Central Information Commission
Mr.Sukhmandra Pal Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India on 20 January, 2012
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003306/16978
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/003306
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Sukhmandra Pal Singh
R/o: 59, S.P. Mukherjee Road,
Kolkata - 700026.
Respondent : Mrs. Meena Hemchandra,
Public Information Officer & CGM Reserve Bank of India Foreign Exchange Department, Central Off: Central Office Building, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Mumbai - 400001.
RTI application filed on : 25/07/2011
PIO replied : 11/08/2011
First appeal filed on : 23/08/2011
First Appellate Authority order : 05/10/2011
Second Appeal received on : 08/11/2011
Sl. Information Sought PIO's reply
1. In which year and on what date Reserve Bank of India, issued HOLDING As per records available
LICENCE to hold immovable properties in India under Section 31(1) of the with Foreign Exchange
FERA 1973, to M/s. "ESSO EASTERN INC' a Foreign Company, Department of Reserve
incorporated under the LAWA OF THE STATE OF DELWARE in bank of India, the sought
U.S.A ., having its Principal Office at 2401, South Gessner, City if Huston, for information in
State of Texas in the United States of Amerca, having its office in India, in connection with M/s the Administrative Building, Mahul in Bombay -- 400047 in the year 1970. ESSO EASTERN INC, Kindly provide the 'certified copy' if the permission granted to ESSO along USA, is not available with all the enclosures submitted by ESSO with us.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
"The information is enclosed."
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply was given.Page 1 of 2
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Sukhmandra Pal Singh on video conference from NIC-Kolkata Studio; Respondent: Mr. Unni Krishnan, Assistant Legal Advisor on behalf of Mrs. Meena Hemchandra, Public Information Officer & CGM on video conference from NIC-Mumbai Studio; The PIO has stated that the information being sought is not available with the Public Authority. The Appellant insists that such information should be with the PIO and that the PIO is giving false information. Mere allegations of this nature cannot lead to inquiries being conducted by the Commission. The PIO has clearly stated that the said information is not available on the records and has reiterated this in the hearing.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The said information is not available with the Public Authority. 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 20 January 2012 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(PRE) Page 2 of 2