Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/SM/A/2009/000242 dated 27-06-2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated: 3 December 2009
Name of the Appellant : Shri R.P. Purohit
2/297, Vidhyadhar Nagar,
Jaipur.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur,
Head Office, Tilak Marg,
Post Box No. 154, Jaipur.
The Appellant was not present in spite of notice.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri S.N. Sharma, CPIO was present.
2. In this case, the Appellant had, in his application dated June 27,
2008, requested the CPIO to provide a number of information regarding the
policy of the Bank on transfer and deputation of officers in Scale 1 and 2
promoted from the clerical cadres. In his reply dated September 12, 2008,
the CPIO provided some information against the first and fourth queries only
without making any mention about the other two queries. Not satisfied with
this reply, the Appellant moved the Appellate Authority on August 8, 2008.
That authority disposed of the appeal in his order dated August 28, 2008 by
stating that the information sought in his second and third queries could not
be provided to him being in the nature of personal information. He,
however, directed the CPIO to provide the desired information against his
first query. The Appellant has challenged this order in the second appeal.
3. We heard this case through videoconferencing. The Appellant was not
present in spite of notice. The Respondent was present in the Jaipur studio
of the NIC. We heard his submissions. He submitted that the Appellant had
sought information for a period of 20 years which would be almost
impossible to provide as it would be extremely voluminous in nature and
may even be difficult to collect, some of the records having been weeded
out in accordance with the retention schedule of records of the Bank. He
agreed to provide the information for a lesser period. We agree with his
submissions and think that collecting information about such a large number
of officers for a long period of 20 years is impractical and has the potential
CIC/SM/A/2009/000242
of disproportionately diverting in the resources of the public authority.
Therefore, we direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10 working
days from the receipt of this order, the desired information for a period of
five years up to the date of the application including copies of the relevant
records, if any.
4. It is also noted that the CPIO had responded to the Appellant very
late. This makes him liable for imposition of the maximum penalty under
the provisions of Section 20 of the Right to Information Act. However,
before deciding on the penalty, we would like the CPIO to explain in writing
if he had any reasonable cause for not providing the information or
responding to the Appellant within the stipulated period. The CPIO must
send this explanation within 15 working days from the receipt of this order
failing which, we will proceed to decide on the penalty ex parte. If the CPIO
wants to be heard in person, he may indicate so in his written explanation.
5. With the above directions, the appeal is disposed off.
6. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied
against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the
CPIO of this Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar
CIC/SM/A/2009/000242