RBI has given 2 arguments in front of Chief Information Commissioner
1. The provisions of Section 45-E of the RBI Act, 1934 which prohibits disclosure of credit information.
On December 16, 2015 the apex court had clearly rejected these arguments
of the RBI, in a matter filed by another RTI applicant, and ordered
disclosure of defaulters’ list, upholding a Central Information
Commission (CIC) order.
2. RBI also said the Supreme Court is hearing a matter in which reports
have been sought in a sealed envelop and hence any decision should be
avoided.
A two-member CIC bench gave reprieve to the RBI as it agreed to not pass
any order till the pending matter, where disclosure of defaulters
having dues of over Rs 500 crore towards the banks, was decided by the
apex court.
Details of 2015 Supreme Court Decision:
In 2015, the apex court had stated that the RBI is supposed to uphold
public interest and not the interest of individual banks. The RBI is
clearly not in any fiduciary relationship with any bank, it had said.
“The RBI has a statutory duty to uphold the interest of the public at
large, the depositors, the country’s economy and the banking sector,”
it had said while directing the RBI to disclose the list of defaulters.
The court had said that the RBI is duty bound to comply with the
provisions of the RTI Act.
“The baseless and unsubstantiated argument of the RBI that the
disclosure would hurt the economic interest of the country is totally
misconceived,” the court had said.
The apex court had said that the facts reveal that banks were trying
to cover up their underhand actions, they are even more liable to be
subjected to public scrutiny. It had passed the order of disclosure
after hearing the arguments of the RBI which had sought refuge under the
Section 45E of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 which says
disclosure of any information relating to credit information submitted
by banking company is confidential.
It had said the RTI Act, 2005 is a general provision which cannot
override specific provisions relating to confidentiality in earlier
legislation in accordance with the principle that where there are
general words in a later statute it cannot be held that the earlier
statutes are repealed altered or discarded.
Rejecting these arguments, the apex court had ordered the disclosure
of information relating to loan default and other such details sought by
various applicants. Some of these arguments, rejected by the Supreme
Court, were put by the RBI before the CIC during the hearing of
Agrawal’s case.
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/rbi-refuses-to-disclose-list-of-loan-defaulters/
No comments:
Post a Comment