CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003383/10925
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003383
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Parbhati Lal
Rz-514/23, Tugalakabad Ext.,
New Delhi- 110019
Respondent (1): Ms. Asha Gandhi
Public Information Officer & District Social Welfare Officer
Women and Child Development
GNCTD, North-West-I,
NP School for Deaf, Sector-4
Near Vishram Chowk, Rohini, New Delhi.
Respondent (2): Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saxena,
PIO & District Officer North West-II,
Women and Child Development
GNCTD, North-West-II,
Beggar Home Lampur,
Narela, Delhi - 110040
RTI application filed on : 15/05/2010
PIO replied : 16/06/2010
First appeal filed on : Not mentioned.
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 01/12/2010
Information Sought:
The appellant has sought information regarding:
1. what is the time limit for releasing the benefits/dues in case of death of an employee.
2. if the benefits/dues are not paid in time who is responsible for delay, what penalty may be
fixed against him.
3. kindly provide the datewise details of the steps taken by the Superintendent in the case of
Late Sh. Azad Singh, care taker who expired on 06/09/2009.
4. datewise details of the steps taken by the dealing assistant in the case of Late Sh. Azad
Singh .
5. is there any provision for providing interest on the payment/dues which are not paid on
time by the concerned officer.
6. on the above subject, any document is required, kindly provide the letter No. by which the
documents asked by the concerned officers/officials.
7. what is the last limit for releasing such dues.
8. what is the cost fixed by the dept. for releasing the dues in case of the death of an
employee.
Page 1 of 3
9. photocopies of the nomination form filled by Sh. Mohan Singh Meena for GPF, and in case
of his death nomination for gratuity and other dues. Name of the officer who allowed both
the nomination.
10. Mr. Mohan Singh Meena has four buses running in Delhi and Rajasthan. Kindly provide
the registration number of the buses, etc.
Reply of the PIO:
PIO replied to the questions accordingly.
Grounds of First Appeal:
Improper reply given by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
Not mentioned.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
False information given by the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Naveen Sharma representing Mr. Parbhati Lal;
Respondent (1): Mr. Arun Kumar, UDC on behalf of Ms. Asha Gandhi, Public Information Officer &
District Social Welfare Officer North West-I;
Respondent (2):Mr. Sohan Pal Singh, Superintendent on behalf of Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saxena, PIO &
District Officer North West-II;
The Appellant has been given part of the dues after the death of his brother. But the balance
payment has not been provided. No information has been provided as to why the balance payment has not
been provided to him. The Respondent has brought before the Commission evidence that the balance
payment has been requested from PAO-XI, Old Secretariat, Delhi on 12/09/2010. The Commission directs
the PIO/District Social Welfare Office North West-II to transfer the RTI application alongwith a copy of
this order to the PIO, PAO-XI, Old Secretariat, Delhi before 15 January 2011.
The Respondent states that the person responsible for not providing the information to the Appellant was
the earlier Mr. Mohan Singh Meena, Superintendent HNV(A&D).
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The Commission directs the PIO/District Social Welfare Office North West-II to
transfer the RTI application alongwith a copy of this order to the PIO, PAO-XI, Old
Secretariat, Delhi before 15 January 2011.
The Commission directs PIO, PAO-XI to send the information about the progress of
the payment to the Appellant before 15 February 2011 in the following format:
Date on which Name and designation Action taken Date on which forwarded to Complaint of Next officer/office. received The officer receiving it.
*there will be as many rows as the number of officers who handled the complaint.
Page 2 of 3
Attested photocopies of all letters and notings will be provided.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
deemed PIO Mr. Mohan Singh Meena, Superintendent HNV(A&D) within 30 days as required by
the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the deemed PIO is guilty of not furnishing
information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as
per the requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is
being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty
should not be levied on him.
Mr. Mohan Singh Meena, Superintendent HNV(A&D). will present himself before the Commission at the
above address on 31 January 2011 at 11.00am alongwith his written submissions showing cause why
penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of
having given the information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him.
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
13 January 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (ST)
CC:
To,
Mr. Mohan Singh Meena, Superintendent HNV(A&D) through Mr. Rajiv Kumar Saxena,
PIO & District Officer North West-II;
Page 3 of 3