Provide probe report to RTI applicant, CIC orders bank

Aparna Banerji

Jalandhar, September 27

The Central Information Commission (CIC), New Delhi, has directed the Central Bank of India to provide a copy of the report of an investigation carried out against its own employee in response to an RTI filed by a Jalandhar resident.

Samir Ranjan Sur first made a complaint to the Central Bank of India against its employee on 30 July, 2022. He then filed an application on September 4, 2022, under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Central Bank of India, Punjab, seeking information about the status of the complaint.

In the reply, the CPIO stated that the bank had got an internal investigation conducted in the matter and claimed the complaint was disposed of.

Dissatisfied, Samir filed an appeal before the First Apellate Authority (FAA), Central Bank of India, on October 29, 2022. Samir, thereafter, filed a second appeal before the CIC on 16 January, 2023.

The information sought by Samir included action taken by the bank on the complaint against employee; rules and regulations of the bank; name and rank of all the officers who have held the inquiry; any show-cause notice or disciplinary proceedings initiated against the said employee; any punishment or penalty awarded to the employee; whether the inquiry officer recommended any punishment or penalty; and the status report of the complaint filed against the employee.

Additonally, the RTI also sought directions and guidelines of Reserve Bank of India and Central Vigilance Commission regarding criminal complaints against employees of public sector banks. In the formal response to the RTI, the bank’s CPIO denied the information.

However, the CIC order, issued on August 28, states that, “Since the appellant had filed a complaint with the bank, principles of natural justice demand that a copy of the investigation report carried out by the bank, as agreed by them in their reply be made available to the appellant within three weeks from the date of receipt of the order.”

Bank had denied info

In the formal response to the RTI, the bank’s CPIO maintained that the “information sought” about the investigation against the employee concerned was ‘personal information’ and would ‘cause unwarranted invasion of privacy.