Central Information Commission
Gaurav Singh vs State Bank Of India on 21 January, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गं गनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2023/650383
CIC/SBIND/A/2023/650499
Gaurav Singh ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: State Bank of India,
Mumbai ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeals:
Sl. No. Second Date of Date of Date of Date of Date of
Appeal RTI CPIO's First FAA's Second
No. Application Reply Appeal Order Appeal
1. 650383 14.09.2023 09.10.2023 11.10.2023 16.10.2023 Nil
2. 650499 14.09.2023 21.09.2023 22.09.2023 16.10.2023 Nil
The instant set of appeals have been clubbed for decision as these relate to the same
subject matter.
Date of Hearing: 13.01.2025
Date of Decision: 20.01.2025
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2023/650383
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.09.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Page 1 of 7 Please provide me soft copy of Master Circular or Circular or Guideline or Notification or Internal Circular of State Bank of India for
(i) Unsolicited loan to customer of State Bank of India i.e. loan for which he has not applied but, has been granted to him.
(ii) Executing any standing instruction given in writing or through email by any Customer of State Bank of India.
(iii) Executing any verbal standing instruction or direction given by Customer of State Bank of India.
(iv) In case there is no Master Circular or Circular or Guideline or Notification or Internal Circular of State Bank of India for executing any verbal standing instruction or direction given by Customer of State Bank of India then please provide me soft copy of Master Circular or Circular or Guideline or Notification or Internal Circular of State Bank of India for action to be taken on employee of State Bank of India executing the said verbal standing instruction or direction.
(v) Procedure and time limit for disposal of complaints made to Chairman of State Bank of India...etc. 1.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 09.10.2023 and the same is reproduced as under :-
(i) Information sought is not held with us (ii) Information sought is not held with us (iii) Information sought is not held with us (iv) Information sought is not held with us etc..
1.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 11.10.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 16.10.2023 stated that the undersigned finds that the desired information has not been provided to the applicant and the CPIO is here Page 2 of 7 by directed to revisit the query and arrange to provide suitable revised information available of the RTI query.
1.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
1.4. The appellant remained present through video conference and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh DGM, Mr. Shailesh Dubey DGM and Mr. Subhash, Law officer attended the hearing through video conference. 1.5. The appellant inter alia submitted that the information sought is wrongly denied by the CPIO.
1.6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the information sought is not available with them. Additionally, on point No. 2 he stated that the internal instructions cannot be shared with the Appellant as per Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act. Written submissions of the Respondent dated 07.01.2025 are taken on record by the Commission.
1.7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observed that an appropriate reply has been provided by the Respondent. Therefore, no intervention of the Commission is required in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2023/650499
2. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 14.09.2023 seeking information on the following points:
Please provide me soft copy of Master Circular or Circular or Guideline or Notification or Internal Circular of State Bank of India for
(i) Unsolicited loan to customers of State Bank of India i.e. loan for which he has not applied but, has been granted to him.Page 3 of 7
(ii) Executing any standing instruction given in writing or through email by any Customer of State Bank of India.
(iii)Executing any verbal standing instruction or direction given by Customer of State Bank of India.
(iv) In case there is no Master Circular or Circular or Guideline or Notification or Internal Circular of State Bank of India for executing any verbal standing instruction or direction given by Customer of State Bank of India then please provide me soft copy of Master Circular or Circular or Guideline or Notification or Internal Circular of State Bank of India for action to be taken on employee of State Bank of India executing the said verbal standing instruction or direction.
(v) Procedure and time limit for disposal of complaints made to Chairman of State Bank of India...etc. 2.1. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 21.09.2023 and the same is reproduced as under :-
"6 (i) On written request of the select borrowers, the sanctioning authority may re-fix the EMI downwards consequent upon decrease in the floating rate of interest provided The conduct of the account has been satisfactory, and the account is Standard Asset, The original home loan was of Rs.5 lacs or more and the downward revision in the floating rate of interest is 1% or more as compared to the rate prevailing at the time of sanction of the loan or last change. The Upward / Downward refixing of EMI can be granted once in every three years during the loan term, provided other terms and conditions of EMI reset are fulfilled. At each such instance, RACPCs/ branches must ensure to establish a fresh check-off facility or arrange to obtain fresh SI/NACH/ECS.Page 4 of 7
Part payments or balloon payments may be permitted in respect of loans sanctioned at both the options of interest rate, i.e. fixed rate & floating rate. RACPCs/Branches may permit re-fixing of EMI downward if 20% or more of the outstanding amount is prepaid in one instance 6(ii) The time limit of changing Home Loan EMI is not held on record with the CPIO"
2.2. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 22.09.2023 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 16.10.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
2.3. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated Nil.
2.4. The appellant remained present through video conference and on behalf of the respondent Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh DGM, Mr. Shailesh Dubey DGM, Mr. Subhash Law officer attended the hearing through video conference. 2.5. The appellant inter alia submitted that in respect of point no. 6 of the said RTI application the Respondent has provided the entire detailed procedure, ignoring the fact that he had sought soft copy of Master Circular or Circular or Guideline or Notification or Internal Circular of State Bank of India for procedure and time limit of changing home loan EMI by State Bank of India once a request has been made in writing or through email by Customer of State Bank of India.
2.6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had requested for a copy of the Master Circular. The desired information available in the Master Circular pertaining to the appellant's query has been provided in verbatim by the CPIO vide letter dated 21.09.2023. The Master Circular contains other Commercial terms/contents, disclosure of which is exempted u/s 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Page 5 of 72.7. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observed that that an appropriate reply has been provided by the Respondent. Therefore, no intervention of the Commission is required in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनंदी रामिलंगम) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/Date: 20.01.2025 Authenticated true copy Bijendra Kumar (िबज कुमार) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26180514 Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO State Bank of India, Personal Banking Business Unit, Corporate Centre, State Bank Bhawan, Madame Cama Road, Mumbai-400021
2. The CPIO Deputy General Manager, RE-Coordination and Risk Mitigation, Real Estate and Housing Business Unit, Corporate Centre, State Bank Bhawan, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021 Page 6 of 7
3. Gaurav Singh Page 7 of 7 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)