Devendra Kumar Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India on 21 January, 2022

Central Information Commission

Devendra Kumar Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India on 21 January, 2022
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Central Information Commission
,
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
, New Delhi - 110067

/Second Appeal No. CIC/RBIND/A/2019/647440

Mr. Devendra Kumar Singh ... /Appellant

VERSUS

CPIO ... /Respondent

O/o. the Banking Ombudsman
Reserve Bank of India, Kanpur
Uttar Pradesh-208011

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:-

RTI : 01-05-2019 FA : 13-06-2019 SA : 08-08-2019

CPIO : 10-06-2019 FAO : Not on Record Hearing: 17-01-2022

ORDER

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the
Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Reserve Bank of India, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh. The
appellant seeking information is as under:-

"1. A copy of the reasoned award by Banking Ombudsman of Complaint number 201516011004808.

2. A copy of the reasoned award by Banking Ombudsman of Complaint number 201617011001472.

3. A copy of the reasoned award by Banking Ombudsman of Complaint number 201718011001144.

4. A copy of the reasoned award by Banking Ombudsman of Complaint number 201718011001641.

5. A copy of the reasoned award by Banking Ombudsman of Complaint number 201718017001546".

2. The CPIO vide letter dated 10-06-2019 had denied the information as sought by the appellant
under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Being dissatisfied with the same, the appellant has filed
first appeal dated 13-06-2019 and requested that the information should be provided to him. The
order of the FAA, if any, is not on record with the Commission. He has filed a second appeal before
the Commission on the ground that information sought has not been provided to him and requested
to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/52774136/ 1

 Devendra Kumar Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India on 21 January, 2022

Hearing:

3. The appellant attended the hearing through audio-call. The respondent, Shri Ani Kumar, AGM
along with Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Asst Legal Advisor, attended the hearing through audio-call.

4. The respondent submitted their written submission and the same has been taken on record.

5. The appellant submitted that the desired information has not been provided to him by the
respondent on his RTI application dated 01.05.2019. he further submitted that the complaints
relates to an ATM fraud and he was the representative of all the complainants before the
Ombudsman and hence the information is wrongly denied to him by the respondent statin it to be
third party information.

6. The respondent while reiterating the replies of the CPIO/ FAA submitted that vide their letter
dated 10.06.2019, they have informed the appellant that the information sought by him relates to
third party and hence the same is barred from disclosure under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005.
However, the FAA vide its order dated 06.12.2019, directed the CPIO to provide information after
verifying the fact if the appellant is the representative in the complaints referred in the RTI
application. In compliance of which the CPIO, vide letter dated 01.01.2020 furnished all the BO
orders to the appellant.

7. However, the appellant denied the receipt of any such letter dated 01.01.2020 as mentioned by
the respondent and also submitted that the FAA took almost four months for passing an order in his
favour.

Decision:

8. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records,
observes that the appellant has sought the copies of Banking Ombudsman orders in the complaint
cases (as mentioned in the RTI application). The Commission further observes that the CPIO in
compliance of the FAO, furnished the relevant information as it existed in material form on record
with them vide their letter dated 01.01.2020. However, the appellant denied the receipt of any such
information. Keeping in view the same the Commission directs the respondent to once again furnish
their reply dated 01.01.2020 along with their written submission dated 12.01.2022 to the appellant
through registered speed post, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order under
the intimation to the Commission.

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

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

)
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (
)

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/52774136/ 2

 Devendra Kumar Singh vs Reserve Bank Of India on 21 January, 2022

Information Commissioner (

/ Date : 17-01-2022
Authenticated true copy
( )

S. C. Sharma (. . ),
Dy. Registrar (-),
(011-26105682)

Addresses of the parties:

1. CPIO
O/o. the Banking Ombudsman
Reserve Bank of India, Kanpur
Uttar Pradesh-208011

2. Mr. Devender Kumar Singh

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/52774136/ 3