CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002382/10257
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002382
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : CH. Srinivasa Rao
C/o. Y. Sanjeeva,
House No. 3-10-257/8
Chandra Nagar, Nizamabad 503001
Respondent : Mr. V. R. Kamalcha
Central Public Information Officer & RPFC-II
Employees Provident Fund Organization
Regional Office, 341,
Bhavishya Nidhi Bahwan,
Bandra (E), Mumbai - 400051
RTI application filed on : 10/12/2009
PIO replied : 15/03/2010
First appeal filed on : 05/04/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 23/07/2010
Second Appeal received on : 26/08/2010
Information sought:
1. Total Sanctioned strength (Examination quota & Seniority quota) in Maharashtra Region cadre
wise i.e. LDC to E.O/AO from 01.04.1995 to 30.11.2009.
2. Total available strength (Examination quota & Seniority quota) in Maharashtra Region cadre wise
i.e., LDC to E.O/AQ from 01.04.1995 to 30.11.2009.
3. How many persons recruited in the cadre of LOC from 1995 onwards.
4. What is the ratio of LDC and UDC cadre.
5. How many persons promoted from LDC to UDC on seniority quota and Examination Quota from
01.04.1995 to 31.10.2005.
6. How many UDC posts filled with adhoc quota for non-available candidates of examination quota
from 1.4.1995 to 30.11.2009? If so, how many officials are reverted to LDC cadre for giving
promotion to examination passed officials from 1.4.1995 to 31.10.2005 and also please mention
the last name of LDC and date of his joining who promoted to UDC on adhoc basis before
14.112005.
7. How many persons are regularized in UDC cadre from 1.4.1995 onwards in examination quota
and seniority quota, details please mention separately.
8. How many adhoc promoted persons are regularized in UDC cadre from 1.4.1995 onwards for not
available of examination quota officials.
9. What is the benefit given to the successful candidates of UDC examination in 2003 while
converting 1 LDC/UDC into SSA cadre.
10. Is there any rule to promote on adhoc basis to UDC Post after completion of 4 years regular
service in LOC cadre. If so, how many LDC’s promoted to Adhoc (UDC) from 1.4.1995 to
14.11.2005.
Page 1 of 3
Reply of the Public Information Officer
1. Total Sanctioned Strength (Examination quota and Seniority Quota) in Maharashtra Region
Year LDC UDC SSA SS EO/AO
31.03.1996 668 1306 295 244
31.03.1997 668 1353 295 244
31.03.1998 668 1353 295 244
31.03.1999 668 1494 300 253
31.03.2000 601 1464 300 273
31.03.2001 601 1464 300 273
31.03.2002 657 1464 300 273
31.03.2003 657 1432 250 292 268
31.03.2004 657 250 292 272
31.03.2005 657 250 327 272
31.03.2006 95 2095 327 272
31.03.2007 95 2095 327 272
31.03.2008 95 2095 327 272
31.03.2009 95 2262 443 351
30.11.2009 95 2262 443 351
3. 785 LDC’s are recruited from 1995 onwards.
4. UDC cadre is not in existence in EPFO. Hence, ratio of LDC to UDC cannot be provided.
5. 617 LDC’s have been promoted to the post of UDC from 01/04/1995 to 31.10.2005.
7. 617 LDC’s have been regularized to the post of UDC from 01/04/1995 to 31.10.2005.
The date relating to the information required on other Points (viz 2,6,8,9&10) are not compiled
and are not readily available. The compilation of such data need diversion of manpower and will take
sometime. In case the applicant needs these information, he may be required to deposit a sum of Rs.
10,000/- being the cost for deployment of two officials who will have to work for nearly one week.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The CPIO has taken 77 days to dispose that to partly my application. The CPIO has stated the
information under point no. 2,6,8,9,10 are not readily available. Also he was demanded me to remit Rs.
10,000/- being the cost for deployment of 2 officials who will have work for nearly one week.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
“CPIO has furnished the information correctly as per the request. The Appellant had never asked
for the information under each category separately. Further, there is no system of sanctioning posts under
different categories within a cadre. Hence, the information provided to him is according to the request
made by him and any request for further information in the matter cannot be entertained through an
appeal. With regard to the appellant’s demand for information at point No.2,6,8,9 & 10 free of cost, the
CPIO has already clarified that such information are not compiled as in the forms required by the
appellant. This information for such a long period need to be compiled and cannot in the normal course of
office work be done without diverting the man power to compile such information for the appellant.
Therefore, the demand for payment action of cost for such action is justified. Appellant, may, therefore,
pay the cost involved, in case he is interested to obtain the information so that the office can deploy
people to compile the information.”
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The FAA also insisted for payment of Rs. 10,000/- towards the cost of deployment of the official
concerned for compilation of the data, vide letter dt. 22/07/2010 after 108 days. The CPIO has insisted the
payment against the above rule.
Page 2 of 3
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: CH. Srinivasa Rao on video conference from NIC-Nizamabad Studio;
Respondent: Mr. V. R. Kamalcha, CPIO & RPFC-II on video conference from NIC-Mumbai Studio;
The PIO has provided certain information and for query-2, 6, 8, 9 & 10 the PIO has claimed that it
would divert the resources of the Public Authority disproportionately. Unfortunately the PIO has made an
illegal demand for Rs.10000/- as additional fee to collate this information. PIOs must remember that
Government officer cannot be diverted from their main function to collate information for Appellants over
some days for a RTI Application. There is no provision in the rules for charging any money on account of
man power for collating information. However, the Act in Section 7(9) states that the PIO may not give
information in the format sought by the Appellant if it would disproportionately divert the resources of the
Public Authority. Hence, in instances where the information format sought by the Appellant would
disproportionately divert the resource of the Public Authority in collating such information the PIO should
offer a photocopy of all the papers in which the information is available and/or an inspection of the
relevant records to the Appellant. However, this must be done well within the 30 day period. In the instant
case the PIO failed to do this. Hence the PIO is now directed to provide the information on queries 2, 6, 8,
9 & 10 free of cost to the Appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information on queries 2, 6, 8, 9 & 10 to the
Appellant before 01 January 2011.
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 of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
01 December 2010
(For any further correspondence on this matter, please mention the file number quoted above.) (KJ)
Page 3 of 3