Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. E. Pankaj Pathak vs State Bank Of India on 30 July, 2008

Central Information Commission
Mr. E. Pankaj Pathak vs State Bank Of India on 30 July, 2008
           CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                                         Appeal No.2578/ICPB/2008
                                                                 F.No.PBA/08/0327
                                                                      July 30, 2008

              In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 19
                          [Hearing on 18.7.2008 at 3.30 p.m.]

Appellant :          Mr. E. Pankaj Pathak

Public authority:    State Bank of India
                     GM & CPIO
                     CGM & Appellate Authority

Present:             For Respondents:
                     Mr. Sushil Kumar, Chief Manager

                     Appellant not present.
FACTS

:

The appellant has sought information under RTI Act by his letter dated
23.10.2007 addressed to Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Narsingpur,
Madhya Pradesh requesting information pertaining to freezing of his account.
The CPIO furnished his reply vide letter dated 27.11.2007 by which he informed
Bank account of the appellant has been freezed by the order of the Deputy
Supdt. of Police, Special Police Establishment, M.P., but the Branch Manager
refused to provide any copy of such order on the plea that said order is the secret
document. The appellant has also approached the Bank on a number of
occasions. A copy of the order was never made available to him. Therefore the
appellant is requesting the Bank to provide the rules and regulations of SBI as
well as RBI in this connection. He has also stated in his application he was
unable to carry out any transaction for the last 12 years on account of the
freezing order. The CPIO has provided the particulars of first AA in case if the
appellant wanted to file any appeal and the first AA has also provided his reply
vide letter dated 2.01.2008 by which he has taken the same stand as that of
CPIO. This has resulted in filing of this appeal before the Commission on
24.01.2008. Comments were called for vide letter dated 9.5.2008, which was
received from CPIO on 21st June 2008.

DECISION:

2. This case was taken up for hearing on 18.7.2008, which was attended by
the Chief Manager. I have gone through the RTI application as well as replies
given by CPIO and AA and also comments provided by the CPIO. I have also
gone through the second appeal filed by the appellant in which the appellant has
1
stated very clearly his account has been freezed on the order of some Deputy
Supdt. of Police. The Chief Manager has clarified during the hearing, the then
Ledger Accountant has made some remarks in the ledger account and on the
basis of Loan Agreement order this account has been freezed. However, this
has been continuing for the last 12 years. Now the bank is not in a position to
show the directions given by the Lok Ayukt for freezing of this account. Since the
account holder is affected party he is entitled to know as per the RTI Act under
what circumstances his account has become in-operational. The Chief Manager
has also stated during the hearing that they have also taken up the matter with
Lok Ayukt with clear stipulation that Bank is prepared to wait for a period of 15
more days and in case no reply is received from Lok Ayukt action will be taken by
the Bank to defreeze the account. I, therefore, direct the CPIO to go through the
records of the Branch and in case if the account has been freezed he should be
provided with the copy of the order under which this account has been freezed.
Since the matter has been taken up with the Lok Ayukt after receipt of reply in
case non-receipt of reply the CPIO should state what action has been taken in
this matter by giving copy of the appeal. As far as RTI Act is concerned, it will be
possible to provide information if it is available and in case if the information is
not available it is not possible for the Commission to give any direction to the
custodian of the information to provide any information. In case if the appellant
still feels some injustice is done to him the only other course available is he has
to approach the appropriate legal forum in the matter. On the above lines, the
appeal is disposed of.

Let a copy of this decision be sent to the appellant and CPIO.

Sd/-

(Padma Balasubramanian)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy :

(Prem Singh Sagar)
Under Secretary & Assistant Registrar

Address of parties :

1. GM & CPIO, State Bank of India, General Banking Department, Local Hear
Office, P.B. No. 6, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal-462001

2. CGM & Appellate Authority, State Bank of India, Local Hear Office, P.B.

No. 6, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal-462001

3. Mr. E. Pankaj, Pathak, G.P.P. Pathak, R/o 152/A, Wright Town, Jabalpur.

2