O R D E R

(21.02.2023)

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 30.03.2021 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 12.01.2021 and first appeal dated 18.02.2021:- (i) Has Uttarakhand Gramin Bank issued instructions for Rin Raksha Policy to be obtained by Staff to obtain Housing Loans at lower rates of interest? If yes provide copy of relevant circular/ instructions.

(ii) Have instructions mentioned at Point No.1 been issued under guidelines from Sponsor Bank/ NABARD/ DFS? If yes provide copy of relevant instructions.

(iii) Is Uttarakhand Gramin Bank recovering Subsidy received by staff on their Housing Loans under the Pradhanmantri Housing Loan Scheme? If yes, is this done under instructions from Sponsor Bank/NABARD/DFS? If yes provide copy of relevant instructions.

(iv) Is recovery of subsidy received under GOI scheme violation of the scheme and there off of the GOI orders? (Opinions and advices are covered under Section

2(f) of RTI Act 2005.)

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 12.01.2021 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, Uttarakhand, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 11.02.2021 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 18.02.2021. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 24.03.2021 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 30.03.2021 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 30.03.2021 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 11.02.2021 and the same is reproduced as under:- (i) & (ii) “You have asked questions which do not come within the definition of information as defined under Section 2(f) of RTI Act.

(iii) & (iv) You have raised queries which is not defined as information under Section 2(f) of RTI Act.”

The FAA vide order dated 24.03.2021 upheld the CPIO’s reply.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri V.V. Singh, CPIO, Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, Dehradun attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that information sought was not provided by the respondent till the date of hearing.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that information sought was in the form of queries which did not fall within the definition of “information” as defined under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that due reply was given by the respondent vide letter dated 11.02.2021. Perusal of the RTI application revealed that the appellant had raised some queries from the CPIO which did not fall within the definition of “information” as defined under section 2 (f) of the RTI Act. It may not be out of place to mention that the CPIO under the RTI Act is not under obligation to answer the queries raised by the appellant. In view of the above and the reply having been given, there appears to be no public interest in further prolonging the matter. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

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

Sd/- (Suresh Chandra) (सुरेश च(cid:3)ं ा)

Information Commissioner (सूचना आय(cid:8)ु )

(cid:11)दनांक/Date: 22.02.2023 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराम मूत(cid:28))

Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक)

011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७)

Addresses of the parties:

THE CPIO :

Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, head Office 18, New Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand – 248001 THE FIRST APPELLATE A