CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/002135/9842Adjunct
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,
Employees' Provident Fund Organization,
Regional Office Jaipur,
Nidhi Bhawan, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur- 302005,
(2) Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav,
CPIO & RPFC- II,
Employees' Provident Fund Organization,
Regional Office: Delhi (North),
Bhavisya Nidhi Bhawan,
Plot No. 28, Wazirpur Industrial Area,
Delhi- 110052
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 held on October 20, 2010:
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 dated October 20, 2010:
The appeal was 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.”
Relevant facts emerging at the show cause hearing held on December 9, 2010:
The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. S. P. Puri, AO on behalf of Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav, CPIO & RPFC- II.
Mr. S. P. Puri stated that neither the RTI application dated 08/03/2010 nor the Commission’s hearing
notice was ever received at the office of EPFO (Delhi: North). Further, copy of the Commission’s order
dated 20/10/2010 was received from the office of EPFO (Delhi: South) only on 11/11/2010. Therefore,
information could not be provided to the Appellant within the prescribed time limit. The Commission is
satisfied with the submissions of Mr. Puri and finds the same as reasonable. Therefore, show cause
proceeding against Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav, CPIO & RPFC- II is hereby dropped.
Pursuant to the Commission’s order dated 20/10/2010, information was provided to the Appellant by the
CPIO & RPFC- II, EPFO (Delhi: North) vide letter dated 29/11/2010. The Commission noted that
incomplete information was provided in relation to query 1 and as regards query 4, it was stated that the
information did not pertain to the office of EPFO (Delhi: North). Mr. Puri stated that the information in
relation to queries 1 and 4 pertained to the office of the CPIO, EPFO (Jaipur).
The Commission observed that information only on queries 2 and 3 of the RTI application dated
08/03/2010 has provided till date. Moreover, it is not possible to ascertain which officer i.e. CPIO, EPFO
(Delhi: North) or CPIO, EPFO (Jaipur) is responsible for furnishing the information in relation to queries
1 and 4 of the RTI application dated 08/03/2010.
Adjunct Decision:
In view of the aforesaid, the Commission hereby directs the Central Provident Fund Commissioner to
conduct an enquiry to determine which officer i.e. CPIO, EPFO (Delhi: North) or CPIO, EPFO (Jaipur) is
responsible for furnishing the complete information in relation to queries 1 and 4 of the RTI application
dated 08/03/2010 and direct the concerned officer to provide the complete information to the Appellant
before January 15, 2011. The Central Provident Fund Commissioner is further directed to send an
enquiry report to the Commission before January 31, 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 the RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
December 9, 2010
Enclosed: RTI application dated 08/03/2010.
CC: Central Provident Fund Commissioner,
EPFO, Ministry of Labour & Employment,
Head Office,
14, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi- 110066
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj