SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 1847

के(cid:3)(cid:4)ीयसचू नाआयोग Central Information Commission बाबागंगनाथमाग(cid:19),मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई(cid:21)द(cid:23)ली, New Delhi – 110067 ि(cid:26)तीय अपील सं(cid:28)या / Second Appeal No. CIC/BKOIN/A/2019/138681 Swati Shyam … अपीलकता(cid:19)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO: Bank of India Distt. Burdwan, West Bengal …(cid:31)ितवादीगण/Respondents Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:














RTI : 07.01.2019FA : 12.02.2019SA : 05.08.2019
CPIO : No ReplyFAO : No RecordHearing : 19.01.2022
CORAM:

Hon’ble Commissioner SHRI SURESH CHANDRA

O R D E R

(22.02.2022)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 05.08.2019 include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through the RTI application dated 07.01.2019 and first appeal dated 12.02.2019:-

(i) A certificate being D.B.D No. ************420 (Sl No. 9105757) was deposited before the Railway Authorities being Agreement No. 59M (02-03) dated 20.10.2002 and the same was released on 19.07.2012, then the appellant wanted to know the renew on 17.06.2010 payment was made to the proprietor?

(ii) As per the Bank’s letter dated 19.03.2017 Ref. No. BAR/ZO/PB/LGL/2016/020 indicate that payment was made to Railway Authorities, the appellant wanted to know in which department of Railway, the payment was made?

(iii) As per Ref. No. BAR/ZO/PB/LGL/2016/020 dt 19/03/2017 indicate that the original D.B.D. no. ***********420 has been renewed to ***********0421, the appellant want copy of such renewal certificiate as well as ***********0420 certificate. Please supply both the certificate.

(iv) How the payment of ***********421 was made to Rail on 17.06.2010 even after death of proprietor who died on 05.09.2009?

(v) That she had deposited the original certificate no. ***********420 after being received from the Railway for payment on 27.08.2014. Kindly return the same as you have indicated that payment she was made on 17.06.2010.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 07.01.2019 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Bank of India, Distt. Burdwan, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO did not reply to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 12.02.2019. The First Appellate Authority (FAA)did not pass any order. Aggrieved bythe same, the appellant filed a second appeal dated

05.08.2019 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 05.08.2019 inter alia on the grounds that no reply was received from the respondent. 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. Perusal of the records submitted by the appellant while filing the second appeal dated 05.08.2019 reveals that neither the CPIO nor the FAA provided any information or any reply to the appellant.

5. The appellant’s representative Shri Anirban Shyam (son)and on behalf of the respondent Shri Shailendra Kumar Dubey, Asstt. General Manager, Bank of India, Bardhaman attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The representative of the appellant inter alia submitted that the appellant’s husband was a railway contractor and during his life time he had obtained a DBD certificate being No. ************20 and the certificate was kept as security deposit to the Railway authorities and the same was released by the railway on 19.07.2012, when she submitted the DBD certificate No. **************20 the Bank on 27.08.2014 for encashment. It was further submitted that later on the appellant came to know that the Bank authorities had renewed the certificate vide A/c. No. **************21 and the same were paid to the Railway Authorities on 17.06.2010. Therefore, she sought aforesaid information but no information was provided by the respondent.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had provided the desired information to the appellant vide letter dated 14.01.2022 and the same is reproduced as under:-

(i) “Certificate being D.B.D. No. 423245100000420 (Old A.C. No. 2872 old D.B.D. No. 37/695) was renewed on 10.05.2006 to A/c No. ************421, payment was made favoring F.A. & C.A.O (CON), Eastern Railway A/c Shyam & Chandra Association amounting Rs. 2,17,215.49.

(ii) The payment was made vide DD No. 19530 dated 17.06.2010 favoring F.A. &

C.A.O (CON), Eastern Railway A/c Shyam & Chandra Associati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top