Whether it is justified to close the grievance on flimsy ground instead of seeking more feedback.

rievance Status

Print || Logout
Status as on 02 Dec 2016

Registration Number : PRSEC/E/2016/12931
Name Of Complainant : Nagendra Bahadur Singh
Date of Receipt : 01 Oct 2016
Received by : President’s Secretariat
Forwarded to : FI Section Deptt. of Financial Services
Contact Address : Ministry of Finance, Deptt. of Financial Services
Jeevan Deep Building, 3rd Floor, Sansad Marg
New Delhi110001
Contact Number : 01123748771
Grievance Description : Your applicant wants to ask a simple question ,whether tower was the part of agreement if not then why installation was made and before installation approval of landlord was taken on a plane paper by assuring Rs.500 .00 increment in the rent of house . It is unfortunate that concerned bank staffs never kept their promise. 30 September 2016 19:32 With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows. 1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that please take a glance of action detail of submitted online application registered on public grievance portal as Registration obvious from attached documents with this representation. The matter was take up with CO: Allahabad, they recommended to drop the matter since the complaint is not based on facts. Bank has never admitted to give rent for the RF tower installed at the roof, so Bank has never paid any rent for this and there is no rent due for RF tower. CO has also submitted that the RF tower has been removed from the roof since March 2016. The lease of the branch premises is executed on 01.03.2007 for 5+5 years. There is no rental dues. As such the matter is closed at ours. 2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that why concerned staffs of government of India is not looking into the facts that if the bank staffs can take rental from those who installed the tower by taking permission additionally from the landlord by assuring Rs. 500.00 increase in the lump some amount as rental per month ,then how the Land lord can be deprived from its share. 3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whether the reply of concerned bank staffs is not cryptic in regard to following submissions under the aforesaid grievance. This is humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that It can never be justified to overlook the rights of citizenry by delivering services in arbitrary manner by floating all set up norms. This is sheer mismanagement which is encouraging wrongdoers to reap benefit of loopholes in system and depriving poor citizens from right to justice. Therefore it is need of hour to take concrete steps in order to curb grown anarchy in the system. For this your applicant shall ever pray you Hon’ble Sir. Yours sincerely Nagendra Bahadur Singh
Current Status : CASE CLOSED
Date of Action : 18 Nov 2016
Details : Insufficient Complaint details to take up the matter for examination as the petitioner has not given the name of the bank and branch. So we may close the case.

2 comments on Whether it is justified to close the grievance on flimsy ground instead of seeking more feedback.

  1. Your applicant wants to ask a simple question ,whether tower was the part of agreement if not then why installation was made and before installation approval of landlord was taken on a plane paper by assuring Rs.500 .00 increment in the rent of house .

  2. Insufficient Complaint details to take up the matter for examination as the petitioner has not given the name of the bank and branch. So we may close the case. When sufficient hurdle will be made in taking the grievance by PG Portal ,then such mistakes are quite common.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: