O R D E R

(07.08.2023)

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 27.12.2021 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 10.10.2021 and first appeal dated 20.11.2021:- Details of information sought :-  “The appellant’s husband Mr. Bani Bhushan Pandey PF 146814 was also promoted as GBO scale-I officer w.e.f 22.04.2015. But, he a Rickshaw-Ridden unable to walk PWD was transferred to Maner 50 KM far from his residence. Due to that inaccessible and malice transfer, his life fell into danger. He was compelled and dictated for transfer near home to accept reversion which make the life of his full family distressful. Despite, the bank has been consistently replying that the posting/transfer of her disabled husband does not contravene any guidelines /policies / verdicts by letters 16.11.2019 and 12.02.2021. Accordingly, he sought the following information for the period 2013-2016.

(i) Whether there was not any vacancy for GBO Scale-l officer as on 21.04.2115 even in Patna town where a PWD may have been adjusted?

(ii) Whether no officers have been retained in same branch in Patna town even after promotion during the period?

(iii) Details of PWD employees who were posted as per guidelines.

(iv) Details of PWD employees who were transferred so far, as my husband Mr. B B Pandey was transferred to 50 KM.

(v) Please provide me details of the disabled employees who could not get/accept promotion due to inaccessible TRANSFER despite national commitment on international platform.”

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 10.10.2021under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Bank of India, Patna, Bihar. The CPIO vide letter dated 21.10.2021replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 20.11.2021. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 07.12.2021 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated

27.12.2021 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 27.12.2021 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 21.10.2021and the same is reproduced as under:- (i) We have examined your RTI application and observed that the information sought by you from (i) to (v) is not pertaining to you. So the same cannot be provided to you because it is exempted u/s 8(1) J of RTI Act, 2005.

(ii) Further, on examination of your request, it is also observed that you have sought the information on behalf of Sri. Bani Bhushan Pandey who had already retired from service of the Bank on 28.02.2021 simply with a view to harass the Bank's officials. You had sought information on various occasions in the past from Zonal office, Patna and raised grievances to zonal office, Patna, Ombudsman, RBI Patna, Grievances Redressal Authority of Bank of India, Mumbai, Hon'ble C.I,C New Delhi and also in the court of Chief Commissioner of person with Disabilities (Divanjan) New Delhi who was Pleased to pass order on 27. 07. 2021. But even after the order, you had submitted application to P.M of India Portal assailing the order of the Hon’ble court regarding which reply has been sent and suitable information were also provided to you on various earlier occasions. So you have sole intention to harass the Bank officials and thus desired information cannot be provided u/s 7(9) of, RT1 Act, 2005.

The FAA vide order dated 07.12.2021concurred with the reply given by the CPIO.

5. The appellant represented by her husband attended the hearing through audio conference and on behalf of the respondent Shri Manish Karray, Deputy General Manager and