Punjab National Bank vs Central Information Commission And Another

Kuldeep Tiwari, J

The petitioner-Punjab National Bank, a body corporate, by filiing the instant writ petition, cast under Articlle 226/227 of the Constitution of India, has thrown a challenge to order dated 30.12.2020 (Annexure P-1), passed by thhe Central Information Commisssioner (respondent No.1).

Perusal of the impugned ordeer reflects that Sh. Binod Kummar Dobhal and Sh. Sunil Khullar, as per Section 20(1) of the Right to Informatiion Act, 2005 (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘Act of 2005’), were found to be liable, beingg negligent in duty and has deliberately and malafidely delayed in supplying the information sought under the Act of 2005. Consequenttly, through the impugned order, a penalty off Rs.10,000/- each, was imposed. Furthermoree, a direction was passed to dedduct the penalty amount from thheir

This Court, at the first instance, has posed a specific query to learned counsel for the petitioner, who has caused appearance through virtual platform, ass to how, the Bank can maintaiin the instant writ petition, for the wrongs commmitted by the CPIO concerned, designated under the Act of 2005, to which, learned counsel for the petitioner answered that they are the officiials of the Bank, therefore, it is the duty of the Bank, to protect them. She further submits that even the said officials have been transferred, and therefore, the instant writ petition has been filed by the Baank.

This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and is of the considered opinion that the instant writ petition is a misconceived motion, as no cause of action arises for the petitioner-Bank, to challenge the impugnedd order. It is the grievance of the CPIO conceerned, who were found liable for having committed an offennce punishable under Section 20(1) of the Act of 2005, and therefore, the Baank has no causee of action to maintain the instannt writ petition.

In view of the above, the innstant writ petition is dismissed. However, liiberty is reserved for the CPIO concerned, in case, still have any grievance too avail all remedy(ies), in accorddance with law, on the same cauuse of action.