Banks told to give all details on Mallya-Kingfisher bad loan
The Central Information Commission has directed a banks' consortium that lent a bad loan to Vijay Mallya's Kingfisher Airlines to reveal details about not just the loan, but also about the loan's approval. Banks earlier rejected an RTI petition, refusing to give most of the information about the process that led to "unwarranted" granting of loan that eventually went bad.
In a landmark judgment, the information watchdog Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed a consortium of banks that lent a bad loan to embattled liquor baron Vijay Mallya's Kingfisher Airlines to reveal all the details of not just the loan the company defaulted on, but such information about the approval of the loan that is expected to land several top bank officials in a legal soup.Hailing it as a big victory, RTI activist Harinder Dhingra told Mail Today that it was a lesson to such public authorities and institutions that tried to hide behind the exemption clauses in the RTI Act to ensconse their "wrongdoings".The consortium had denied Dhingra much of information about the process that led to "unwarranted" granting of loan that eventually went bad."It is strange that innocuous information pertaining to public money was denied in the name of hampering investigation. It is also strange that the bank does not know of what happened to the money it lent to the company. It doesn't know if the company has been declared a defaulter," said Dhingra.While Mail Today was the first to report that such a loan, nearly Rs 55 crore, had been given to Mallya's Kingfisher Airlines by the Oriental Bank of Commerce-led consortium, the latter had been stonewalling giving information regarding who approved the loan and on what grounds, such as collaterals etc, by invoking Section 8 (1) (h) of the RTI Act. The bank had argued that the matter was pending before different investigating agencies and disclosure of the information could hamper the investigation process. The concerned enforcement agencies are the CBI, ED and the SFIO.SUPREME COURT PRECEDENTThe CIC had earlier, at the case hearing on February 10, questioned the invoking of the exemption clause. In its latest judgment in the case, the CIC quoted several judgments from the Supreme Court as well as the Delhi High Court and observed that the bank had to furnish information asked by Dhingra and that the exemption did not apply.IC Sharat Sabharwal observed: "Except for stating that the matter is under investigation of some agencies, the respondents (bank) have not made any other submission to justify invocation of Section 8 (1) (h) to deny most of the information and why its disclosure would hamper the investigation process. As stated above, the investigation agencies have chosen not to make any submission in spite of an opportunity given to them for the purpose."The IC also cited that the exemption clause itself made it clear that "a public authority may allow access to information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests."The IC also quoted, among others, an SC observation in the case of UP Financial Corporation vs gem Cap India Pvt (AIR 1993, 1435). "In fact, information about industrialists who are loan defaulters of the country may put pressure on such persons to pay their dues."