Central Information Commission
Mr.Devendra Singh Bhusari vs Punjab National Bank on 20 July, 2010
Central Information Commission
File No.CIC/SM/A/2009/001306 dated 25112008
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Dated: 20 July 2010
Name of the Appellant : Shri Devendra Singh Bhusari MD54, Sector - D, Duplex Type LDA Colony, Kanpur Road, Lucknow.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Punjab National Bank, Circle Office, 10, Ashoka Marg, Lucknow - 220 661.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice. On behalf of the Respondent, Shri S.K. Singh, CPIO was present.
2. In this case, the Appellant had, in his application dated 25 November 2008, wanted a copy of the statement of his Provident Fund account from January 2007 till date along with the details of appropriation of his PF amount in different loan accounts. In his reply dated 10 December 2008, the CPIO provided most of the information as available and also informed him that the statement of the PF account for the period prior to April 2008 was being sought from the PF department in the head office and would be provided on getting it from them. Not satisfied with this response, the Appellant preferred an appeal on 15 December 2008. The Appellate Authority disposed of the appeal in his order dated 31 March 2009. Against the order of the Appellate Authority, the CIC/SM/A/2009/001306 Appellant has preferred a second appeal in the CIC.
3. We heard this case through video conferencing. Both the parties were present in the Lucknow studio of the NIC. We heard their submissions. In fact, between the CPIO and the Appellate Authority all the details about the Provident Fund and the appropriation of the Fund against various loan accounts have already been provided. The Appellant is not satisfied with the decision of the bank to continue to charge interest on his outstanding loan amounts while not paying any interest on his PF amount after three months of his retirement from the bank. We cannot do anything in this regard. It is obviously outside the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. If the Appellant is not satisfied with the decision of the bank in appropriating his PF amount, he is to seek redress in some other forum and not in the CIC. As for the information, it has already been provided.
4. The appeal is, thus, disposed off.
5. 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/2009/001306