SC issues contempt notices to RBI for denying info under RTI on loan defaulters
PrintListen to this Article
0:00
0:00
The Supreme Court on Friday issued contempt notices to the RBI for failing to reveal under the Right to Information Act intelligence received on loan defaulters and details of action taken against banks in connection with fraud.
In December 2015, a bench of the top court — comprising Justices MY Eqbal and C Nagappan — had asked banking sector regulator RBI to reveal such information in the interest of shoring up public confidence in the banking system and as a deterrent to bank frauds, instead of claiming that it held such information in a “fiduciary capacity” and revealing it would ruin the economy.
In separate petitions filed in the Supreme Court, Mumbai resident Girish Mittal and Delhi-based RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal have alleged that instead of sharing information, the RBI has brought in policy changes that allow withholding of most information. The petitions pertain to information about alleged irregularities by the Sahara group.
Activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioners, on Friday told a bench that the RBI has failed to abide by the court’s three-yearold order. Bhushan was assisted in the case by lawyer Pranav Sachdeva.
In response, the bench, comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and MR Shah, issued the contempt notices to the RBI.
The court has given RBI officials, including those designated as its information officers, four weeks to respond to the notices. Should the court reject their explanation, they will face contempt action which carries a jail term of up to six months.
Almost all information can be sought under RTI, barring a few where security and public interest demand it.
Petitioners Mittal and Agrawal had sought from the RBI, among other things, information about alleged irregularities by the Sahara Group. The 2015 ruling had come in a plea against a Central Information Commission order directing banks to give information about some banks to Agrawal.
One of the petitions claimed that the RBI, instead of giving information under RTI after the 2015 order, issued a disclosure policy on December 30, 2016 to its public information officers asking them not to disclose virtually all kind of information, even the kind ordered by the court.
The contempt plea charged that the top court had clearly asked the RBI to share information relating to individual banks regulated and supervised by it. Agrawal had sought information from the RBI related to fines imposed on banks for violating rules, the list of banks issued show-cause notices and details about any other action taken against erring lenders, if any. #casansaar (Source - PTI, Economic Times)
In December 2015, a bench of the top court — comprising Justices MY Eqbal and C Nagappan — had asked banking sector regulator RBI to reveal such information in the interest of shoring up public confidence in the banking system and as a deterrent to bank frauds, instead of claiming that it held such information in a “fiduciary capacity” and revealing it would ruin the economy.
In separate petitions filed in the Supreme Court, Mumbai resident Girish Mittal and Delhi-based RTI activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal have alleged that instead of sharing information, the RBI has brought in policy changes that allow withholding of most information. The petitions pertain to information about alleged irregularities by the Sahara group.
Activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioners, on Friday told a bench that the RBI has failed to abide by the court’s three-yearold order. Bhushan was assisted in the case by lawyer Pranav Sachdeva.
In response, the bench, comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and MR Shah, issued the contempt notices to the RBI.
The court has given RBI officials, including those designated as its information officers, four weeks to respond to the notices. Should the court reject their explanation, they will face contempt action which carries a jail term of up to six months.
Almost all information can be sought under RTI, barring a few where security and public interest demand it.
Petitioners Mittal and Agrawal had sought from the RBI, among other things, information about alleged irregularities by the Sahara Group. The 2015 ruling had come in a plea against a Central Information Commission order directing banks to give information about some banks to Agrawal.
One of the petitions claimed that the RBI, instead of giving information under RTI after the 2015 order, issued a disclosure policy on December 30, 2016 to its public information officers asking them not to disclose virtually all kind of information, even the kind ordered by the court.
The contempt plea charged that the top court had clearly asked the RBI to share information relating to individual banks regulated and supervised by it. Agrawal had sought information from the RBI related to fines imposed on banks for violating rules, the list of banks issued show-cause notices and details about any other action taken against erring lenders, if any. #casansaar (Source - PTI, Economic Times)
Category : RBI | Comments : 0 | Hits : 348
The Supreme Court on Friday set aside the rejection of an IRS officer’s candidature for appointment as a member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), ruling that the involvement of the th...
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Friday unveiled a set of liquidity-boosting measures aimed at infusing more than $23 billion (around ₹2 lakh crore) into the banking system, after review...
RBI has issued draft rules to tighten dividend payouts by banks by linking distributions to capital adequacy, asset and profit quality, setting a uniform prudential framework effective from FY27. In t...
Comments