1 1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7785/2009. Aijaz Ahmed Vs. Bombay Mercantile Corporation Bank Ltd. & Ors. Date of Order : 7th August 2009. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. Sikander Khan, for the petitioner. ... BY THE COURT: Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the material placed on record, this Court is unable to find any reason to interfere with the order dated 20.10.2008 (Annex.8) as passed by the Deputy Governor & Appellate Authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for Reserve Bank of India, Central Office, Mumbai. On the request as made by the petitioner seeking information regarding memo, charge-sheet, bank account, ledger sheet, and the inquiry proceedings pertaining to Smt. Ramu Devi and Shri Anish Ahmed, said to be the employees of the Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited, Jodhpur, the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Reserve Bank of India stated in his communication dated 20.06.2008 (Annex.5) that the required information was not available with the Reserve Bank. It was submitted by the petitioner before the Appellate 2 Authority that the concerned Bank being under the control of Reserve Bank of India and all its rules and regulations being applicable to the said Bank, direction be issued to the CPIO to provide the copies of the documents in respect of alleged irregularities/fraud in the said Bank. The Appellate Authority has observed that a public authority is expected to supply the information that it holds; and that the CPIO had already explained the position to the appellant. The Appellate Authority has proceeded to dismiss the appeal while observing that the appellant was free to approach the CPIO with a fresh request specifying the information required and completing all the formalities. It cannot be said that the request made by the petitioner has not been duly considered. The information in relation to the proceedings of a particular Bank, and more particularly, relating to its employees, if not available with the Reserve Bank of India, the CPIO could not have stated anything except the impugned communication that such an information was not available with him. Neither the CPIO nor the learned Appellate Authority could be faulted in this matter. There does not appear any reason to entertain this writ petition. The writ petition stands rejected. 3 //Mohan// (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J.