CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opp. Ber Sarai Market, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000611/4683Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000611
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Complaint:
Complainant : Mr. Jai Narain
G-316, Nauroji Nagar,
New Delhi
Respondent : Ms. Renu Popli
Public Information Officer & Senior Manager
Delhi Transport Corporation
BBM Complex,
Delhi 110009
RTI application filed on : 02/06/2008
Commission Notice issued on : 08/06/2009
First Reply of PIO : 18/06/2008
Second Reply of PIO : 10/07/2009
Complaint received on : 14/05/2009
Information sought:
Complainant had sought following information:-
1. Number of applications for grant of pension from EPFO, including that of Shri Mahender
Kumar, Badge No. 5560, pending in the HQs or in Depots for more than one month as on 21 st
April, 2008.
2. Details in respect of each application describing name of the ex-employee, pending since when
and reason thereof.
3. Whether the ex-employee concerned have been informed about his pending application to
rectify the discrepancies, if any? If not, the reason thereof.
4. Names, designation and phone numbers of the persons responsible for disposal of such
applications and the details of action taken by them on each of the application pending.
5. The expected date of completion of needful action on behalf of DTC and sending the same back
to the applicants for onward.
Reply of PIO:
1. In this connection, it is stated that the corporate office disposes of the application/10D forms of
EPS-95 received from the units approximately within 15 days. However as on date no
application is pending with the corporate office for more than fifteen days.
2. The application of Sh. Mahender Kumar is pending since 28/03/2008. The reason is that the
employee has not given his bank account No. as per the list of EPFO. Moreover his son Sh.
Subhash was handed over a list of bank so that he can open account in the bank and intimate the
office about the action so that further action on his application.
3. Yes, the ex-employee has been informed about the discrepancies.
Page 1 of 3
4. As per procedure application/10 D form has to be submitted by the concerned employee at his
depot/unit. The same form has to be sent to corporate office for attestation and after that it is
returned to concerned unit for onward submission to RPFC to grant pension to the subscriber by
RPFC.
5. There is no time limit for the needful action and all it depends upon the completion of all the
formalities.
Grounds for Complaint:
Not furnishing the information by PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Complainant: Mr. Jai Narain
Respondent: Ms. Renu Popli, PIO
The RTI application primarily sought information about delay in getting Completion of Pension. Most
public authorities appear to be very callous towards there retiring employees and people who have
served these organizations for years are made to run from pillar to post like beggars to get their dues.
Whereas society proclaims special benefits for senior citizens on the one hand on the other the
legitimate dues of senior citizens and their families are neglected rampantly. The Commission directs
the PIO to ensure that in compliance of Section 4 names of those who apply for Pensions and Provident
Funds are put up on the website as soon as the application received within a week. The action taken on
these must also be displayed giving dates. If any applications are pending for over 30 days this should
be mentioned giving reasons. The PIO will ensure that this direction is complied with before 30
September 2009. These details shall be updated every week and the date of updation will be mentioned
on the website. A compliance report will be send to the Commission and the Complainant before 5
October 2009.
Decision dated 03/09/2009:
The Complaint was allowed.
The PIO was directed to display the information on the website in requirement of Section 4 as
described above.
Facts leading to the show cause hearing on 13/07/2010
The Commission had looked at the website of the Department and it did not appear that the information
available on the website of Delhi Transport Corporation had been updated. Therefore, the PIO was
directed to ensure that the information as directed in the Commission’s order was updated before 30
June 2010.
A copy of action taken report giving the url address where the information had been updated was to be
emailed to rtimonitoring@gmail.com by 05/07/2010.
The Commission had decided to schedule a hearing on 13/07/2010 at 12.15 p.m. The PIO was directed
to appear before the Commission at the above mentioned address on 13/07/2010 at 12.15 p.m.
If the PIO had sought assistance from any other officer in his department to comply with the
Commission’s order or had issued any directions in this matter, he was directed to bring proof of the
same to the Commission along with his written submissions and he was directed to inform such persons
of the hearing and direct them to appear before the Commission with him.
Page 2 of 3
Relevant Facts emerging during the hearing held on 13/07/2010:
The following were present
Respondents: Ms. Renu Popli, Public Information Officer & Senior Manager
The PIO states that the information has not been updated since the server was not working
because of the cable fault due to Metro digging. The PIO has ensured that the information is now
updated and she guarantees that the updation would be done every month before 10th of the subsequent
month. The PIO is warned that if the updation is not done by 10th of every month the Commission
would be constrained to use the punitive measures.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this order will be provided free cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Ac.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
13 July 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
Page 3 of 3