Mr.Ravi Shankar Tirpathi vs Banking Division on 15 June, 2010

                              Central Information Commission
                 Complaint No.CIC/SM/C/2009/001403 dated 01­07­2009
                       Right to Information Act­2005­Under Section (18)




                                                                          Dated: 15 June 2010


Name of the Complainant                   :    Shri Ravi Shankar Tripathi
                                               Vill & Post - Sareni,
                                               Rai Bareilly - 229 001.


Name of the Public Authority              :    CPIO, Baroda Uttar Pradesh Gramin 
                                               Bank, Head Office,
                                               A­1, Civil Lines,
                                               Rai Bareilly.



         The Complainant was present in person.

         On behalf of the Respondent, Shri D.P. Bose, CPIO was present.

2. In   this   case,   the   Complainant   had,   in   his   letter   dated   1   July   2009, 

requested the CPIO to provide him the information on the action taken on his 

complaint   in   which   he   had   alleged   misbehavior   by   an   employee   of   the 

respondent   bank.   In   his   reply   dated   4   July   2009,   the   CPIO   informed   the 

Complainant that the he had been already informed about the actions taken on 

his complaint by a letter earlier. Not satisfied with the reply of the CPIO, the 

Complainant   preferred   an   appeal   on   10   July   2009.   In   his   appeal,   the 

Complainant included some new requests which were not there in the original 

RTI   application.   The   Appellate   Authority,   in   his   order   dated   23   July   2009, 

endorsed the stand of the CPIO while declining the new requests. Against the 

Appellate Authority’s order, the Complainant has lodged a complaint with the 

CIC.  

CIC/SM/C/2009/001403

3. We heard this case through videoconferencing. Both the parties were 

present in the Raibareilly studio of the NIC. We heard their submissions. The 

Complainant   is   aggrieved   by   the   conduct   of   the   branch   manager   and   had 

complained against him and wants to know what action the bank had taken 

against the branch manager. The CPIO has already forwarded to him a copy of 

the letter showing the action taken on his complaint although the Complainant 

does not find it satisfactory at all. Under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, we 

can   only   help   him   get   information.   We   cannot   help   him   in   resolving   his 

complaint against the conduct of an individual officer of the bank. We would like 

to advise him to take up the matter with the higher authorities of the bank if he 

so chooses.

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/2009/001403