Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.Naresh Chandra Bharadwaj vs Bank Of India on 11 October, 2011

Central Information Commission
Mr.Naresh Chandra Bharadwaj vs Bank Of India on 11 October, 2011
                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                           Club Building (Near Post Office)
                         Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                     Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/001443/SG/15134
                                                            Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/001443/SG

Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                             :      Mr.Naresh Chandra Bharadwaj,
                                             Plot-131, Rajeev Nagar, Vinayakpur
                                             (near Radhakrishna mandir, Sharda Nagar),
                                             Kanpur-208024

Respondent                            :      Mr. Satish Chandra,
                                             PIO & DGM
                                             Bank of India
                                             Head Office, Legal Department
                                             Star House, 3rd floor, C-5, G Block
                                             Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra ( East)
                                             P B No. 8135, Mumbai- 400 051

RTI application filed on              :      24/01/2011
PIO replied on                        :      04/03/2011
First Appeal filed on                 :      16/03/2011
First Appellate Authority order on    :      23/04/2011
Second Appeal received on             :      18/05/2011

Information Sought:
The applicant is a member of staff who has been awarded punishment under Bank Of India Officers
Service regulation in case of frauds that occurred in Harsh Nagar Branch and Lal Bangla Branch in the
year 2006.the applicant wishes to have following information:
   1. The number of files maintained for the above referred fraud cases by the Bank in its various
       departments at Head Office Mumbai.
   2. The reference number of all such files which also include the files of the above mentioned
       accused staff-members.

Reply of PIO
                1. It is informed that 11 files are maintained at Vigilance Department in connection
                with the said fraud cases occurred at Harsh Nagar and Lal Bangla Branches of the
                Bank.
                2. 2 files in relation to staff accountability are maintained in respect of the staff
                members mentioned in the application.
                3. it has been observed that appellant's earlier request to the Bank to provide
                information regarding disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Bank against the
                Officials involved in the said fraudulent cases. The bank has also furnished available
                information but having not satisfied with the Bank's reply, he appealed before the
                Commission. CIC wide order dated 08.10.2010 had directed the Bank to provide the
                information and the same were furnished to him by the Bank.
 Also, the appellant was told that "the above files relating to the said fraud cases contains information
relating to various individuals and the disclosure of it would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy
of those individuals , and is exempted from disclosure U/s 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act. You may also
appreciate that the said fraud matters, the CBI has filed criminal cases against the concerned officials
and disclosure of information would identify the source of information or assistance given in
confidence for Law enforcement agency in the matter. Hence, the same is exempted from disclosure
u/s8(1) (g) of the RTI act."
 Grounds for the First Appeal:
Information provided by the PIO was incorrect and misleading.

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Seconds the PIO.

Ground of the Second Appeal:
The PIO did not provide the requisite information.
FAA 'ratified the stand taken by the CPIO in total disregard to the points raised in the appeal"

Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

The following were present:

Appellant: Mr. Naresh Chandra Bhardwaj on video conference from NIC Kanpur Studio;
Respondent: Mr. I. T. Vel, CPIO & Sr. Manager Law on behalf of Mr. Satish Chandra, PIO & DGM
on video conference from NIC-Bandra Studio;

The Appellant has been provided information available and most of the queries of the
Appellant do not seek information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The Appellant states
that he would like to inspect the records relating to the disciplinary action against him at the Head
Quarters Mumbai.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the relevant records pertaining to
the disciplinary action against the Appellant at the Mumbai HQ at a date mutually
convenient to him and the PIO. The PIO will provide attested copies of records which
the Appellant wants free of cost upto 100 pages.

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
11 October 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (BK))