Central Information Commission
Appeal No.CIC/PB/A/2008/01000-SM dated 27.9.2008
Right to Information Act-2005-Under Section (19)
Dated 05.01.2009
Appellant : Shri Surendra Singh
Respondent : Ballia Kshetriya Gramin Bank
The Appellant is present in person.
On behalf of the respondents the following were present:-
(1) Shri Yogesh Pachauari, Advocate
(2) Shri Harendra Mohan Srinivas, Senior Manager, Ballia
Kshetriya Gramin Bank
The brief facts of the case are as under.
2. The Appellant had approached the CPIO in his letter dated
24.3.2008 seeking a number of information with regard to some
alleged forged signature on certain cheques for withdrawing money
from the Bank. The CPIO, in his reply dated 5.5.08, that is belatedly,
informed him that the Bank’s reply dated 31.3.08, sent in response to
his complaints, contained the information he had sought. The
Appellant filed an appeal against this before the First Appellate
Authority on 29.4.08 which was decided on 14.5.08. The Appellate
Authority disposed off the appeal after observing that the required
information had already been provided by the CPIO. It is against this
order of the Appellate Authority the Appellant has approached this
Commission in Second Appeal.
3. During the hearing, the Appellant submitted that of the 8 items
of information he had sought from the Bank he had specific problem
with regard to the reply given against Item No. 8. It is to be noted that
the Appellant had asked for a copy of the Inquiry Report conducted by
the Bank on his complaints regarding the alleged forgery of signature
for withdrawal of money. The Respondents have, in their reply,
mentioned that the inquiry was closed and a reply was given to the
Appellant in their letter dated 31.3.2008. The Appellant submits that
the Bank has not given a copy of the Inquiry Report submitted by the
Inquiry Officer. It is noted that the Respondents had not indeed given
any copy of the Inquiry Report. We, therefore, direct the CPIO
concerned to provide a copy of the Inquiry Report to the Appellant in
this matter within 10 working days from the receipt of this order.
4. During the hearing, the Appellant further submitted that the
Commission should conduct an enquiry to find out if the signature on
the cheques on which the Bank had released certain amounts of money
and the specimen signature of the person concerned available with the
Bank happened to be the signature of the same person. It was
explained to the Appellant that it was not for this Commission to
conduct any enquiry about the correctness of signatures found on the
cheque which the Bank had honoured. The CPIO has himself
categorically mentioned in his reply that the signatures appeared to
him to be similar based on which the Bank released the money to the
bearer and this assertion binds the Public Authority. If the Appellant
has any doubt about the signatures, he is advised to approach the
Competent Authority under the law for further necessary action.
5. With the above directions, this Appeal is disposed off. Copies of
this order be given free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(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.
Sd/-
(Vijay Bhalla)
Assistant Registrar