Posted On by &filed under Central Information Commission, Judgements.


Central Information Commission
Mr.Bharat Singh Chauhan vs United Commercial Bank (Uco) on 4 August, 2010
                              Central Information Commission
                            Complaint No.CIC/SM/C/2009/000398 
                       Right to Information Act­2005­Under Section (18)




                                                                    Dated: 4 August 2010


Name of the Complainant                  :   Shri Bharat Singh Chauhan
                                             Vill & Post Bhauli,
                                             Bakshi Ka Talab,
                                             Distt - Lucknow, U.P.



Name of the Public Authority             :   CPIO, UCO Bank,
                                             Zonal Office, Sky Lark Bldg.,
                                             28, Nawal Kishore Road,
                                             Lucknow.



         The Complainant was present in person.

         On behalf of the Respondent, Shri Gadhadhar Panda, CPIO was 

present.

2. In our order dated 15 October 2009, 15 October 2009, we had directed 

the CPIO not only to provide the desired information but also to explain the 

reasons   for   the   delay.   The   CPIO   had   sent   his   written   explanation   on   1 

December   2009.   Besides,   we   had   also   fixed   a   hearing   today   through 

videoconferencing to give an opportunity to both the parties to state their cases. 

Both the parties were present in the Lucknow studio of the NIC. We heard their 

submissions. The CPIO explained that the RTI application had been preferred 

in the branch and that the branch had sent this application to the Zonal Office 

seeking  certain   guidance.  The   CPIO  had  advised  the   branch  to   collect  the 

information from the organization where the Complainant was employed so that 

CIC/SM/C/2009/000398
it could be delivered in time. It seems the branch had tried to get the information 

from the employer of the Complainant. In the meanwhile, the Complainant had 

sent   an   appeal   to   the   Appellate   Authority.   Around   this   time,   the   desired 

information   had   been   collected   and   the   CPIO   sent   the   information   to   the 

Complainant on 11 November 2008. Thus, really speaking, the delay in this 

case is reasonably explained.

3. However, the Complainant submitted that the statement of account sent 

to him was only for the period from 2007 onwards whereas his account was 

much older. The CPIO explained that the account statement was generated 

from the computer which contained the details from 2007 onwards only. We, 

however, direct him to send to the Appellant within 10 working days from the 

receipt of this order the photocopy of the entire statement of account from the 

beginning.

4. The case is, thus, disposed off.

5. 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/C/2009/000398


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

9 queries in 0.227 seconds.