RAJAN VERMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER -Rajan Verma has directed this writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the impugned. orders dated 8.11.2007, 15.6.2007 and 4.8.2007, passed by respondents No. 3 to 5 and for directing the respondents to provide information to the petitioner under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the RTI Act') and for further directing respondents No. 1 and 2 to make an enquiry into the large scale embezzlement made by the respondent-Canara Bank in settling the Non Performing Assets (hereinafter to be referred as 'NPA').

(2.) IT is-pleaded that the firm M/s S.R. Rajan and Company has taken loan from respondent No. 5 and the petitioner stood as a guarantor for the repayment of the said loan and pledged his commercial property and that of his wife, in favour of the bank. The borrower account of M/s S.R. Rajan and Company became NPA and the petitioner wanted to settle the matter with the bank. The bank charged the interest @ 14.5% per annum instead of 9% per annum. Large scale embezzlement was being made by the Canara Bank while settling the NPA of different parties and one Tarsem Bawa, Manager of the bank misappropriated an amount of Rs. 3,17,00,000/- by withdrawing the government dues from inter- banking transactions. The petitioner moved an application dated 8.2.2007 to the Chief Manager, Canara Bank, Amritsar for providing information under the RTI Act with regard to the details of compromise made by the bank during the last five years with the different parties of NPA, alongwith requisite Court fee, but the same was not supplied. The petitioner moved applications dated 27.4.2007 to the Director, RTI and dated 28.4.2007 under the RTI Act to the Chief Manager, Canara Bank, Amritsar for providing information, but no action has been taken. The petitioner moved an application dated 30.4.2007 to the Director, RTI, but no information was provided. The petitioner then moved an application dated 7.5.2007 alongwith requisite fee under the RTI Act to the Section Officer, Office of Director Banking Division, New Delhi and the said application was forwarded to the CPIO, Canara Bark for action. Inspite of issuance of direction by respondent No. 2, the CPIO, Canara Bank-respondent No. 4, did not provide any information to the petitioner. The petitioner moved an appeal dated 28.5.2007 to the Joint Secretary and Appellate Authority (under the RTI Act), Banking Division, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi for providing information, but the said appeal was rejected.

(3.) THEREAFTER , the Public Information Officer on 15.6.2007 illegally and arbitrarily dismissed the application. The petitioner moved the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal on frivolous grounds vide order dated 4.8.2007. The petitioner approached the Chief Information Commissioner for providing information to the petitioner under the RTI Act, but that application was not decided. The petitioner approached the High Court by filing C.W.P. No. 14919 of 2007 for directing respondent No. 2 to decide the appeal of the petitioner and the Hon'ble Division Bench vide order dated 24.9.2007 directed the Central Information Commission to consider and dispose of the appeal of the petitioner within a period of four weeks.