Central Information Commission
Tarani Kumar Basak vs Punjab National Bank on 8 February, 2024
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/PNBNK/A/2022/153524
Tarani Kumar Basak ... अपीलकता /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Punjab national Bank
New Delhi ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 27.06.2022 FA : 21.08.2022 SA : 16.11.2022
CPIO : 22.07.2022 FAO : 05.09.2022 Hearing : 06.02.2024
Date of Decision: 07.02.2024
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
_ANANDI RAMALINGAM
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 27.06.2022 seeking information on the following points:
i. "PNB, the Punjab National Bank, if is a member of BCSBI, are maintaining the obligatory norms of BCSBI in displaying the details of offices, authorities, contact numbers, communicating mail addresses etc. ii. PNB, if maintaining official contact numbers (not the personal contact numbers of officer or manager) may please provide and arrange to display in respective boards.Page 1 of 4
iii. PNB, service outlets or branches are not displaying the notices and circulars meant for customers, pensioners, retirees and public issues may please confirm displaying the signed copy of circulars and notices properly.
iv. PNB, if providing the honoured services to the senior citizens, pensioners and aged customers with guided care and norms, may please provide authentic copy of such circulars with the list of fair practice codes.
v. PNB, if maintains interest rate chart, displaying of such charts, circulars, boards may please confirm in letter and spirit."
2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 22.07.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"Point nos. 1 & 2 - The Contact details of Principal Nodal Officer cum Principal Grievances Redressal Officer should be available in all branches of the bank on comprehensive notice board.
Point no. 3 - Policy circulars for customer service is available on banks website www.pnbindia.in.
Point no. 4 - Policy regarding the same is available on bank's website www.pnbindia.in.
Point no. 5 - The information sought is in the form of query and not covered under the definition of 'Information' u/s 2 (f) of RTI Act, 2005. Hence cannot be provided."
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 21.08.2022 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 05.09.2022 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA's order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 16.11.2022.
5. The appellant attended the hearing through video conference and on behalf of the respondent Shri Jaseem Siddiqui, Assistant General Manager (Law) and Shri Kumal Chauhan, Manager (Law), attended the hearing in person.
Page 2 of 46. The appellant inter alia submitted that the respondent had deliberately not published information relating to third party agencies and the services rendered by them to the bank. He argued that the non-disclosure of the information acted in detriment to the interests of customers and in violation of the principles of transparency and accountability. He further submitted that the respondent bank had not updated complete contact details (including email IDs) of the officials of their bank on their official website.
7. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had provided exhaustive list of names, designations, contact details and email IDs of the officials of their bank. The CPIO further submitted that the information relating to the agencies (third-party administrators), tenders invited for hiring those agencies, etc. were published on their official website as well as on the notice boards. Besides, the policy circulars for customer services were available at their official website.
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observes that an appropriate reply was given by the CPIO on 22.07.2022. Further, the respondent have pleaded that the information desired by the appellant was available in public domain and, thereafter, the information may not be considered to be under the custody of the public authority. Moreover, the observation passed by the Delhi High Court in Registrar Of Companies & Ors. Vs. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Anr. [W.P.(C) 11271/2009], vide decision dated 01.06.2012 may be relied upon:
"12. The RTI Act very clearly sets the course for the evolution of the RTI regime, which is that less and less information should be progressively held by public authorities, which would be accessed under the RTI Act and more and more of such held information should be brought into the public domain suo-motu by such public authority. Once the information is brought into the public domain it is excluded from the purview of the RTI Act and, the right to access this category of information shall be on the basis of whether the public authority discloses it free, or at such cost of the medium or the print cost price "as may be prescribed".Page 3 of 4
That being so, the Commission finds no scope for further intervention in the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
आनंदी राम लंगम)
(Anandi Ramalingam) (आनं म
सूचना आयु )
Information Commissioner (सू
दनांक/Date: 07.02.2024
Authenticated true copy
S S Chhikara (एस. एस. िछकारा)
Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)
011-26180514
Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO
Punjab National Bank, Nodal CPIO,
RTI Cell, (Law Division), Head Office: Plot No.-4, 3rd Floor, East Wing-(A), Sector-10, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075
2. Tarani Kumar Basak Page 4 of 4