicating in which of these cases the discount offered by the company had been built into the loan finally sanctioned;
(ii) copies of the letters/reports, if any, received by both the Regional Manager concerned and the Branch Manager of the ADB Alleppey alleging that the discount was not passed on to the borrowers;
(iii) If the loan sanctioned to Ms. Vidhyadhiraja School has remained unpaid and has been declared as NPA, then the total amount for which the Bank has initiated any recovery proceedings.
5. We direct the CPIO to provide the above information to the Appellant within 10 working days from the receipt of this order.
6. With the above directions, both the cases are disposed off.
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla) Assistant Registrar CIC/SM/A/2009/00062 & 284