Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 218
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
ANANDI RAMALINGAM, J
J. SELVAM – Appellant
Versus
United Commercial Bank (UCO) – Respondent
CIC/UCOBK/A/2023/110543
The CPIO's response to the RTI application was deemed adequate, and the absence of the Appellant limited the Commission's ability to intervene.
Headnote:(A) Right to Information Act, 2005 - The Appellant filed an RTI application seeking details regarding charges and notices related to a Jewel Loan Auction. The CPIO responded, stating that the information was not specific enough and provided some details. The Appellant appealed, claiming the response was incomplete. The FAA upheld the CPIO's response. (Paras 1-7)
(B) RTI Application - The CPIO is required to provide specific information as per the RTI Act, and the absence of the Appellant during the hearing limited the Commission's ability to intervene. (Paras 5-7)
Facts of the case:
The Appellant sought information regarding charges and notices related to a Jewel Loan Auction from UCO Bank, alleging incomplete responses from the CPIO and FAA.
Findings of Court:
The Commission found that the CPIO had provided an appropriate response and dismissed the appeal due to the Appellant's absence.
Issues: The main issues were whether the CPIO provided sufficient information and the adequacy of the response to the RTI application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the CPIO's response was adequate under the RTI Act, and the Appellant's absence hindered further proceedings.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 07.07.2022 seeking information on the following points:
- (i) Rupees 7,560/- (Rs.3780/- + Rs.3780/-) has been collected from me as charges referring towards for sending Jewel Loan Auction notice in the Bank details dated 24.05.2022, in respect of the UCO Bank Jewel Loan Account Nos.
1) **********9927
2) **********9934 (ii) Kindly furnish the details of the dates on which the above Jewel Auction notice has been sent to me as per the provision of the Right to Information Act, 2005 . If the above said Auction Notice has been send by Speed Post or Registered Post, the copy of the such Auction Notice, the particulars relating to relevant number of the Post of package, date of sending the notice, Postal Receipts and the name of the Post Office from which the said Auction Notice has been sent.
(iii) The Particulars relating to Publication of the Auction Notice in the News Papers and the dates of Auction Notice and also to furnish the copies of the publication of the Auction Notice published in the News Papers (iv) If the Jewell Auction Notice had been send from the UCO Bank through Postal Services and if the said Auction Notice has been returned, Kindly furnish the Copy of the Postal Cover and the date of containing the endorsement of the Postman on which the reason for returning the Postal Cover and the date of the endorsement of the Postman on the said Postal Cover.
(v) On the last 31.03.2022, inside the house where I am residing address Old No.19, New No.29, Appu Street, Second Floor, Mylapore, Chennai-600004, two unknown persons have without my permission, forcibly entered into my house, taken photos of me and my family members and also raised their voices and threatened me and my family members. The said unknown two, Persons have arranged to stand certain rowdy’s /rogues outside the house. On making a telephone complaint to the Police (Phone No. 100 Emergency) the Policemen came to the spot aside my house arrested or taken custody of (vi) If 1) Shri Naveen Kishore, Branch Manager, UCO Bank, Purasaiwakkam, Chennai - 600007 and 2) Shri Murugan, Appraiser, UCO Bank, Purasaiwakkam, Chennai -600007 and taken them to the Mylapore Police Station, Chennai.
Kindly furnish the Photo Copy of the Regulations (guidelines) in which the officials of the Bank permitting to go to the house/residence of the borrowers pledging the Gold Jewells and enter into the house forcibly collecting the Jewel Loan money from the borrowers and to take Photos also to coerce them, threatening and troubling the family members. …, etc./ other related information 2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 21.08.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:- i. Query no.1: You are not seeking any specific information. Therefore we are not able to give any reply.
ii. Query no.2, 3 & 4: Copies of letters dated 04.04.2022 and 04.05.2022 of Bank with postal details and gold auction notice on 21.05.2022 published in the New Indian Express and Dinamani newspaper are enclosed.
iii. Query nos. 5 & 6 you are raising various allegations against Bank/its officers. No circular/guidelines as sought by you. ….etc.
3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 29.08.2022 alleging that the information provided was incomplete, false and misleading. The FAA vide order dated 29.09.2022, upheld the reply given by the CPIO.
4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 26.11.2022.
5. The appellant remained absent during the hearing despite notice and on behalf of the respondent Ms. Uma Devi, AGM, attended the hearing through video/audio conference.
6. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that a point-wise response to the RTI application in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, had already been furnished to the appellant vide their letter dated 21.08.2022. Hence, no further information remained to be
