Central Information Commission
File No.CIC/SM/A/2009/000785 & 1064
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Dated: 29 April 2010
Name of the Appellant : Shri J K Sharma
189, Adarsh Nagar,
Near Hanuman Mandir,
Roorkee - 247 667.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur,
Tilak Marg, Post Box No. 154,
Jaipur.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri R. K. Aggarwal was present.
2. The Appellant has filed two separate appeals which we have clubbed
together for hearing. The brief facts are as under.
3. In the case number 000785, the Appellant had, in his application dated
30 August 2008, requested the CPIO for a few details regarding both the
amount of pension received from the Department against PPO 8609 and the
date and the amount of the bank drafts/cheques issued for the purpose of
recovery of the loan instalments. In his reply dated 3 September 2008, the
Manager Accounts provided him with part of the information while advising him
to approach the Hissar Branch for the remaining information. After repeated
correspondence, however, the Appellant did not get any further information and
has eventually come to the CIC in second appeal.
CIC/SM/A/2009/000785 & 1064
4. In the case number 001064, the Appellant had, in his application dated 4
February 2009, requested the CPIO to clarify why extra sum of money was
demanded when the loan account was to be closed finally. He also wanted the
details of the incidental charges as well as a copy of the slip through which a
certain amount of money had been deposited. Since he did not receive any
response from the CPIO within the stipulated period, he preferred an appeal on
7 March 2009 which the Appellate Authority decided in his order dated 30
March 2009 by giving direction to the CPIO to provide the said information. In
his reply dated 28 April 2009, the CPIO provided the desired information.
Nevertheless, the Appellant has approached the CIC in second appeal alleging
that he is yet to receive the correct and complete information.
5. We heard this case through videoconferencing. The Appellant was
present in the Haridwar studio of the NIC whereas the Respondents were
present in the Jaipur studio. We heard their submissions. It appears that the
information sent by the CPIO in the form of various statements of accounts
containing the answers to the queries of the Appellant is not clear enough for
the Appellant to make sense and that is why he has come to us. The
Respondent submitted that whether it is about the payment of monthly pension
or loan installment, in either case, the relevant account statements, already
sent to the Appellant, would contain all the desired details. He further submitted
that the information was not being maintained in the manner in which it had
been sought.
6. Keeping the submissions of both the parties in mind, we think that it
would be appropriate for the CPIO to arrange for the Branch Manager of their
Haridwar Branch to explain the contents of the various account statements
CIC/SM/A/2009/000785 & 1064
already sent to the Appellant and to clarify to him the specific details he wants
to know. The CPIO is, therefore, directed to invite the Appellant to the above
Branch on a mutually convenient date within 20 working days from the receipt
of this order and to arrange for explaining and clarifying the statements of
accounts provided to the Appellant to remove his doubts about the regular
payment of pension and crediting of installments in his loan account before it
was finally settled. The CPIO is also directed to provide copies of any other
relevant documents in this regard, as available.
7. Both the appeals are, thus, disposed off.
8. 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/A/2009/000785 & 1064