CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001110/13788
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001110
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Nanak Chand Yadav
Delhi Coop. Housing Finance Corpn. Ltd.
3/6, Siri Fort Instl. Area, August Kranti Marg,
New Delhi – 110049.
Respondent : PIO & RPFC-II,
Employees Provident Fund Organization
Behind ACP office, Sector-23,
Dwarka, New Delhi - 110075.
RTI application filed on : 08/12/2010
PIO replied : 09/02/2011
First appeal filed on : 18/02/2011
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned.
Second Appeal received on : 02/04/2011
Information sought by the appellant:
This is to bring to your kind notice that I had applied for Advance from the fund and in response to it, I
was asked to submit the required documents as per your letter dated 13.08.2010. Accordingly, desired
information / documents were also submitted to your office vide my letter dated 08.10.2010 which was
also acknowledged by your office. It is regretted to inform you that even after completing all the required
formalities and lapse of more than 5 months, I have not been given any advance from my own find. For
your convenience, a copy of the letter dated 13.08.10 along with the letter duly acknowledged in your
office are enclosed, herewith.
In view of the above, the appellant request you to provide information in this regard under Right to
information Act, 2005.
PIO Reply:
According to PIO reply, “Your claim for advance in FBI was received in this office on 16/11/2010 which
was returned on 04/01/2011 vides this office letter no. Gr.10/DL/15339/01/1385-86 due to difference
in specimen signature of the authorized signatory and the Asstt. was advised to submit fresh specimen
signature duly attested by the employer”.
Grounds of the First Appeal:
As the PIO has failed to supply the requisite information within stipulated time as per the provisions of the
RTI Act, 2005, therefore, by aggrieving of the same, I am constrained to file the First Appeal before your
honour.
Order of the FAA:
FAA Order not mentioned.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Due to non-supply of the information by the PIO within the stipulated time, I filed the 1 st Appeal with the
First Appellate Authority, RPFC side application dated 18/02/2011.
Neither the Appellate Authority has yet given any opportunity for hearing nor supplied the requisite
information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Nanak Chand Yadav
Respondent: Absent;
The Appellant has been provided the information by the PIO on 09/02/2011 that this application
for advance which had been received on 16/11/2010 had been returned on 04/01/2011 due to difference in
signatures of authorized signatories.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information available on the records has been provided.
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
02 August 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (TG)