Central Information Commission
Humayun S vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation on 25 June, 2025
Author: Heeralal Samariya
Bench: Heeralal Samariya
के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/EPFOG/A/2024/113404
Shri HUMAYUN S ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
VERSUS/बनाम
PIO, ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent
Employees Provident Fund Organization
Date of Hearing : 23.06.2025
Date of Decision : 23.06.2025
Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 21.11.2023
PIO replied on : - -
First Appeal filed on : 19.12.2023
First Appellate Order on : 15.01.2024
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 25.04.2024
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 21.11.2023 seeking information on following points:-
1. "Monthly PF Statement of Shaik. Shameulla contact number 95506 36553 Son of Shaik. Masthan Saheb, From Period February 2023 to September 2023
2. work history of Shaik. Shameulla
3. UAN Number of Shaik. Shameulla-contact number 95506 36553 Son of Shaik. Masthan Saheb Grounds for Complaint:
He is working both Government Organization (Grama sachivalayam Andhra pradesh) as digital assistant ID 10990084PDA at Tirmur, vakadu mandal, Gudur Revenue division, Tirupati District. And also as Software Engineer at Onward Technologies www.onwardgroup.com Private job Onward Technologies Working details:
Designation: Software Engineer INBU-DCOR [email protected] Office location as per their data: INCHN_OMR Chennai Address Rayala Techno Park, Page 1 4th floor and 5th floor, 144/7 Rajiv Gandhi Salai (OMR), Kottivakkam, Chennai-600 041 Mumbai Corporate & Registered Office 2nd Floor, Sterling Centre Dr A.B. Road, Worli Mumbai-400018 Request you the true and certified copies of the documents to the address given below through registered post. I also undertake to pay additional fees/charges (if applicable) as prescribed under the RTI Act or Relevant Rules."
Dissatisfied with the non-receipt of information received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 19.12.2023. The FAA vide order dated 15.01.2024 stated as under:-
"I, N.B. Adurkar, RPFC-I/First Appellate Authority after examining the original RTI application, reply given by the CPIO, contents of the Appeal hereby decide that the information sought by the Appellant is of fiduciary nature and hence it is denied correctly by the CPIO. The appeal is accordingly disposed of."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present Respondent: Milind Deulkal, RPFC The CPIO submitted that a reply was given to the Appellant vide letter dated 18.12.2023. It was further submitted that the applicant has sought information about Financial & Personal information ie Member Ledger, Working History and UAN Number of PF member Shaik Shameulla.
EPFO is a statutory body entrusted with the task of maintaining accumulated PF Contribution for each Employee and providing regular interest as per rate decided by Central Board of Trustees and approved by Ministry of Finance, Government of India. Thus, EPFO holds the details of an Employee's Universal Account Number, PF Basic Wages and Service History is in a Fiduciary Capacity. It is private information of an individual similar to the bank account details maintained with a Bank. Divulging of such information may cause security concern with respect to the account and social benefits of the member.
It may be also noted that, disclosure of Information held in a Fiduciary Capacity is governed by Section 8 of RTI Act and upholding large public interest is a since qua non for such disclosers. The Applicant is not related to the Establishment in any way and has no locus standi to receive such sensitive information until a larger public interest is served. The claim that information is being hidden is not backed by any documentary evidence to substantiate the same.
Page 2 Decision:
Upon the perusal of the case records & submissions, the Commission observes that an appropriate reply has been provided by the CPIO. No further action lies.
The Appeal stands disposed off.
Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)