Central Information Commission, New Delhi
File No.CIC/WB/A/2010/000376 & 377SM
Right to Information Act2005Under Section (19)
Date of hearing : 8 August 2011
Date of decision : 8 August 2011
Name of the Appellant : Shri Pratap Singh Sekhawat
PO Luniawas, Via Badhal,
Distt - Jaipur, Rajasthan - 303 602.
Name of the Public Authority : CPIO, Cabinet Secretariat,
(EAII Section), Bikaner House (Annexe),
Shahjahan Road, New Delhi - 110 011.
The Appellant was present in person.
On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:
(i) Smt. Sumati Kumar, Director & CPIO,
(ii) Shri Pradeep Singh, Joint Deputy Director,
(iii) Shri C.L. Verma, Assistant Director
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Satyananda Mishra
2. Both the parties were present during the hearing. We heard their submissions.
3. In two separate RTI applications, the Appellant had sought some information
regarding the qualifying service for calculating his pension. The CPIO, in both the
cases, had informed him that she was not obliged to provide any information since
under section 24 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act the public authority concerned
CIC/WB/A/2010/000376 & 377SM
was included in the Second Schedule of that Act. The Appellate Authority had also
endorsed this decision.
4. During the hearing, the Appellant submitted that at the time of his retirement,
the competent authority had decided his pension after reckoning his period of service
for calculating the pension; but later, the period was reduced and his pension was
revised. He wanted to know the basis for taking such a decision. He further submitted
that the reduction in his pension had adversely affected his livelihood options and, to
that extent, it was a clear act of violation of his human rights.
5. We tend to agree with the submissions of the Appellant. Ordinarily, the public
authority in this case, being included in the second schedule to the Right to Information
(RTI) Act, is not required to disclose any information. However, in the particular
circumstances of this case, we think that the desired information should be provided in
terms of the proviso to Section 24(1) of the Right to Information Act. Therefore, we
direct the CPIO to invite the Appellant on any mutually convenient date within 15
working days of receiving this order and to show him the relevant records and files in
which the competent authority had decided on the qualifying service for computing his
pension and the subsequent decision to revise it. If after inspecting the records and
files, the Appellant chooses to get the photocopies of some of those documents and
records, the CPIO shall provide the same to him free of charge.
6. Both the appeals are disposed of accordingly
7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties.
(Satyananda Mishra)
Chief Information Commissioner
CIC/WB/A/2010/000376 & 377SM
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against
application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this
Commission.
(Vijay Bhalla)
Deputy Registrar
CIC/WB/A/2010/000376 & 377SM