CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi- 110067
Tel No: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001243/SG/14201
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2010/001243/SG
Relevant Facts
Emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Md. Zakir Hussain
Kurpaniya
P. O. Sunday Bazaar
District Bokaro
Jharkhand- 829127
Respondent : Mr. Shahdev
PIO & AGM
Bank of India
Giridih Zone, Kachhary Road
Girideeh, Jharkhand- 815301
RTI Application filed on : 16/01/2010
PIO Replied on : 24/02/2010
First Appeal filed on : 28/02/2010
Order of the FAA : 23/03/2010
Second Appeal filed on : 04/09/2010
Information Sought
Information sought as translated from Hindi is reproduced below:-
1. What is the basis of obtaining fixed deposit when as such loan is given even without fixed
deposit?
2. What is the reason behind the delay in depositing the fixed deposit amount to the loan account
for 16 months? Whether interest was calculated on the same during this period?
3. What is the amount taken in interest for account no. 480230100000153 and account no.
480270400005698?
4. Rs. 2, 10, 000 is the subsidy amount, in exchange of which, interest has been waived for which
account?
5. Statement of both the accounts.
PIO’s Reply
The point-wise reply for the information sought is as follows:-
1. It is the discretion of the Bank to sanction loan with or without collateral security.
2. Delay on adjustment of collateral security in the loan account was due to delay in obtaining the
consent from the Guarantor.
3. Total interest charged is to the tune of Rs. 157355/- and Rs. 79912- respectively in both the
accounts upto December 2009.
4. Interest relief on subsidy amount was effected in term loan account only.
5. The information for both accounts is enclosed for ready reference.
Grounds of First Appeal
The Appellant states that the information provided is incomplete and misleading.
Order of the First Appellate Authority
Information has already been provided by the PIO.
Grounds of Second Appeal
Information provided is incomplete and misleading.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Md. Zakir Hussain on video conference from NIC-Bokaro Studio;
Respondent : Mr. Shahdev, PIO & AGM on video conference from NIC-Giridih Studio;
The PIO has given most of the information but PIO is now directed to provide the information
on the following points;
1- Query-2: The PIO is directed to provide the attested photocopies of the communication
with the different agencies which resulted in the delay of 16 months in returning the deposit
of the appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as mentioned above to the
Appellant before 05 September 2011.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
23 August 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (ved)