The Times of India on August 4, 2013, carried a news item "Millions of notes not printed in mints reaching RBI vaults". The news report was based on information elicited through the Right to Information Act from Currency Note Printing Presses and the Reserve Bank of India on the notes printed and the notes received/supplied from the Presses, respectively, from 1999-2000 to 2010-11.

There are several discrepancies in the data published with the article that have resulted in incorrect conclusions by the reporter.

The newspaper has arrived at the conclusion that notes not printed in mints are reaching RBI based on the data given in Table I which was published along side the article.

 

In this table,

1. In column 4, supply figures of Bharatiya Reserve Bank Note Mudran Private Limited (BRBNMPL) – one of the printing presses - have wrongly been shown as production figures.

2. The figure in column 6 (notes supplied to RBI) showing 598 million pieces of ` 1000 notes in 2006-07 is incorrect. The correct figure is 589 million pieces (RBI Annual Report 2006-07).

3. For the year 2010-11, the report has used the Reserve Bank and BRBNMPL figures for 12 months (April- March) whereas Security Printing & Minting Corporation of India Ltd. (SPMCIL) figures are for nine months (April –December).

4. Changes in the floating stock held at the Presses.

Also, a point to note is that like in any other production process, in printing of currency notes also, there is both, stock and flow of banknotes produced; and like in any other production line, in banknote printing process too there are some quantities of banknotes that flow across the years.

When all these factors are considered, the alleged differences get reconciled.

While regretting the error on its part in its edition of August 6, 2013, The Times of India raised another question on the integrity of BRBNMPL's data to the RTI applicant, pointing out discrepancies between the numbers provided in response to two similar queries as shown in Table II below:

However, the question on BRBNMPL’s data integrity raised on the basis of Table II is also incorrect. According to BRBNMPL:

1. The details of data indicated in the table pertaining to the two dates were against two different queries.

2. The reply provided in November 2011 was for the query “Give details of ` 1000 and ` 500 printed in each year from the date of printing of ` 1000 and ` 500 started.” Accordingly, BRBNMPL provided data pertaining to notes printed in their presses.

3. The reply provided in December 2011 was for the query, “How many Indian Currency notes have printed by BRBNMPL as per the order of Reserve Bank of India from the year 1947 to December 2010.” Accordingly, BRBNMPL provided data pertaining to notes supplied to RBI as per the Reserve Bank’s indent.

Alpana Killawala
Principal Chief General Manager
Department of Communication
Reserve Bank of India
Central Office
Shahid Bhagat Singh Road
Mumbai 400 001
India