CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000645/SG/14720
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000645/SG
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Ajit Kumar Dubey
Senior Manager
M E S Extentioin Counter Pedhambe
Chiplun Branch
Ratnagiri Zone,
Ratnagiri-415639
Respondent : Mr. B. K. Dhawale
PIO & Dy. Zonal Manager
Bank of India
Ratnagiri Zone, Ratnagiri Zonal Office,
Shivaji Nagar
Near Arogya Mandir
Ratnagiri KohlapurHighway
Ratnagiri-415639
RTI application filed on : 30/08/2010
PIO replied : 29/09/2010
First appeal filed on : 29/10/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 29/01/2010
Second Appeal received on : 04/02/2011
Sl. Information Sought Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO)
1. Name designation of the officer who SM S. S. Bandiwadeka, Senior Branch Manager, Bank
received the Appellant’s application of India, Ratnagiri Branch received your application)
under RTI and consequently replied to dated 4.12.2009 referred to by you under RTI Act, on
that letter conveyed to the Appellant 15.12.2009.
vide letter no HO/LGL/NH 537 dated
5.1.2010 also on which date the above
referred application was received.
2. If the above said RTI application was The said application was forwarded to Head Office
forwarded to corporate office without along with a copy of the counterfoil of Rs.10, by Shri
counter foil receipt of fee for Rs. l0 paid S. S. Bandiwadekar, Senior Branch Manager, Bank of
at Ratnagiri Branch, then please furnish India, Ratnagiri Branch through Zonal Office,
the name and designation of the officer Ratnagiri, as it was addressed to the Chairman &
who forwarded the application, and Managing Director, Bank of India, Head Office.
basis/need for doing so?
3. What is the detail of transaction number The transaction No. M431414 dated 15.12.2009 is in
M431414 dated 15-12-2009? respect of Rs.10, deposited under RTI Act.
4. Whether the application was Yes.
accompanied by cash receipt of Rs. 10/-
Page 1 of 5
paid at Ratnagiri Branch along with the
above application under RTl ?
5. If yes then what was the basis for However, the sheet containing Xerox image of the
rejecting the Appellant's application counterfoil of Rs.10 might have got detached in transit.
and denying the desired information Although the Appellant was informed about
there by denial of the Appellant's nonpayment of fees and consequent non-
fundamental right. Now please furnish maintainability of your claim, vide letter No.
all the information desired and was HO/LGL/NH/537 dated 5.1.2010, you were also
denied to Vide letter bearing reference advised vide this letter that the Appellant should
number HO/LGL/NH 537 dated address the communication to CPID of Ratnagiri Zone,
5.1.2010. which is the correct authority under RTI Act. The
Appellant did not ask for the desired information from
the correct CPIO Authority subsequently. The
information that was sought now is hereby provided.
6. Please furnish authenticated copies of The Appellant reported to Ratnagiri Zone on
all transfer orders and relieving orders 01.02.2006. Copies of the transfer orders / relieving
which undersign has acknowledged orders issued during subsequent period are enclosed.
along with all the relevant/related Transfer /Relieving orders pertaining to earlier period
documents clearly stating need/basis for are not available with our zone. The request for
such transfers since 26 November’ 1996 information regarding need / basis for your transfers is
till date. declined as the information is of confidential nature and
disclosing such information would compromise the
functional freedom of the Management.
7. Name of the employees treated at None of the employee from the Ratnagiri zone other
FORTIS HOSPITAL, NOIDA, were than the Appellant has been treated at Fortis Hospital
issued letter for furnishing details of NOIDA so far.
break up as indicated in letter no. RZO:
HRD: SGP: 1359 dated 28.07.2010 and
a copy of their reply too of any such
employee.
8. Number of occasions and names of the The rent payable in respect of the flat hired by the
officers responsible for not paying the Appellant under the TOA scheme at Ratnagiri was not
rent of the flat allotted to me under paid for the month from February 2010 to May, 2010,
transferee officer scheme by the Bank as balance for the part of the rent to be -borne by by the
during die course of my service at Appellant, was not available in account. The rent for
Ratnagiri Zone till date and basis on the month of June & July, 2010, which had remained to
which such irregular payment of rent be paid through oversight by Ratnagiri Branch, has
was made. since been paid on 27.9.2010.
9. Names of the employees who wanted to The information is not available with us. Hence cannot
take action against me whose reference be supplied.
is indicated in the complaint of Shri S S
Bandewadkar on the basis of that
undersign was place under suspension
for around six months in recent past.
10 Please furnish the authenticated copies No non-statutory deductions have been made from the
. of mandates available on Bank’s record Appellant’s salary.
for effecting non-statuary deduction
from my salary .lii case mandate not
available on Bank’s record then name
of the officer’s responsible for, illegal
deductions from the Appellant’s salary
Page 2 of 5
and number of occasions too in the past
during the course of my stay at
Ratnagiri Zone.
11 Please furnish the names of the officers Following officers were promoted from Scale MM II to
. and their state of domicile who MM III in batch other than the Appellant:
promoted in the Appellant’s batch from Shri V. B. Pawar Maharashtra
MM SCALE-II to MM SCALE–III Shri S. G. Sonavjane – Maharashtra
from Ratnagiri Shri R. S. Salvi Maharashtra
Zone Out of them how many officer’s Shri B. V. Buchade Maharashtra
designated as Senior Branch Managers. Shri R. B. Dirangané Maharashtra
and, also names of the ,officer’ s who Though the above list is provided to you, transfers and
were not designated as Senior Branch posting of officers employees is Management’s
Manager and need/basis for doing so prerogative and information regarding reasons etc. is
along with documents supporting the denied as it is of confidential nature.
reasons given in this matter.
