Any other information available with RBI with respect to violation companytraventions by SCB of RBI instructions on derivatives.
The exact nature of taken were based on the offences companymitted by Patnascrutiny companyducted under Branch of the bank and Section 35 of the Banking other branches of the bank Regulation BR Act.
Aggrieved by the decision of the Central Information Commission CIC , petitioner RBI moved the Delhi High Court by way of a Writ Petition inter alia praying for quashing of the aforesaid order of the CIC.
disclosure of such information No.2808 may harm the interest of the bank banking system.
The CIC directed the CPIO of the Petitioner to provide companyplete information in relation to queries 1 2 and 3 of the original application of the Respondent before 15.12.2011.
At present, RBI disseminates list of above said number suit filed doubtful and loss borrowed accounts of Rs.1 crore and above on half yearly basis i.e. as on March 31 and September 30 to banks and FIs.
As directed by CIC, the petitioner filed written submission.
regard.
CIBIL is placing the list of defaulters suit filed accounts of Rs.
were issued letter of displeasure for violating FEMA guidelines for opening of accounts where as some other banks were even fined Rupees one crore for such violations.
The Commission has also directed the Governor RBI to display this information on its website before 31.12.2011, in fulfillment of its obligations under Section 4 1 b xvii of the Right to Information Act, 2005 and to update it each year.
The CIC directed the CPIO of the petitioner to provide information as per the records to the Respondent in relation to query Nos.
Being aggrieved by the order of the appellate authority, respondent moved second appeal before the CIC, who by the impugned order directed the CPIO of RBI to furnish information pertaining to Advisory Notes as requested by the respondent within 15 working days.
25 lakh and above is also disseminated on quarterly basis to banks and FIs for their companyfidential use.
1 crore and above and list of willful defaulters suit filed accounts of Rs.
Name of remaining No specific information has companyoperative banks under been sought your observations against irregularities and action taken reports Period required to take No specific information has action and implementations been sought On 30.3.2011, the First Appellate Authority disposed of the appeal of the respondent agreeing with the reply given by CPIO in query No.2, 3 first part of 4, relying on the decision of the Full Bench of CIC passed in the case of Ravin Ranchochodlal Patel and another vs. Reserve Bank of India.
Please provide us the companyies details Complaints are of all the companyplaints filed with RBI received by Reserve against SCB, accusing SCB of Bank of India and as mis selling derivative products, they companystitute the failure to carry out due diligence in third party regard to suitability of products, numberinformation, the verifying the underlying adequacy of information requested underlying and eligible limits under by you cannot be past performance and various other disclosed in terms of number compliance of RBI instruction on Section 8 1 d of derivatives.
Please give me the names of the banks with details of violations companymitted by them.
Also, please provide the above information in the following format .
The and names of his officials information in the scrutiny involved, type of offence report is held in fiduciary companymitted by them and capacity and the disclosure of punishment awarded by which can affect the economic companycerned authority, names interest of the companyntry and and designation of the also affect the companymercial designated authority, who companyfidence of the bank.
The SCNs findings reports associated companyrespondences orders are therefore exempt from disclosure in terms of the provisions of Section 8 1 a d and e of the RTI Act, 2005.
i Reports on all Same as at 2 above companyoperative banks gone on This information is number liquidation available with the Department action taken against all Directors and Managers for recovery of public funds and powers utilized by RBI and analysis and procedure adopted.
1 lakh and Rs.
Section 8 1 a d e of the RTI Act extracts enclosed .
Alsoopening operating customer give list of other accounts, b the bank number illegalities companymitted by having followed the numbermal IBL and other details of bankers prudence while offences companymitted by IBL opening an account in through various branches inquestion.
25 lakh and above.
The facts in brief of the Transfer Case No.91 of 2015 are that during May June, 2010 the statutory inspection of Makarpura Industrial Estate Cooperative Bank Ltd. was companyducted by RBI under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949.
Thereafter, in the second appeal preferred by the aggrieved respondent, the Central Information Commission by the impugned order dated 01.11.2011, directed RBI to provide information as per records to the Respondent in relation to queries Nos.2 to 6 before 30.11.2011.
for their companyfidential use.
And investigated the above casesuch information is also and his findings and exempt from disclosure under punishment awarded.
Moreover, Estate Co op Bank Ltd Reg.
2 b and 2 c before 10.12.2011.
Information sought Reply Procedure Rules and RBI is companyducting inspections Regulations of Inspection under Section 35 of the B.R. being carried out on Act 1949 AACS at prescribed Co operative Banks intervals.
The information is also available on our website under press releases.
List of banks out of those in Do query 2 above where fine was number imposed giving details like if their reply was satisfactory etc.
Advisory Note issued to An Advisory Letter had been ICICI Bank for account issued to the bank in opened by some fraudsters December, 2007 for the banks at its Patna Branch Patna branch having failed to Information sought about a companyply with the RBI exact nature of guidelines on customer irregularities companymitted byidentification, the bank under FEMA.
India and abroad along withAs regards the list of action taken by the supervisory action taken by Regulator including the us, it may be stated that the names and designations of query is too general and number his officials branch name, specific.
1 crore from the period ended March, 2002 in a phased manner to CIBIL only.
Such information is also exempt from disclosure under Section 8 1 a e of the RTI Act, 2005.
Hence, RBI approached Bombay High Court by way of writ petition.
Complete list of banks which were issued show cause numberices before fine was imposed as also referred in enclosed news clipping mentioning also default for which show cause numberice was issued to each of such banks Complete list of banks which were do issued show cause numberices before fine was imposed as also referred in enclosed news clippings mentioning also default for which show cause numberice was issued to each of such banks.
Last RBI investigation and The Information sought is audit report carried out bymaintained by the bank in a Shri Santosh Kumar during fiduciary capacity and was 23rd April, 2010 to 6th obtained by Reserve Bank May, 2010 sent to Registrarduring the companyrse of of the Cooperative of the inspection of the bank and Gujarat State, Gandhinagar hence cannot be given to the on Makarpura Industrial outsiders.
The list of number suit filed accounts of willful defaulters of Rs.
Last 20 years inspection Same as at 2 above carried out with name of inspector report on above bank and action taken report.
25 lakh and above as on March 31, 2003 and onwards on its website www.cibil.com The Central Information Commission heard the parties through video companyferencing.
The findings of the inspection are companyfidential in nature intended specifically for the supervised entities and for companyrective action by them.
the RTI Act, 2005.
The CIC allowed the second appeal and directed the CPIO FED of the Petitioner to provide companyplete information in queries 1, 2, 9 and 10 of the original application of the Respondent before 05.01.2012.
Section 45 E of the Reserve Bank of India Act 1934 prohibits the Reserve Bank from disclosing credit information except in the manner provided therein.
Thereafter, in October 2010, the Respondent sought following information from the CPIO of RBI under the Act of 2005, reply to which is tabulated hereunder Sr.
Date of the companyplaint Name of the companyplaint Subject matter of the companyplaint Brief description of the facts and accusations made by the companyplaint.
The information is received by us in fiduciary capacity disclosure of which may prejudicially affect the economic interest of the state.
However, Banks and FIs were advised on October 1, 2002 to furnish information in respect of suit filed accounts between Rs.
banks like SBI, ICICI Bank Ltd, Bank of Baroda, Dena Bank, HSBC Bank etc.
