CIC: Though the reply given by the PIO, Brach Office was appropriate as the file was not available with them, the fact remains that the file was available with the Corporate Office - CIC: Collect the information u/s 5(4) and provide to the appellant

O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 17.05.2022 seeking information on the following points:

Copy of her application date 18.01.2017 for appointment on compassionate ground and also the attested copy of the file dealing with the issue or aloow her inspection of the relevant file.

(Loose translation from the application filed in Hindi)

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 09.06.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-

The Punjab National Bank Ghaziabad Divisional Office came into existence on 22.06.2020 and the Copy of her application date 18.01.2017 for appointment on compassionate ground and the file dealing with the issue is npt available in the office and as such, the same cannot be provided.

(Loose translation of the reply in Hindi)

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.06.2022 alleging that the information provided was false and misleading. The order of FAA, if any, is not on record of the commission.

4. Due to non-receipt of the desired information, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 17.08.2022.

5. The appellant was present in person alongwith his representative and on behalf of the respondent R S Chauhan alongwith Meenashi Singh attended the hearing in person.

6. The representative of the appellant submitted that the CPIO had deliberately failed to provide the information and even though the RTI application was filed in the Head Office, Dwarka where the file is available, the CPIO of the head office had unnecessarily transferred the RTI application to Branch Office, Ghaziabad. He prayed that penalty may be imposed on the concerned CPIO fir failure on his part to provide the sought for information.

7. The respondent while defending their case submitted that since the file was not available with them, the same was duly informed to the appellant vide the letter dated 09.06.2022. On a query by the Commission as to who is the holder of the file mentioned in the RTI application, the CPIO informed that the file is available with the Head Office, Dwarka.

8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observed that even though the reply given by the CPIO, Brach Office, Ghaziabad was appropriate and as per the records available with them as they have clearly informed the appellant that the file is not available with them, however, the fact remains that if the file in question was available with the Corporate Office, Dwarka, the CPIO, Corporate Office, Dwarka had incorrectly transferred the RTI application to the Branch Office. Since, no one was called from the Corporate Office, Dwarka, it could not be ascertained as to why the RTI application was transferred.

9. Having said so, since the CPIO who was present during the hearing informed the Commission that the file is available with the Corporate Office, under these circumstances, the present CPIO is directed to collect the sought for information from the Corporate Office after seeking assistance u/s 5(4) of the RTI Act and provide the same to the appellant. The concerned CPIO, Corporate Office is also directed to provide reasonable assistance to the CPIO, Branch Office so as to enable him to provide the information to the appellant. The CPIOs should note that any non-compliance of this order will be viewed strictly by the Commission and penal proceedings will be initiated in case of any default to supply the available information. This direction is to be complied with within a period pf 30 days from the date of receipt of this order under intimation to the Commission.

10. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Information Commissioner

Citation: Aarati v. Punjab National Bank, Second Appeal No. CIC/PNBNK/A/2022/138977; Date of Decision: 01.02.2024