12 Name and Designation of the officer Immediately before the Appellant’s transfer to Chiplun
. who was transferred/relieved from Branch, Shri AK. Deshpande- officer, was transferred
Chiplun Branch immediate before I from Chiplun to Mandangad Branch. You reported to
joined Chiplun Branch. Please furnish Chiplun Branch St Pedhambe Extension Counter on
the date along with authenticated copies 09.08.2010. The distance between Chiplun Branch and
of document showing reasons for the MES Extn. Counter at Pedhambe is 16 kms. Transfers
Appellant’s transfer/posting at MES and posting of officers/ employees is Management’s
Extesion, Counter Pedhambe please prerogative and information such as reasons I basis
furnish the dates on which the therefore is of confidential nature and disclosing such
Appellant joined Chiplun Branch and information would compromise the functional freedom
MES Extension Counter at Pedhmbe of of the Management. Hence information regarding
Chiplun Branch and the distance reasons for your transfer is declined.
between Chiphin Branch and MES
Extension Counter at Pedhambe of
Chiplun Branch.
13 Name of Training programs at Ratnagiri It’s the Management’s prerogative and disclosing such
. Zone received from different training information would compromise the functional freedom
colleges of Bank of India and other of the Management.
institutions too for
Deputing officers from Ratnagiri Zone
for training during the course of the
Appellant’s service at Ratnagiri zone
till date.
Whether the Appellant was eligible for
the programs? If yes whether my name
was recommended? Name of the
recommending authority of the
program?
Whether the Appellant’s name- was not
approved even after recommendation?
Name of the approving authority and
reasons for declining the approval in
case of the Appellant?
14 On which date undersign appeared for The information is already available with the Appellant
. interview for promotion from scale and the same is not available with Ratnagiri Zone.
MM-II to MM-III for the first time?
Page 3 of 5
15 Number of APR (Annual Performance The information is declined as the same is of
. Review)’s considered in the above confidential nature and disclosing such information
mentioned promotion process. would compromise the functional freedom of the
Management. The information regarding number of
APRs considered for promotion is explained in the
promotion policy, which is circulated to staff from time
to time.
16 Please furnish authenticated copies of The information is declined .as the same is of
. all APR’s considered in above confidential nature and disclosing such information
mentioned promotion process. would compromise the functional freedom of the
Management.
17 Please furnish authenticated copies of The information is declined as the same is of
. all the relevant documents considering confidential nature and disclosing such information
those my transfer to Ratnagiri Zone was would compromise the functional freedom of the
conveyed to me along with the name Management.
of• the officer(S) proposed and
approved my name for this transfer, and
reason if any.
18 Please furnish authenticated copies of The copies of the deliverable documents pertaining to
. all the documents considered in the enquiry against the Appellant have already been
inquiry held against me for non- supplied to during the course of departmental enquiry.
reporting at Ratnagiri zone. Other documents, which are of confidential nature and
cannot be supplied to the Appellant, are declined as
disclosing such information would compromise the
functional freedom of the Management.
19 Please furnish authenticated copies of The Appellant’s application being for inter-zone
. all the documents considered vis-à-vis transfer, had been forwarded to Head Office. Other
the Appellant’s application for transfer information sought is not available with us. Moreover,
of services to Delhi Zone last year. the same is of confidential nature and disclosing such
What is the fate of information would compromise the functional freedom
that application as the Appellant is yet of the Management.
awaiting so please furnish the same too.
Whether waiting list is maintained at
Bank level for considering the same
application form ensuring year or one
has to apply a fresh every year?
20 What was the need for office order By the said Office Order No. CHN:SNR: dated
. bearing reference number CHN/SMR 9.8.2010, the Appellant was designated as Officer in
dated 9.8.2010. charge of Pedhambe Extn Counter. The information
regarding reasons/need etc. is declined as the same is of
confidential nature and disclosing such information
would compromise the functional freedom of the
Management.
21 Whether any designation was Yes. The Appellant’s designation of Senior Manager
. withdrawn during the course of the (DAS) was withdrawn at Ratnagiri Branch, when you
Appellant’s service at Ratnagiri Branch. were put under suspension and major penalty was
If yes then what was the need for that. imposed on the Appellant for alleged misbeviour on
premises of the Bank which was accepted
unconditionally by the Appellant and proved in the
Page 4 of 5
enquiry. It is prerogative of the management and
disclosing reasons would compromise the functional
freedom or the Management. Hence information is
declined.
22 Please furnish the details of approved It is prerogative of the management and disclosing
. manning for Chiplu Branch for officers reasons would compromise the functional freedom or
and also present deployment along with the Management. Hence information is declined.
the reasons for doing so.
23 What was the need for RZO: HRD: P: It is prerogative of the management and disclosing
. 279 dated 31 .12.2009 vide which the reasons would compromise the functional freedom or
Appellant’s designation was withdrawn. the Management. Hence information is declined.
What was the basis/need for doing that?
24 What was the address where letter The letter No. RTN/SSB/290 dated 18.1.2010 of
. bearing reference number Ratnagiri Branch was sent to the Appellant on the last
RTN/SSB/290 dated known address- Flat No. FE 3j, Plot No, 118, Sector 4.
18.1.10 was sent for undersign. Vaishali Gaziabad (UP).
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The appeal was disposed off as the information sought by the Appellant was furnished by the PIO.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO and unfair disposal of the appeal by the
FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. B. K. Dhawale, PIO & Dy. Zonal Manager on video conference from NIC-Ratnagiri
Studio;
The respondent states that he has provided all the information available as per records to the
Appellant. This appears to be correct.
Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
The information available on the records appears to have 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
21 September 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)DIS
Page 5 of 5