ORDER

(26.02.2021)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 24.01.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 10.11.2018 and first appeal dated 12.12.2018:-

i. Provide copy of HDFC bank rules wherein HDFC bank, can deprive a visually impaired account holder of his/her savings of accrued/received interest on fixed deposits not only earned in previous financial year but also in the present financial years on fixed deposits if an account holder withdraws money fully when as per information published on HDFC bank website at the web-link / URL https://www.hdfcbank.com/ about us/ citizens charter/ premature withdrawal of term which clearly says that the interest rate applicable for premature closure will be lower of the base rate for the original/contracted tenure for which the deposit has been booked or the base rate applicable for the tenure for which the deposit has been in force with the bank as Annexure 2 to this application. Please provide detail rule wise.

ii. (i) On which date shall the visually impaired account holder be credited Rs. 6791.00 in his savings account no. **********814 (ii) Please provide names and designation of the HDFC Bank Ltd. who have offered all possible assistance to inform the visually impaired account holder that he would be deprived of his savings of Rs. 6791.00 as per information furnished on bank website (iii) Please furnish the details of the assistance furnished rule wise, acknowledged in writing by the account holder for the interest rate as detailed in para A as applicable by each of the said officer of HDFC bank of the said Indore Branch.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 10.11.2018 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO replied on 06.12.2018. Dissatisfied with the response of the CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal dated 12.12.2018. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) did not pass any order. Aggrieved by this, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 24.01.2019 before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 24.01.2019 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) & (2) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO vide letter dated 06.12.2018 gave point-wise reply and against point nos. 2 to 5 of the RTI application stated that information sought was not available with them. The FAA did not reply to the first appeal.

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Hemant Kumar Soni, CPIO, Banking Ombudsman, Bhopal and Shri Manoranjan Mandal, Manager, Reserve Bank of India, Bandra, attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had a fixed deposit with the HDFC Bank which was prematurely withdrawn by him and therefore, one percent (1%) less interest was paid to the appellant as per the rules. Thereafter, the appellant filed a complaint to the Banking Ombudsman, Bhopal which was rejected on the ground that the appellant had not exhausted the channel available with them. They informed that before filing a complaint in the Banking Ombudsman the complainant had to file a complaint before the concerned bank and thereafter, non- receipt of any response/non-receipt of satisfactory response within 30 days, then he could approach the Banking Ombudsman. However, the appellant did not do so, hence, his complaint was rejected. Subsequently, the appellant filed an RTI application seeking aforesaid information and point-wise reply was given by the respondent. Further, the first appeal filed by the appellant was also