Central Information Commission Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi website-cic.gov.

Transcription

1 Central Information Commission Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi website-cic.gov.in Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/ CIC/MP/A/2014/ Appellant : Shri Shish Ram Swami, Kota. Public Authority : State Bank of India, Hyderabad, New Delhi/ Hyderabad. Date of Hearing : 05 th August, 2015 Date of Decision : 28 th August, 2015 Present : Appellant : Present in person Respondent : Ms. Anuradha, DGM through VC at Hyderabad Shri A.V.S.S. Prasad, AGM in person. Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/002115: ORDER The appellant Shri Shish Ram Swami submitted RTI application dated to the Central Public Information Officer, State Bank of Hyderabad, Kota seeking information whether any rule or circular of SHB or RBI exists which permits to remit fund transfer without customer s signature on cheque and NEFT form; the power granted to Branch Managers to order to perform such remittances; details of rules under which such powers were granted etc. through six points The CPIO vide letter dated informed the appellant that the System (41 site) under e-circulars and was accessible to every member of the bank s staff. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA vide order 1

2 dated while upholding the decision of the CPIO, provided a copy of rules in response to points 4 and Thereafter the appellant filed the present appeal before the Commission The matter was heard by the Commission. The respondents stated that the NEFT booklet was available on the intranet. However a hard copy had been also provided to the appellant The Commission holds that the appellant had been appropriately replied to by the respondents. Moreover, the hard copy of the NEFT booklet had been also provided to the appellant even though the rules were available on the intranet. The appeal is disposed of. Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/002153: 2. The appellant Shri Shish Ram Swami submitted RTI application dated to the Central Public Information Officer, State Bank of Hyderabad, Kota sought footage of CCTV installed in the bank for (2.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m. and for the period 2.00 p.m to 6.00 p.m The CPIO vide letter dated informed the appellant that the System (41 site) under e-circulars and was accessible to every bank staff, which was not relevant to the CCTV footage being sought by the appellant. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA vide order dated directed the CPIO to provide the video footage recorded in the CCTV footage in the banking hall of Kota Branch dated (2 p.m. to 5 p.m.) and (2 p.m. to 6.00 pm) in a CD after collecting the costs in terms of the Right to Information 2

3 (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, In compliance with the directions of the FAA, the Branch Manager, SBH, Kota vide letter dated informed the appellant that CCTV footage dated was not available due to technical problem in the hard disk and provided a copy of engineer s report to the appellant; and CCTV footage of the entrance gate of the branch dated The appellant was provided three CDs Thereafter the appellant filed the present appeal before the Commission The matter was heard by the Commission. The respondents stated that in compliance with the directions of the FAA, the Branch Manager, SBH, Kota provided CCTV footage in three CDs dated and the appellant was informed that CCTV footage dated was not available due to technical problem The Commission holds that the appellant had been provided CCTV footage, as per available records. The appeal is disposed of. Appeal No. : 3. The appellant Shri Shish Ram Swami submitted RTI application dated to the Central Public Information Officer, State Bank of Hyderabad, New Delhi seeking copy of SBH H.O. Circular Per/ /44 dated ; copy of Kota Branch letter No., F/2/SRS/193 dated covering letter of the Branch Manager forwarding the reply of show cause notice by the appellant; details of bank s policy/rule/circular which prohibits to provide copy of covering letter written for forwarding the reply of show cause notice by an employee etc through four points The CPIO vide letter dated informed the appellant that the 3

4 System (41 site) under e-circulars and was accessible to every bank staff. Dissatisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the appellant filed an appeal on before the first appellate authority (FAA). The FAA vide order dated directed the CPIO to provide information as sought for at point 1 and 2, which would cover points 3 and 4 of the RTI application. In compliance with directions of the FAA, the CPIO vide letter dated provided information on points 1 and 2 i.e. copy of SBH H.O. Circular Per/ dated and SBH, Kota Branch letter No. F/2/SRS/193 dated to the appellant Thereafter the appellant filed the present appeal before the Commission The matter was heard by the Commission. The respondents stated that the SBH HO Circular dated was issued regarding memorandum of settlement on disciplinary action procedure signed between Indian Banks Association and the workmen union at Mumbai on 10 th April, 2002, which is available in public domain. However, the CPIO had provided hard copy of the circular to the appellant as well as copy of SBH Kota Branch letter dated , in compliance with the directions of the Commission The Commission holds that the CPIO had provided information in compliance with directions of the FAA vide letter dated to the appellant. The appeal is disposed of. 4. The appellant stated that how the reply of all applications could be same. He stated that the CPIO had obstructed providing information and in the intervening period directed the Branch Manager, SBH, Kota to initiate disciplinary proceedings for seeking information under the RTI Act. The respondents denied the allegations of the appellant. 4

5 5. The Commission observes that the CPIO had provided the same reply in all the three RTI applications, which was absolutely irrelevant to the matter at hand, more particularly the RTI application dated , and the information was provided only after the directions of the FAA. The Commission recommends that the competent disciplinary authority to take action as deemed fit against the CPIO for his negligent functioning. Authenticated true copy: (Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner (T.K. Mohapatra) Dy. Secretary & Dy. Registrar Ph. No Address of the parties: Shri Shish Ram Swami, Staet Bank of Hyderabad, 10A, Jhalawar Road, Kota (Rajasthan). The Central Public Information Officer, State Bank of Hyderabad, Region-II, Zonal Office, Konnectus Tower-1, 9 th Floor, Bhavbhuti Marg, Opp. New Delhi Railway Station (Ajmeri Gate Side), New Delhi The GM(Treasury)/FAA, State Bank of Hyderabad, Complaince Department, 1 st Floor, Prabhat Towers, Head Office, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad