Central Information Commission
File No.CIC/SM/A/2009/000910 dated 14012009
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Dated: 6 May 2010
Name of the Appellant : Shri Rajesh Kumar Pandey
Vill - Pure Kali Pandey,
Post Kunwarmau,
Distt - Rai Bareilly.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Punjab National Bank,
Circle Office,
Nav Chetna Kendra,
10, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.
The Appellant was represented by Shri A Chauhan.
On behalf of the Respondent, Shri S.K. Singh was present.
2. In this case, the Appellant had, in his application dated 14 January 2009,
requested the CPIO for several details regarding the waiver of loan in respect of
the farmers in the Nasirabad Branch of the Bank. In his reply dated 20 March
2009, the CPIO observed that the desired information concerned third parties
and could not be disclosed as exempt under Section 8(1) (d), (e) and (j) of the
Right to Information (RTI) Act. Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the
Appellant had preferred an appeal on 7 March 2009. It is not clear if the
Appellate Authority disposed of that appeal. The Appellant has however come
to the CIC in second appeal alleging that no information was provided to him
within the stipulated period.
CIC/SM/A/2009/000910
3. We heard this case through videoconferencing. A representative of the
Appellant was present in the Raibareilly studio of the NIC. The Rspondent was
present in the Lucknow studio. We heard their submissions. Since the Appellant
had sought to know about the beneficiaries of the loan waiver scheme and
specially for the Kissan Credit Card(KCC) holders, we are of the view that such
information should be provided. Under this scheme, financial benefits had been
extended to the borrowers and, therefore, certain details about such borrowers
should be available in the public domain. We have been consistently holding
that wherever any subsidy or financial benefit is given by the government, the
details about that should be disclosed in order to promote transparency.
Therefore, we direct the CPIO to provide to the Appellant within 10 working
days from the receipt of this order a complete list of the KCC holders whose
loans had been waived wholly or partially along with the name of the village and
the total amount of loan waived in each case. Similarly, the CPIO shall also
inform him if new Credit Cards had been issued to some of the beneficiaries of
the above loan waiver scheme. Finally, he shall inform if the loan granted to
Surendra Kumar Singh (item 5) had been waived and if so, the basis for that.
4. As far as the delay in providing the information is concerned, the
Respondent submitted that the application dated 14 January 2009 had not been
received in the Branch and that the first time they came to know about the
request for information was only when his appeal dated 7 March 2009 was
received. If this is so, we direct the CPIO to inform the Appellant accordingly in
a sworn affidavit within the same period of 10 working days from the receipt of
this order. However, if the application had been received in the Branch and no
action had been taken on that, the CPIO shall explain why penalty under
CIC/SM/A/2009/000910
section 20 (1) should not be imposed on the official concerned for his action
resulting in the delay in providing the information.
5. With the above directions, the appeal is disposed off.
6. 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/2009/000910