ORDER

(15.01.2021)

1. The issues under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated nil include non-receipt of the following information raised by the appellant through his RTI application dated 07.11.2017 and first appeal dated 12.12.2017:

“In reply to my RTI No. SBIBC/R/2017/50001, I have been provided with a copy of RBI circular No.DBS.CO.CFMC.BC.No.1/23.04.001/2015-16 dated July 01, 2016 titled as Master Directions on Frauds Classification and Reporting by commercial banks and select Fls. I have following queries w.r.to the section 8.11 (Filling Complaints with Law Enforcement Agencies) of the same in reference to my complaint to SBI captured in Ticket No. 3254177229.

(i) Has any legal opinion been sought on my complaint or in complaints similar to mine by other buyers in Sovereign Unnathi project in Bangalore by sovereign Developers & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Please provide me a copy of the same.

(ii) As per the para 8.11 of the master circular of the RBI on fraud reporting, Fraud has to be reported immediately to the law enforcement agencies by scheduled commercial banks. Has these instructions been followed in the case of Sovereing Developers & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Karnataka Bank Limited and Phoenix ARC wherein a 3rd party security interest has been created in the name of Phoenix ARC in violation of an undertaking given to SBI on the properties taken by the SBI as collatereal while sanctioning the loan to more than 250 home buyers in Sovereing Unnathi project in Bangalore. Along with that many instances of fund diversions are also reported to SBI.

(iii) If any action has been initiated, please provide me a copy of all the complaints filed by the SBI with law enforcement agencies like CBI, Police, SFIO and/or RBI etc. against the aforementioned parties.”

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 07.11.2017 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), State Bank of India, Local Head office, Bangalore, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO replied on 07.12.2017. Dissatisfied with the response of the CPIO, the appellant filed first appeal dated 12.12.2017. The First Appellate Authority disposed of the first appeal vide order dated 16.01.2018. Aggrieved by this, the appellant has filed a second appeal dated nil before this Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant filed the instant appeal inter alia on the grounds that the reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant has requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the information immediately.

4. The CPIO vide letter dated 07.12.2017 gave point-wise reply to the RTI application wherein they denied the information on point no. (1) of the RTI application under section 8 (1) (d) of the RTI Act. The FAA vide his order dated 16.01.2018 directed the CPIO to revisit the RTI application and provide a revised reply to the appellant. The CPIO complied with the order of the FAA vide their letters dated 07.02.2018 and 27.03.2018.

Hearing on 14.05.2020:

4.1. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent, Shri Ramesh Maiya, Chief General Manager and CPIO and Shri Rajesh M B, Law Officer, State Bank of India, Bangalore, attended the hearing through audio conference.

4.2. The Commission passed the following directions on 18.05.2020:

“6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, notes that the reply given by the respondent is perfunctory and misleading. The objective of the RTI Act is to bring the transparency and accountability in functioning of the public authority. The information sought has not been provided by the respondent even after lapse of more than three years from the date of filing of this RTI application. In view of this the Registry of this Bench is directed to issue a Show Cause notice to Shri T. Ramchandra Bhat, the then CPIO and Shri Ramesh Maiya, presen