ORDER

(25.07.2022)

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 07.06.2020 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 25.01.2020 and first appeal dated 26.04.2020 :-

(i) “Furnish the date of purchase of cheques worth 77 crores and name of officer who authorized the same (as mentioned in his final order no. 636/HRD/IRD/DA-6 Dated 23.11.2018).

(ii) Date and name of authority who first time opened the a/c of Mr Bharat Bomb.

(iii) Copy of final order of punishment awarded to Mrs. Sonia Kalra, Assistant Manager Udaipur Branch.

(iv) Copy of investigation report which concluded Mr. Bharat Bomb as key conspirator behind the alleged fraudulent transactions involving magnitude of crores of rupees.

(v) Copy of investigation report which found that Mr Bharat Bomb is the actual beneficiary of all loans.

(vi) Copy of first financial credibility report prepared for Bharat Bomb before his entry as borrower at Udaipur Branch.

(vii) What is the quantified loss to Udaipur Branch under the above referred order of punishment.

(viii) Furnish the profit of Udaipur Branch for the year ending 31/03/2012, 31/03/2013, 31/03/2014 and 31/03/2015 and also as on 31st March 2000 to 31st March 2012 in respect of various branches where he was Branch Head between Dec. 1999 to Dec. 2012 in respect of various branches where he was Branch Head between Dec. 1999 to Dec., 2011. Kindly also inform the commercial value of publicity made by him between July 1987 to Nov. 1999 while he was working as PRO at Zonal Office Lucknow.

(ix) The copy of office note under which reasons of disagreement from Enquiry Officer has been explained by Mr. Sathish Kamath as GM DA in his chargsheet No. 010/HRD/IRD/DA/3 dated 04/01/2018.

(x) Copy of investigation report which concluded that the signatures of parties in loan accounts as referred in his chargesheet are really not pertains to them as they disowned the same (as per contents of his chargesheet).

(xi) Copy of investigation report, which is the base of his chargesheet before the case was handed over to CBI”

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 25.1.2020 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Canara Bank, Rajasthan, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letter dated 21.04.2020 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 26.04.2020 The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 22.05.2020 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 07.06.2020 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 07.06.2020 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 21.04.2020 and the same is reproduced as under :-

“i) Bank has lodged FIR in this connection with CBI and the investigation process in pending on the same. Therefore we are unable to provide the information sought by you until the completion of investigation as per Sec. 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act 2005 as the disclosure of information would impede the process of investigation.

ii) Bank has lodged FIR in this matter with CBI and the investigation process in pending on the same. Therefore, we are unable to provide the information sought by you until the completion of investigation as per Sec. 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act., 2005 as the disclosure of information would impede the process of investigation

vi) Bank has lodged FIR in this matter with CBI and the investigation process in pending on the same. Therefore, we are unable to provide the information sought by you until the completion of investigation as per Sec. 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act., 2