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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CIC) 9994

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Surendra Singh Meena, Information Commissioner
Nilesh Agrawal – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent
Second Appeal No. CIC/SBIND/A/2025/610338



A public authority cannot evade its duty to provide information under the RTI Act due to internal administrative confusion or failure to trace applications; it must provide the requested information within the stipulated timeframe as directed by the Commission.

Headnote:The matter involves an application filed under the Right to Information Act seeking details regarding deductions from a kiosk ID, incentive payments for the Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti Bima Yojana campaign, commission charts, and monthly transaction/commission records from August 2016 to August 2024. The public authority failed to provide any response to the initial application or the first appeal. The primary issue is the failure of the Respondent to respond to the RTI application. The Respondent attributed the delay to confusion resulting from multiple offline applications and stated that the specific application was not traceable until the receipt of the Commission's notice. The Respondent is directed to provide the reply to the appellant within three weeks after receipt of this order. With this direction, the appeal is disposed.

Relevant Facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application 28.10.2024
PIO replied on Not on Record
First Appeal filed on 06.12.2024
First Appeal Order on Not on Record
2nd Appeal received on 20.02.2025

Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 28.10.2024 seeking information on the following points:

(1) बी.सी.एन.आई.सी.टी. द्वारा दिनाांक 22/02/2022 को मेरे दकयोस्क आई.डी. 32804612 के दिदमट से10000/- (अक्षरी िस हजार रूपये) नामे दकयेगयेथे, नामेकरनेका सु-स्पष्ट कारण और यदि उस रादि को वापस दकया गया होगा तो वापस कब दकस खातेमेंदकया गया इसकी जानकारी की प्रमादणत, सत्यादपत छाया प्रदत प्रिाय करें.

(2) 16 अप्रेि 2024 से26 अप्रेि 2024 के मध्य बी.सी.एन.आई.सी.टी. ने प्रधानमांत्री जीवन ज्योदत बीमा योजना मेंनामाांकन केदिए एक कै म्पेन चिाया गया था दजसमेंक्वािीफाई करनेवािेसी.एस.पी. को 1000/- (अक्षरी एक हजार रूपये) का इांिेंदटव िेनेकी घोषणा की गई थी, मैंअपनेदकयोस्क आई.डी. 32804612 मेंउक्त इांिेंदटव हेतुक्वािीफाई दकया था. उक्त इांिेंदटव मुझेदजस रूप मेंदियेगयेहैंउसकी जानकारी की प्रमादणत, सत्यादपत छाया प्रदत प्रिाय करें.

(3) भारतीय स्टेट बैंक के ग्राहक सेवा के न्द्ोां मेंउपिब्ध सभी सेवाओां से सांबांदधत अगस्त 2016 सेअगस्त 2024 के मध्य बैंक द्वारा जारी दकयेगयेसभी कमीिन चाटटप्रिाय करें.

(4) मेरेद्वारा अपनेदकयोस्क आई.डी. 32804612 मेंअगस्त 2016 सेअगस्त 2024 केमध्य दकयेगयेसभी सफि िेनिेन की मादसक जानकारी प्रिाय करें.

(5) मेरेद्वारा अपनेदकयोस्क आई.डी. 32804612 मेंअगस्त 2016 सेअगस्त 2024 के मध्य दकयेगयेसभी सफि िेनिेन का बैंक द्वारा जारी कमीिन की मादसक जानकारी प्रिाय करें.

(6) बी.सी.एन.आई.सी.टी. द्वारा मेरेदकयोस्क आई.डी. 32804612 मेंअगस्त 2016 सेअगस्त 2024 के मध्य दियेगयेसेवा िुल्क एवां मुझेप्रिाय दकयेगये कदमिन की मादसक जानकारी प्रिाय करें.

(7) बी.सी.एन.आई.सी.टी. द्वारा मेरे दकयोस्क आई.डी. 32804612 के दिदमट में अगस्त 2016 से अगस्त 2024 के मध्य नामे दकये गये सभी िुल्क की मादसक जानकारी प्रिाय करें.“

Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal on 06.12.2024. Order of FAA is not available on record.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

The appellant remained absent.

The respondent Mr. Narender Kumar Mittal, AGM & CPIO, was present through video conference.

The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that reply to the RTI application could not be provided to the appellant, as due to receipt of multiple offline RTI applications from the appellant, due to some confusion, the instant RTI application was not traceable in the records and sought apology for the same. The respondent during hearing also stated that they have received the RTI application along with the hearing notice of the Commission and he will provide the information to the appellant as per RTI, at the earliest.

Decision:

The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case and perusal of records, the respondent is directed to provide reply to the appellant, within three weeks after receipt of this order. With this direction, the appeal is disposed.

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