O R D E R

1. Mr. Girish Mittal i.e. the RTI applicant filed an application dated 01.05.2021 under Section 6 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 before CPIO, Reserve Bank of India seeking information regarding:-

2. The instant matter was earlier listed before this Commission on 11.03.2022 vide which the Commission observed that “It has further come into the notice of this Commission that most of the banks (as mentioned in the RTI application dated 01.05.2021) have also approached this Commission by way of filing their second appeals (arising out of same RTI application) and those second appeals are pending for hearing before this Commission bearing numbers CIC/RBIND/A/2021/147383; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/145617; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/660016; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/147221; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/147222; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/652193; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/639603; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/654598; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/146942; CIC/RBIND/A/2021/145618. Out of the above mentioned cases, stay has been granted in file no. CIC/RBIND/A/2021/639603 and some cases were listed before the Commission but adjourned for next date of hearing. The parties have no objection if the abovementioned cases are clubbed together. Since, the cause of action has arisen from the same RTI application and orders of CPIO and FAA and in the interest of justice, other banks should also be heard in this matter before passing any order in this second appeal”.

3. The matter was listed for further hearing on 30.03.2022 wherein the banks as mentioned in the RTI application of the applicant (Shri Girish Mittal)

were called to present their case or file their objection.

Hearing:

4. Shri Anand Shankar Jha, MeenakshiDevgan and Shri ShubhamTripathirepresented ICICI Bank Ltd. and RBL Bank who were personally present in the hearing. Shri ArvindNayyar, Sr. Adv. Assisted by Shri Akshay Joshi, Shri Pranaya Goyal, Shri Dhruv Shah, Ms. ApporvaKaushik, Shri Aayesh Gandhi and Shri Dhawal Desai who were personally present in the hearing. Shri V.K. Gupta, Advocate represented Indusind Bank was personally present in the hearing represented Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Shri Anish Dayal, Sr. Adv. represented Bajaj Finance Ltd. along with Shri RakeshSinh, Shri Anand Srivastava and Shri AnweshaChowdhary were personally present in the hearing. Shri S. Dinesh, CPIO & DGM was personally present in the hearing on behalf of the State Bank of India along with Ms. Neha Gupta and Shri Abhinav. The respondent, Reserve Bank of India, Shri Abhay Kumar, CPIO along with Ms. Lali Ramesh, Assistant Legal Advisor, Shri Akhtar, Assistant Legal Advisor attended the hearing through video-conferencing. The RTI applicant Shri Girish Mittal attended the hearing through video-conferencing from Mumbaiand his counsel Shri Pranav Sachdeva and Shri Jatin Bhardwaj were personally present in the hearing. Shri Devender Singh, Chief Manager (Law) representing Bank of Baroda along with Shri P C Khanna, PIO, Bank of Baroda attended the hearing through video-conferencing. Shri Ayush Gandhi, Advocate along with Shri Mangesh Joshi, Manager, Shri Tejas appeared on behalf of HDFC Bank and attended the hearing through video-conferencing. Shri Nimish Bhatt, Joint General Manager Corporate Legal along with Shri Gaurav Mathur appearing on behalf of HDFC Ltd. attended the hearing through video- conferencing from Mumbai. None appeared on behalf of the Yes Bank, ILFS and Sahara India Financial Services despite notice.

5. The written submissions of all the parties were taken on record.

6. The counsel for HDFC Ltd. submitted that no third party notice was issued to them by the respondent i.e. Reserve Bank of India under Section 11(1) and 11(3) of the RTI Act neither they have filed any second appeal before the Commission in this regard. Therefore, they requested the Commission to drop the proceedings against them. In view of this, the HDFC Ltd. is dropped from the memo of parties.

7. The counsel for ICICI Bank Ltd. reiterated the arguments made by him on the last date of hearing i.e., 11.0