CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Club Building (Near Post Office) Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067 Tel: +91-11-26161796 Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000387/SG/14085 Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000387/SG Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal: Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Patil 5/1 Shri Shakti Kempageri Line Bazar, Dharwad-580001 Karnataka Respondent : Mr. Venu Gopal Deemed PIO & Chief Manager Syndicate Bank, regional Office, Sai Nagar Road, Unkal Cross, Hubli-580021 RTI application filed on : 17-12-2009 PIO replied on : 24-03-2010 First Appeal filed on : 19-04-2010 First Appellate Authority order of : 21-05-2010 Second Appeal received on : 20-01-2011 List of Panel Values with details as on the date of Empanelment: Q.No Information Sought Reply of PIO 1. Qualification List of panel valuers of the Bank's Bangalore and Hubli Regions, pre and post 2007, with their basic qualification and experience. 2. Experience & Expertise as valuer. This was not a mandatory requirement as per the then Bank's policy, pre 2007. Hence, details furnished post- 2007. 3. Whether registered as valuer in CBDT. This was not a mandatory requirement as per the then Bank's policy, Subsequently it has been stipulated that the valuer should be a member of institute like Institute of Engineers, Institute of Valuers-Delhi. pre 2007. recognized 4. Whether member/fellow of institute of This is only a preferable qualification and not mandatory. valuers. The information in this regard is not available. 5. Whether already empanelled as Valuer in The information pertaining to date of empanelment is other banks also furnished in the list above referred to. 6. Date of Empanelment & Category (like The Bank is unable to furnish the information relating to land & building, Plant & Machinaries date of application, date of approval and name of the etc. branch from where the application was routed as per 7. Date of Application & Date of Approval Section 7(9) of the RTI Act-2005 as this would divert the 8. Name of the branch from where the resources of the Bank. disproportionately. application was routed Grounds for the First Appeal: The PIO reply was false, misleading and vague. Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA): The PIO has given reply stating that it is not a mandatory requirement as per policy and thus information is not available with PIO. Ground of the Second Appeal: PIO had not given complete and true information. Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Patil on video conference from NIC-Dharwad Studio;
Respondent : Mr. Venu Gopal, Deemed PIO & Chief Manager on video conference from NIC-Dharwad
The PIO has provided most of the information but is now directed to provide the date of
application of the valuers and the exact date on which they were empanelled with respect to the entire list.
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant before
10 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.
16 August 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (kh)