Central Information Commission Judgements

Shri Jagmohan Agarwal vs Reserve Bank Of India, D/O … on 8 October, 2009

Central Information Commission
Shri Jagmohan Agarwal vs Reserve Bank Of India, D/O … on 8 October, 2009
                         Central Information Commission
               Appeal No.CIC/SM/A/2008/00108 dated 13-05-2008
               Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)



                                                       Dated: 8 October 2009


Name of the Appellant            :   Shri Jagmohan Agarwal
                                     Annapurna Preet Vihar Colony,
                                     Behind Mahilal School,
                                     Khushalpur, Majholi,
                                     Moradabad - 244 001.

Name of the Public Authority     :   CPIO, Reserve Bank of India,
                                     D/o Administration & Personnel
                                     Management, Central Office,
                                     Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg,
                                     Mumbai - 400 001.



       The Appellant was present in person.

       On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:-

(i) Shri Unnikrishnan, Deputy General Manager,

(ii) Shri Thomas

2. In this case, the Appellant had, in his application dated May 13, 2008,
requested the CPIO for the certified copy of a communication which the
Zonal Office of the Allahabad Bank had sent to the RBI in connection with
the dispute on which he had been corresponding with the RBI. The CPIO
replied on July 16, 2008 and forwarded a copy of the said communication.
Not satisfied with the document provided by the CPIO, he had approached
the first Appellate Authority on August 18, 2008. That Authority disposed off
his appeal in his order dated September 10, 2008 by endorsing the
information already provided by the CPIO. The Appellant has challenged this
order in the second appeal.

3. We heard this case through videoconferencing. The Appellant was
present in the Moradabad studio of the NIC whereas the Respondent was
present in the Mumbai studio. The main objection of the Appellant was that

CIC/SM/A/2008/00108
the copy of the letter sent to him was not of the original one but of the
office copy only as it was not printed on the letterhead of the Allahabad
Bank. Indeed, the copy of the letter provided to him is that of an office
copy only and we cannot blame the Appellant for suspecting its
genuineness. The Respondent admitted that though they had the original
letter, the CPIO had sent a copy of the office copy by mistake.

4. We now direct CPIO to send to the Appellant the copy of the original
reply of the Zonal Office printed on the official letterhead of the Allahabad
Bank, within 10 working days from the receipt of this order.

5. The appeal is, thus, 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/2008/00108