CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
B-Wing, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Appeal No.2539/ICPB/2008
F.No.PBA/08/0073
July 29, 2008
In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 19
Appellant : Mr. Dilip Kumar Haldar
Public authority: State Bank of India
GM & CPIO
CGM & Appellate Authority
FACTS
:
The appellant vide his letter dated 6.8.2007 under RTI Act has sought for
copies of complaints made by three individuals against him when he was working
as Accountant in State Bank of India, Mueearai Branch during 1992-93. The
appellant has stated in his application on the basis of the complaints made by three
individuals he has been suspended and he was also charge-sheeted in the year 1993
and therefore he has requested for copies of these complaints. Since the appellant
has not submitted application fee in a proper manner, the CPIO has entered into
correspondence and finally he has given reply only on 13.9.2007. Though the
application is dated June and the appellant has paid his fee in the month of July, the
CPIO has provided him some kind of reply only on 30.9.2007, i.e. after a period of
two months for which he has to give an explanation. However, vide letter dated
13.9.2007, the CPIO has expressed his inability to provide information since the
information sought for is exempted under the provisions of section 8(1)(g) of the
RTI Act. The appellant has filed appeal on 25.9.2007 and the AA has disposed of
this appeal on 27.10.2007. Since the appellant has not received a copy of this
complaint he has filed appeal before the Commission on 27.11.2007. In the appeal
he has stated very clearly he was not supplied with the copies of the said
complaints and therefore he got no scope of cross-examining the complaints while
defending his case. Comments were called for vide letter dated 21.2.2008 which
was received from CPIO on 9.5.2008 indicating he has not received a copy of the
complaint.
DECISION:
2. I have gone through the RTI application as well as replies received in this
connection. The appellant is requesting for the complaint made by three
1
individuals and according to him it is connected with his case based on which he
was suspended and he was also issued with charge-sheet. The CPIO and AA have
stated this information is third party information and it has to be rejected under
section 8(1)(j) of the Act. In the comments the CPIO has stated the appellant was
removed from service by the Bank for certain misconducts committed by him and
he was removed after conducting proper departmental proceedings and domestic
enquiry as per his service conditions. Therefore, he cannot raise this point by
requesting for the copy of the complaint under RTI Act. Therefore, I direct the
CPIO to state categorically these complaints were not taken into account while
proceeding with disciplinary action against the official and based on which he was
removed from Bank’s services. In case if these complaints were part of the
proceedings, the appellant should be provided with the copy of these complaints
within 15 days. After receipt of this reply if the appellant is not satisfied he is at
liberty to approach the Commission thereafter. 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, Local Head Office, Samriddhi Bhavan, 1,
Strand Road, Kolkata-700001
2. CGM & Appellate Authority, State Bank of India, Local Head Office,
Samriddhi Bhavan, 1, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001
3. Mr. Dilip Kumar Halder, Suri, Birbhum, Barabagan-731103 (West Bengal)
2