CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001310/SG/14324
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001310/SG
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Gopal,
C.B. 71 B, DDA flat,
Hari Nagar,
New Delhi-110054.
Respondent : Mr. Sulakhan Singh
PIO & DGM
Bank Of India,
1st Floor,Vijay building,
17 Barakhamba road,
New Delhi-110001.
RTI application filed on : 17/06/2010
PIO replied : 07/07/2010
First appeal filed on : 17/07/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 01/09/2010
Second Appeal received on : 30/03/2011
The Appellant in his RTI Application has sought information about his Pension payment order(PPO),
his queries are as follows:
Sl. Information Sought PIO's Reply
1 Provide the necessary details about the Your PPO was not received till then.
payment asked for on 25.05.2010.
2 Furnish me with proof as to why there is no On 24.06.2010 Hauz Khas branch obtained a copy
action taken/payment made on my PPO of your PPO and your pension was been paid on
684471001302 dated 22.4.2010. 29.06.2010
3 What is the time taken for the payment to be After receiving the PPO from the Nodal
transferred to the bank account once the PPO branch(Janpath), the bank informs the pensioner
is received? about it and after the pensioner signs the required
documents, the payment is paid within one or two
days.
4 Who is responsible for the delay of the Till now the reason as to why the payment wasn’t
payment and provide details of the necessary made was because your PPO wasn’t received by the
actions that can be taken in this regard? bank. Information has been sought from the courier
department on this matter, and your pension was
paid on 29.06.2010. Thus your question has been
answered.
5 Who will bear the compensation to be As Above.
provided for the delay ?
Grounds for First appeal:
Dissatisfied with the reply of the PIO.
The First Appellant Authority’s Order:
Information has already been provided by the PIO.
Grounds For Second Appeal:
Dissatisfied with the reply of the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Gopal;
Respondent: Mr. Sulakhan Singh, PIO & DGM and Ms. Rajani, Manager (Law);
The Appellant has been provided information available on the records. The Appellant has a
grievance since his PPO appears to have been misplaced by the courier agent. The PIO states that a
duplicate was called on receipt of the Appellant’s letter and the pension was released after receipt of
the PPO. It appears that the PPO was sent by the Nodal Branch to the Concerned Branch but was not
received. The Appellant was naturally aggrieved by the delay in getting his pension. The Commission
suggests that everyone dealing with pensions should look at this with some sensitivity and ensure that
such delays do not occur.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
Information available on the records has been provided.
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
29 August 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (AM)