Central Information Commission
Mr.J S Gaba vs Punjab And Sind Bank on 30 May, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001195/19152
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2012/001195
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. J. S. Gaba
Secretary, Punjab and Sind Bank Staff
Federation, Delhi Area Committee
2636-Hudson Line, GTB Nagar
Delhi-110009
Respondent : Mr. H. S. Gandhi
PIO & Chief Manager Punjab & Sind Bank O/o The Chief Manager, Bank House, 7th Floor, 21, Rajender palace, New Delhi - 110125 RTI application filed on : 08/11/2011 PIO replied : 03/12/2011 First appeal filed on : 03/01/2012 First Appellate Authority order : 12/01/2012 Second Appeal received on : 13/04/2012 Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Is it correct that we have been requesting Personnel It is question, no information sought.
Deptt. through our various letters to club Code No. 40 with our parent Code No. 04 since long?
2. Is it not correct that Personnel Deptt. did not pay any It is question, no information sought.
heed to our requests and continued with two codes i.e. 04 & 40 for our Federation?
3. Is it correct that Personnel Deptt. has changed the name It is question, no information sought.
of our Federation under Code No. 40 from Punjab & Sind Bank Staff Federation (Delhi) to All India Punjab & Sind Bank Staff Federation (dac) when the matter is sub- judice?
4. Is it correct that All India Punjab & Sind Bank Staff It is question, no information sought.
Federation can not function as All India Body and a State Unit simultaneously with the similar name?
5. Is it also correct that Constitution of All India Punjab & It is question, no information sought.
Sind Bank Staff Federation does not permit the name of All India Punjab & Sind Bank Staff Federation (day) as its State Unit?
6. Is it not correct that Personnel Deptt has incorporated this It is question, no information sought.
fictitious name in their records against the provision of Constitution of All India Punjab & Sind Bank Staff Federation7 Page 1 of 4
7. Is it also correct that out of these two codes of our It is question, no information sought. Federation, name of Code No. 40 has been changed without any requisition submitted by our Federation without informing us in writing/without seeking our opinion?
8. Is it correct that Personnel Deptt. has changed the name It is question, no information sought.
of our Federation under Code No.40 before clubbing with our parent Code No. 04?
9. We solicit reasons for action of Personnel Deptt. for As per mandate given by individual changing the name under Code No. 40 from Punjab & employees on 29.04.2008,the Sind Bank Staff Federation (Delhi) to All India Punjab & subscription are being deducted in Sind Bank Staff Federation (dac) when the matter is sub- favour of All India PSB (DAC),The judice. Change of code is our internal package 10 Whether this change in name under Code No. 40 has been Reply as mentioned in 9 effected by Personnel Deptt. on its own or with the prior permission of I.R. Cell or H.O. C.P.P. Department, who is only authorized to make changes in the salary software? 11 Who requested for change of the name under Code No. The letter dated 1707.2008 was sent by 40 from PSB Staff Federation (Delhi) to All India PSB Secretary Staff Federation (dac)? Please specifically inform us the All India Punjab & Sind Bank Organizational Union individual's name who made the Federation (DAC). request for change.
12 Which papers have been submitted for change of name Reply as mentioned in 5r.No.11 for our Federation under Code No. 40? Please arrange to send us copies of each of the said papers 13 Who submitted the papers for change of name of our Reply as mentioned in 5r.No.11 Federation under Code No. 40 and on which date? Copies may please be provided to us.
14 Who received and accepted the papers for change of Reply as mentioned in 5r.No.11 name of our Federation under Code 40 and at whose end decision for change of name was proposed and taken? 15 Which authority issued instructions/directions to change Code number is our internal package, the name of our Federation under Code No. 40 from but the subscription is being deducted PSBSF (Delhi) to AIPSBSF (dat) and who followed and as per mandate. executed the directions?
16 Who are being considered as President & Secretary of the Sh.Avtar Singh Chawla,as President is Union under Code No. 40 as on date/since change of posted at B O Green Park, New Delhi name of our Federation? Please be specific to inform us and Sh.S.S.Alag, as Secretary is posted their names and present place of posting. at B.O.Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi of All India PSB Stall Federation (DAC) 17 Minutes of meeting/record for consideration of request Subscription has been deducted as per and issue of directions for change of name of our mandate received from employees, Federation under Code No. 40 is being requested/sought copy enclosed. through this letter under RTJ Act 2005.
18 In which month and year change in the name of our Reply as mentioned in Sr,No,11 Federation under Code No. 40 has been proposed and executed?
19 Is it correct that subscription amount under Code No. 40 It is question, no information sought.
along with list of deductee members is being sent to some other union?
20 Who is being made beneficiary of the subscription All India P58 Federation (DAC) amount after change in name of our Federation under Page 2 of 4 Code No. 40?
21 Please inform us the Title of Account and Account All India P58 Federation (DAC) Number and name of the Branch Office where it is being maintained.
22 Who are operators of the Account? Please specify their Not available with us names with present place of posting.
23 Whether subscription amount after change in name under List enclosed of issued/outstanding Code No. 40 has been got encashed? Please inform us the entries. Cheque/Pay Order No., Date of issue, Amount and Favouring. Also please inform us the date of clearance of the Cheque/Pay Order, as above.
24 Is it not correct that this change in the name of our It is question, no information sought Federation has been done by HO Personnel Department ignoring Hon'ble Court's Interim Order dated 14/02/2008, which is sub-judice?
25 Is it also correct that ever since formation of Punjab & It is question, no information sought Sind Bank Staff' Federation, affiliated to B.E.F.I. only one Code No. 04 was in circulation in salary package for our Federation?
26 Is it not correct that ours is the only Federation working It is question, no information sought for and on behalf of our members in Delhi & New Delhi which is having affiliation with Bank Employees Federation of India through its Delhi State Unit. 27 Who proposed and created Code No. 40? Under whose Reply as mentioned in Sr.No,15 directions, execution of this another code was done? Please also inform us the date and year of its effectiveness and its executants. Also please submit all the relevant documents upon which the directions/instructions were passed on and orders were executed.
28 Is it a practice adopted by HO Personnel Deptt? that It is question, no information sought whenever any member of a Union submits his letter of request for change of a particular union, Personnel Dept. gives direction to its Salary Section to change the name of that Union instead of deleting the name of employee from that particular union?
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
It has been observed that at most of the points appellant has made question which can not be answered as in terms of section 2(f) read with 2(j) of the RTI Act, information means any material in any wm, including records, documents, memos, circulars, orders etc. which is accessible and is held. by him or under the control or any public authority. As per above definition of RTI Act, CPIO is not supposed to give any reasoning or justification whether some thing is correct or not until and unless that is covered under section 2(f) & 2(j) of the RTI Act.
The present appeal requires no further direction as the CPJO has already provided the information with respect to all such points on which information has been sought which were covered under the definition of RTI as define under section 2(f) read with 2(j) of the RTI Act and denied the information with respect to rest of points where the appellant had made questions and no sought no information. With these observations I uphold the decision of CPIO.Page 3 of 4
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO as well as by FAA Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. M. P. Singh representing Mr. J.S. Gaba; Respondent: Mr. Iqbal Singh Nagi, Manager on behalf of Mr. H. S. Gandhi Public Information Officer & Chief Manager;
The PIO has provided most of the information and the many of the queries of the Appellant no not seek information which could be a matter of records. However the following deficiencies have been found: 1- Query-11, 13, 14, 18, 21 & 27: Specific information will be provided.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information on the points mentioned above to the Appellant before 20 June 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 30 May 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PN) Page 4 of 4