O R D E R

(09.08.2021)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 26.04.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 08.01.2019 and first appeal dated 08.02.2019:- Fraud Monitoring Committee, formed in HDFC Bank pursuant to RBI direction for forming a special committee of board for exclusively monitoring and following up of cases of fraud involving amounts of Rs 1 crore and above.

(i) Please share the outcome of the board meeting for the discussed eligible fraud cases.

(ii) What were the observations of the board in the meeting dated 21.04.2016 and

20.07.2016, that is prior to approaching police, on fraud case related to HDFC1601-00170. Please share the board remarks on the said case.

(iii) In which board meeting, board members decided to follow up with the police in fraud no. HDFC 1601-00170.

(iv) RBI vide its mail dated 08.06.2017, ask about the update status of the police complaint. HDFC Bank submitted one letter to RBI, which showed that Bank approached to police against 09.06.2017, that is, only after RBI asked for an update. Please share the related papers, basis which RBI ascertained that plice follow up after 1 year and after 5 board meeting is in line with the compliance of RBI directions.

(v) Please share the progress on the recovery of money from the landlord and the CMS client in case of HDFC1601-0070.

(vi) What are the recovery measures HDFC Bank has taken to recover money from Landlords and the CMS client.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 08.01.2019 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 vide letter dated 06.02.2019 replied to the appellant. Dissatisfied with that, the appellant filed first appeal dated 08.02.2019. The First Appellate Authority vide order dated 22.04.2019 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed a second appeal dated 26.04.2019 before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 26.04.2019 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory; that the RBI was responsible authority for the functioning of Fraud Monitoring Committee of the bank and compliance of RBI directives, however, no information was provided. 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 06.02.2019 that the information sought by the appellant was not available with them. The FAA held that the information was not part of the record of their authority, therefore, not available under their custody and could not be furnished to the appellant.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, CPIO, Reserve Bank of India, Bandra, attended the hearing through audio conference.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that the information sought by the appellant was not provided so far.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the information sought by the appellant was not available in their custody, therefore, the appellant was replied to accordingly vide letter dated 06.02.2019.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observes that due reply has been given by the CPIO on 06.02.2019. The public authority may only disclose such information maintained by them in due course of business and in material form. Further, most of the queries raised by the appellant are interrogative in nature. Therefore, the information not having been maintained by them, they are not under any obligation to create the same. In Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr.v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors.(2011) 8