CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/002135/9842
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002135
Appellant : Mr Arvind Kumar
Block Al, House No126,
Sushant Lok Phase II, (Sector 55)
Gurgaon, Haryana
Respondent (1) : Mr. Vikas Sodai
PIO & Regional PF Commissioner,
Employee Provident Fund Organization
Regional Office Jaipur
Nidhi Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur- 302005,
(2) PIO & RPFC-I
Employee Provident Fund Organization
6th-9th Floor, Bhavisya Nidhi Bhawan,
28, Wazirpur Industrial Area,
Wazirpur, Delhi
RTI application filed on : 08/03/2010
PIO replied : 08/04/2010
First Appeal filed on : 19/04/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 17/05/2010
Second Appeal Received on : 27/07/2010
Information sought:
1. Whether the P.F. Accumulation of Appellant's old P. F. RJ/8963/245 is being credited or not to
his New (present) PF. A/c NO. DL/28542/202, if not yet credited then provide the detail:
i) Reason of any pendency
ii) Where Appellant's-said accumulation lying on
iii) And also specify' how many more days require for giving aforesaid credit. .
iv) Who will bear the cost of interest on said accumulation up 10 till date (the Appellant had
mentioned reference of various documents/letters in the RTI application through point 1(a) and
1(b).
2. Provide certified true copy of Annexure K issued by EPF office, Jaipur vide letter dated
30/10/2007.
3. What is the procedure to escalate/appeal against the said matter, if credit is not given to
Appellant's new P.F. Account.
4 What action has been taken by the Respondent concerned office on receipt of Appellant's request
vide letter dated 12/12/2007.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Information not provided except point no.2.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
No order passed.
(Giving address of concerned office, FAA advised the Appellant to approach Regional Office, Delhi for
query no. 1, 3, and 4)
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Information not provided except point no.2.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. Vikas Sodai, PIO & Regional PF Commissioner;
The respondent states that the appellant has originally worked at Jaipur and hence his PF Account
was with RPFC Jaipur. In 2007 he sought the transfer of the amount to Delhi where he presumably started
working. From his queries it is evident that the credit of the Jaipur PF Amount ha snot been given in his
Delhi PF Account. He therefore filed the RTI application with PIO Delhi PF Office. Only query-2 could
be answered by PIO Jaipur. This has been done by the PIO at Jaipur and it appears that the PIO in Delhi
has not provided the information of the balance queries.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO RPFC-I at Wazirpur Office, Delhi is directed to provide the information on
queries sought by the appellant before 10 November 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO
RPFC-I at Wazirpur Office, Delhi within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the 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.
PIO RPFC-I at Wazirpur Office, Delhi will present himself before the Commission at the above address
on 09 December 2010 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 bring the information sent to
the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent 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
20 October 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj