के (cid:574)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग१,मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:671)ी, New Delhi – 110067 ि(cid:554)तीय अपील संূा / Second Appeal No. CIC/RBIND/A/2023/129520 Dineshwar Ojha … अपीलकता१/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO: Reserve bank of India Mumbai …ঋितवादीगण/Respondent Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:

RTI : 22.03.2023 FA : 16.05.2023 SA : 07.07.2023 CPIO : 28.04.2023 FAO : 26.06.2023 Hearing : 04.12.2024 Date of Decision: 10.01.2025 CORAM:

Hon’ble Commissioner _ANANDI RAMALINGAM O R D E R

1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 22.03.2023 seeking information on the following points:

(i) “The PSS ACT, 2007 para 21(1) says every system provider shall disclose and supply copies of Rules, Regulations, Documents to existing customers. Give information as per ACT in uploading SBI Yono Internet Banking the physical supply of rules, regulation, documents is necessary to supply by Bank.

(ii) Give information whether Bank will quote only it's website to replace the PSS ACT 27 as physical supply word not written in ACT.

(iii) RBI Guidelines July, 6 2017 Para 4(2) says to act in for Prevention and Detection mechanism. Provide me information for Detection, whether Bank has been advised through the Guidelines to act to save the Debited unauthorized transaction money by Hold, Block beneficiary account or it is only liable to Prevent for further Debits only.

(iv) Provide me information in details as per RBI Guidelines July 6, 2017 Para 4(3)

said mechanism for GAP in system in case of unauthorized transaction. If relates GAP in TIME between the unauthorized transactions then provide me information for point of time.

(v) Provide information in short about the role of PSU Banks when unauthorized transactions take place when written information given to Bank by Customer.”

2. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 28.04.2023 and the same is reproduced as under:-

(i) “In terms of Section 21 (1) of The Payments and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 (PSS Act), every system provider shall disclose to the existing or potential system participants, the terms and conditions including the charges, limitations of the liability, providing copies of the rules and regulations governing the payment system and other relevant documents. This is to read with para 2 (p) of the Act, wherein "system participant" is defined as a bank or any other person participating in a payment system and includes the system provider.

(ii) Query is not clear.

(iii) (iv) & (v) Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has not issued any specific instructions in this regard.

However, you may refer Circular on 'Customer Protection Limiting Liability of Customers in Unauthorized Electronic Banking Transactions' dated July 06, 2017 available on RBI website under following link:

https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=11040.”

3. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 16.05.2023. The FAA vide order dated 26.06.2023 upheld the reply given by the CPIO.

4. Aggrieved with the FAA’s order, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 07.07.2023.

5. The Appellant remained absent during the hearing and on behalf of the Respondent, R. Karpagam, AGM & Rep. of CPIO along with Uttara Srinivasan, Legal Officer attended the hearing through video conference.

6. The Commission took on record the written submissions of the Appellant stating inter alia as under:

“1- …in Digital Payment app SBI yono Internet Banking SBI didn't used to supply Rules, Documents in physical mode likewise Debit, Credit card causing HACKING due to unawareness of system. SBI says everything is in SBI website and is tantamount to the PSS ACT. In another reply Ombudsman Patna replied that the said ACT is not meant for mechanism for complaints and Ombudsman will not ask SBI. Customers are deprived of digital awareness whereas in para 21, 1 of the PSS ACT 51 of 2007 it has been said to SUPPLY Rules, Documents