CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No.2863/ICPB/2008
F. No. PBA/2008/684
October 6, 2008
In the matter of Right to Information Act, 2005 - Section 19
[Hearing on 22.9.2008 at 11.00 a.m.]
Appellant: Mr. Shahjada Rafi Ahmed
Public authority: Punjab National Bank
Mr. Malvinder Singh, Chief Manager & CPIO
Parties Present: For Respondent:
Mr. Malvinder Singh, Chief Manager
Mr. Sartaj Singh, Sr. Manager (Law)
For Appellant:
Mohd. Samshad Alam
DECISION:
The appellant has sought information under RTI Act by his letter dated 26.3.2008
addressed to CPIO, Punjab National Bank, Patna requesting information pertaining to
certain loan account. The appellant has deposited some amount as fee to some other
branch and also requested information regarding how some interest has been
calculated and he has also sought information regarding the compromise proposal
which he has submitted to the Bank. Whereas the appellant while submitting the
amount of fee has sent it to a particular branch, whereas the CPIO has been stationed
in circle office. The CPIO has stated in his reply the appellant has requested some
information to him as competent authority under SARFAESI Act, 2002 for which he has
provided him suitable reply whereas he has not received any application under RTI Act.
Therefore he has not given any reply under RTI Act. This has created lot of confusion
in the minds of the applicant and hence he has taken up the matter with the
Commission. He has filed complaint before the Commission on 12.5.2008. The
Commission has called for comments on 10.7.2008 which was received from the Circle
Office, Patna on 16.06.2008. The case was listed for hearing on 22.9.2008 which was
attended by the appellant’s representative as well as Chief Manager-cum-CPIO, Circle
Office, Patna along with Senior Manager (Law).
2. I have gone through the RTI application as well as replies received in this
connection. The appellant could not clarify whether he has forwarded the application
fee along with the RTI application to the designated CPIO who is also a Chief Manager,
Circle Office, Patna. The appellant has shown during the hearing a receipt for payment
of fee. However the Chief Manager is of the view the appellant might have submitted
fees for getting the statement of accounts for which they have to pay certain fees. It is
also learnt during the hearing though the appellant has taken some loan and he has not
repaid the loan and Bank has initiated recovery proceedings under SARFAESI Act,
1
2002 by which they have also issued him a notice to take over the mortgage property.
Since the appellant has submitted the compromise proposal no action has yet been
taken under SARFAESI Act, 2002 and they are working out compromise proposal and
the appellant has also given his acceptance to the compromise proposal.
3. During the hearing the appellant has only stated he has not received the full
statement of accounts and he has only received the credit that has been paid to him.
Therefore it is not clear to him how Bank has been charging interest in respect of
outstanding loan. When the Commission has sent notice for the hearing, the Bank has
submitted up-to-date statement of accounts dated 19.9.2008 to the concerned party.
Copies of the statements were made available to the appellant during the hearing itself.
I, therefore, advise the appellant to go through the statement of account and if he is
noticing some discrepancy he should make specific mention in his letter to the
designated CPIO who attended the hearing on the day of the hearing and seek for the
clarification. The applicant has agreed that he would go and visit the CPIO and in case
if he visits his office the CPIO has been directed to provide all the clarification to him
after getting the concerned loan file and accounts details from the concerned branch of
the Punjab National Bank. The CPIO should also provide the particulars of first AA so
that in case if he is not satisfied with the reply he can file an appeal before the first AA.
It has been reiterated again and again to the PNB officials there should be a proper
system of receiving RTI application in case if the fee has been sent to different authority
the concerned authority should forward it to the designated CPIO. This should be
followed very strictly in future. On these 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. Mr. Malvinder Singh, Chief Manager & CPIO, Punjab National Bank, Inspection
Department, Circle Office, R-Block, Chanakya Place, Patna-800001
2. Mr. Shahjada Rafi Ahmed, S/o Mohd. Younus, 503, Makbubal Apartments,
Exhibition Road, Patna, Bihar.
2