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

2023 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 3169

केीय सूचना आयोग

Central Information Commission

बाबा गंगनाथ माग ,मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka

नई दली, New Delhi – 110067

ितीय अपील संया / Second Appeal No. CIC/PNBNK/A/2021/661620

CIC/PNBNK/A/2021/661289

Vikas Verma

… अपीलकता /Appellant

VERSUS

बनाम

CPIO: Punjab National Bank,

Jammu

…ितवादीगण/Respondents

Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 23.06.2021

FA

: 19.08.2021

SA

: 20.12.2021

CPIO : 04.08.2021

FAO : 20.09.2021

Hearing : 23.03.2023

CORAM:

Hon’ble Commissioner

SHRI SURESH CHANDRA

ORDER

(15.05.2023) 1. The issues raised in both the second appeals were identical. Therefore, it is felt desirable to pass a common order in both the appeals.

1.1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 20.12.2021 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI applications dated 23.06.2021 and first appeals dated 19.08.2021:-

 “That applicant has Applied TA Bill for transportation and freight (for shifting of household goods from Mathura to Jammu) on 30.07.2018 in HRMS and submitted physical copy of TA Bill Application to the HR Manager Mr Gauravpreet Singh Bhatti (PF - 1368362) on 12.09.2018 along with self-attested photocopies of GR Receipt No 1076 dated 25.06.2018 and other supporting documents but the same was declined by the HR Manager on 13.11.2018 and the factum for declining the same in HRMS was uploaded with reason being non production of above receipts and documents in original for retention. In short the HR Manager declined the above TA Bill because the above receipts and supporting documents were not handed over to him for retention in original. Based on the above factual matrix the undersigned desires to get the following information at the earliest:

(i) Under which circular of the erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce was it required for an officer employee to give the GR receipts and other documents of freight and transport in original for retention, for claiming a TA Bill and where in that circular has it been mentioned that self-attested photocopies of GR receipts and other documents of freight and transport are not sufficient for claiming a TA Bill? Please provide the certified copies of the circular based on which the TA Bill of the undersigned dated 30.07.2018 was refused by the HR Manager.”

 The applicant/undersigned was transferred from Mathura to Jammu in the month of June 2018 and joined OBC Bank, Jammu on 18.06.2018 and acquired a leased accommodation on 1.06.2018 at rent amounting to 11500 per month and the undersigned has applied for availing lease facility vide application dated 19.10.2018 to Ms. Gaurapreet Singh Bhatti, HR Manager for sanction of lease facility from 18.06.2018. The same was sanctioned from the month of OCTOBER 2018. Based on the above factual matrix the undersigned desires to get the following information at the earliest.

(ii) Under which circular of the erstwhile Oriental Bank of Commerce was the Circle Head or for that matter the HR Department at Circle Office empowered to decline the lease for the period of delay, in case, there is delay in applying for availing the lease facility.

(iii) Under which circular was the lease entitlement of the undersigned from 18.06.2018 to 30.09.2018 declined.

(iv) Provide certified copy of the office note vide which the lease entitlement of the undersigned from 18.06.2018 to 30.09.2018 was declined along with lease documents submitted by the applicant/undersigned.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed applications dated 23.06.2021 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Punjab National Bank, Jammu, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO vide letters dated 04.08.2021 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeals dated 19.08.2021. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide orders dated 20.09.2021 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeals dated 20.12.2021 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeals dated 20.12.2021inter 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 vi

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top