Central Information Commission Ratan Mani vs Canara Bank on 20 July, 2023 के ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई द ली, New Delhi 110067 ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/CANBK/A/2022/139382 Ratan Mani ... अपीलकता/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO: Canara Bank Nehru Place, New Delhi ... ितवादीगण/Respondents Relevant dates emerging from the appeal: RTI : 17.06.2022 FA : 29.06.2022 SA : 17.08.2022 CPIO : 29.06.2022 FAO : 02.08.2022 Hearing : 14.07.2023 Hon'ble Commissioner SHRI SURESH CHANDRA ORDER (19.07.2023) 1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 17.08.2022 include nonreceipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 17.06.2022 and first appeal dated 29.06.2022 :  "Appellant (Promotional Club, Customer ID: 248525300) seeking the following information for which we have been requesting but the same has not been provided to us till date. Details of which are as follows: (i) Your ref no. (ii) FIRC no. (iii) Date of receipt (iv) Remitters name (v) Name of currency Page 1 of 3 (vi) Amount received in foreign currency (vii) Amount applied against export SB no. (viii) Amount applied against our invoice no. (ix) Amount applied against your export ref. no. (x) Balance pending the above said information on urgent basis." 2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 17.06.2022 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Canara Bank, New Delhi. The CPIO vide letter dated 29.06.2022 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 29.06.2022. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) vide order dated 02.08.2022 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 17.08.2022 before the Commission which is under consideration. 3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 17.08.2022 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act. 4. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 29.06.2022 and the same is reproduced as under: "I have examined your RTI application and observed that the information sought by you pertains to normal banking / procedures is made available through normal regular procedures in accordance with the banking system. To obtain the sought information, please contact MCB Noida branch and obtain the sought information." The FAA vide order dated 02.08.2022 concurred with the reply given by the CPIO. 5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Bhavesh Garg, Law Officer, Canara Bank, New Delhi, attended the hearing in person. 5.1. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant had filed several RTI applications with Canara bank seeking information regarding re structuring of his loan account (M/s Promotional Club) which had been declared NPA in 2016. However, the appellant had entered into an OneTime Settlement (OTS) Agreement Page 2 of 3 with their bank and his loan account had been closed. Further, the appellant had submitted an application dated 13.07.2023 before the Commission requesting for withdrawal of his 26 second appeals. 6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observed that the appellant submitted an application dated 13.07.2023 addressed to the Commission and stated that all his grievances against the respondent bank stood resolved. The appellant expressed his willingness to withdraw all his second appeals listed for hearing today i.e. on 14.07.2023. During the course of hearing, the respondent also produced the original copy of appellant's signed application dated 13.07.2023. That being so, there appears to be no public in