Ashok Gupta vs Punjab & Sind Bank on 18 March, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Ashok Gupta vs Punjab & Sind Bank on 18 March, 2019

1. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the then CPIO, Punjab & Sind Bank, near Ashram Chowk, New Delhi in compliance of the Commission's order no. CIC/PASBK/C/2017/142568 dated 16.07.2018 for not giving any information to the complainant within the stipulated time. The CPIO was directed to submit an explanation as to why action under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be initiated against him.

Hearing on 13.07.2018:

2. The complainant's representative Shri Gulshan Sharma and the respondent Shri D.K. Sethi, Asstt. General Manager, Punjab & Sind Bank, Near Ashram Chowk, New Delhi were present in person.

Interim Decision (16.07.2018):

3. The Commission passed the following directions:

"The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and perusing the records, notes that as per the complainant a reply in response to his RTI application dated 31.03.2017 was received by him only on 09.06.2017. The Commission, thus, finds that information was not provided to the complainant within the stipulated time period. The Commission, therefore, directs the Registry of this Bench to issue a Show Cause Notice to the then CPIO, Punjab & Sind Bank, Near Ashram Chowk, New Delhi for explaining as to why action under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be initiated against him for not providing information within the stipulated time to the complainant."

Hearing on 05.03.2019:

4. The appellant's representative Mr. S.K. Sharma and the respondent Mr. Anil Kumar, CPIO and Chief Manager and Mr. Jasmeet Singh and Mr. Rizwan Khan, Punjab & Sind Bank, Delhi, attended the hearing in person.

5. The respondent submitted that the point-wise reply to RTI application dated 31.03.2017 had been given vide letter dated 05.05.2017. The respondent brought into the notice that the applicant vide his original RTI application has provided their incorrect address as 29/1 Vishwakarma Colony instead of 294/1 Vishwakarma Colony. As a result, the reply was sent at the incorrect address due to the fault of applicant himself and not on the part of the Bank. In fact, the correct address came into the knowledge of CPIO on receipt of the FAA order dated 12.06.2017. The appellant had not received the reply due to his own mistake and preferred an appeal dated 15.05.2017 before FAA and alleged that they have not received reply from CPIO till date. FAA considering his appeal, directed CPIO to resend the copy of reply again within 20 working days of receipt of the order. In compliance to the order received from FAA, the CPIO resent reply dated 05.05.2017 along with enclosures vide letter dated 16.06.2017 (sent through speed post). That reply had also been sent within the prescribed period of 20 working days as stated in the FAA Order dated 12.06.2017 (received on 16.06.2017).

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, feels that the reply was sent by the respondent at the incorrect address as mentioned by the appellant in his RTI application and the same was rectified upon directions of the FAA after collecting the correct address details of the appellant. In view of the satisfactory explanation given by the CPIO, the show-cause notice against the then CPIO, Punjab & Sind Bank, Near Ashram Chowk, New Delhi, is dropped.

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

Sd/-

Suresh Chandra (सुसुरेश चं ा) ा Information Commissioner (सूसूचना आयु ) दनांक/ Date:18.03.2019

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission