M/S Rasane Food Products vs State Bank Of India on 6 October, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

M/S Rasane Food Products vs State Bank Of India on 6 October, 2021

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 30.04.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through the RTI application dated 12.06.2018 and first appeal dated 28.01.2019:-

(i) Please give details period i.e. month & amount for that particular month charges interest.

                      Date              Amount Charged             Period and month
                                                                   wise Interest Int.
                  30.11.2016                175809.41              amounts information
                                                                   required.
                  30.11.2016                 522.00

                                                                                          Page 1 of 4
                     28.02.2017               127264.41

                    28.02.2017                1278.00

                    27.03.2017               88000.00

                    11.04.2018               99852.00

                    11.04.2018               13045.00

     (ii)      Why Rs.128542.41 debited on 28.08.2017 and reason for debiting such amount
               to A/c.
     (iii)     Why credited this amount on 10th January 2018, if this was wrong accounting

by branch Manager because of such entry what affect the account and who is responsible for the affect.

(iv) What action is taken by superior empowered authority of Bank against Branch Manager?

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 12.06.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of India, Satara, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 09.07.2018 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 28.01.2019 The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 26.02.2019 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 30.04.2019 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 30.04.2019 inter alia on the grounds that the respondent provided incorrect account statement and break-up of interest calculation. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

Page 2 of 4

4. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 09.07.2018 and provided the following information: (i) period-wise interest charged on account as per statement of bank; (ii) the interest was debited to the account on 28.08.2018aimed to the Memorandum of Change given by the Central Statutory Auditors at our Local Head Statutory Auditor at the behest of their Statutory Auditor for 2016-17; (iii) the account had become NPA in February 2017 after which the interest amount of Rs. 1,27,264/- plus unrealized penal interest of Rs. 1,28,542/- on 28.08.2017 as per the Memorandum accounted. The RBO which as per Branch calculation had already been paid by the borrowers, receipts but after the Statutory Auditors' Report. Hence, the amount was re-credited along with Rs. 5497/- as compensation after due approval from RBO; (iv) internal inquiry was under process. The FAA vide order dated 26.02.2019 concurred with the reply given by the CPIO.

5. The appellant's representative Advocate D.Y. Mutalik and on behalf of the respondent Shri Ajay Kumar Singh, Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Satara attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that the reply given by the respondent was not proper and the first appeal was rejected by the First Appellate Authority on the grounds of delay.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had sought information regarding his CC account with limit of Rs. 15 lacs. The respondent further submitted that the account had turned NPA several times. However, when the account was regularized, the interest claimed was reversed. Further, the appellant had raised grievance and sought clarification/explanation through his RTI application.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observes that due reply was given by the CPIO on 09.07.2018. However, perusal of records revealed that the reply given by the respondent was not legible. In view of the above, the respondent is directed that certified and legible copy of the letter dated 09.07.2018 be made available to the appellant again within two Page 3 of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. With these observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश चं ा) ा) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) दनांक/Date: 04.10.2021 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत ) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

CPIO : STATE BANK OF INDIA REGIONAL BUSINESS OFFICE, JEEVAN TARA, B-WING, 513, SADAR BAZAR, OPP. COLLECTOR OFFICE, SATARA - KOREGAON ROAD, SATARA - 415 001 THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, GENERAL MANAGER (NW-1), STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, SYNERGY, PLOT NO. C-6, G-BLOCK, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI - 400 051 M/S RASANE FOOD PRODUCTS Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission