Central Information Commission
Prakash Kumar Singhai vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. on 2 August, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Baba Gang Nath Marg, Munirka,
New Delhi-110067
CIC/SECFL/A/2017/100227
CIC/SECFL/A/2017/105213
Date of Hearing : 13.06.2018
Date of Decision : 13.07.2018
Appellant/Complainant : Prakash Kumar Singhai
Respondent : PIO/Senior Manager/Johila Area,
South Eastern Coalfields Limited
Information Commissioner : Shri Yashovardhan Azad
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 16.05.2016 & 23.04.2016
CPIO replied on : 19.07.2016 & 18.05.2016
First Appeal filed on : 05.07.2016 & 09.06.2016
First Appellate Order on : - - & 22.07.2016
2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 02.01.2017
CIC/SECFL/A/2017/100227
Information soughtand background of the case:
Vide RTI application dated 16.05.2016, the appellant sought information as under:-
1. Coal Mines Provident Fund (CMPF) contribution/deduction from salary and other earnings year wise as per statutory CMPF statement (Form Y/ Form V.V).
2. Copies of form 16, certificate issued by finance dept. of Area, under section 203 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for the Tax deducted at source from and other particulars year wise for the year the appellant was worked in Johila Area, SECL.
3. He sought information for the period from 1968 to 1981 and from June 1990 to July 1992 year wise.
CPIO vide letter dated 19.07.2016 provided two pages of information to the appellant received from concerned department. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed first appeal dated 05.07.2016. Feeling aggrieved with no response received from the FAA, the appellant approached the Commission.
CIC/SECFL/A/2017/105213 Information sought and background of the case:
Vide RTI application dated 23.04.2016, the appellant sought information as under:-
1. CMPF contribution/deduction from salary and other earnings year wise as per statutory CMPF statement (Form Y/ Form V.V).
2. Copies of form 16, certificate issued by Finance Dept. of Area, under section 203 of the Income Tax Act 1961 for the Tax deducted at source from income chargeable under the head "Salaries" and other particulars year wise for the year the appellant worked in J & K Area.
3. He sought information for the period from 1981 to 1990 and 1995 to 1996 and 1996 to 1997 year wise.
CPIO vide letter dated 18.05.2016 provided 5 pages information to the appellant, received from the concerned department. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed first appeal dated 09.06.2016. FAA vide order dated 27.08.2016, upheld the reply of PIO. Feeling aggrieved as dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Commission.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
Both the parties are present and heard. The appellant submits to have sought his financial statements viz. tax deducted by employer and CMPF deduction made from the respondent authority. He states to be aggrieved as incomplete information was furnished by respective PIOs. Per contra, the respondents submit that the appellant has desired to obtain copies of very old financial statements dating back to year 1968. They submit that since the appellant had worked in various areas, the RTI applications were transferred to various units of SECL. It is seen from the submission filed on record by the respondents that SECL units at Jamuna Kotma, Umariya, Nowrozabad have furnished information as available on record. The delay in replying to the RTI application is attributed to the transfer of RTI and time taken to search old manual records which are stated to be in a dilapidated state.
However, the appellant who states to have superannuated in 2005 submits to have lost his personal records of deductions made from 1968 to 1981 which necessitated the present RTI applications. Upon query, he submits that he suspects that certain wrongful deductions were made by the employer SECL and he required the information sought to take corrective action.
Decision:
After hearing the parties, the Commission finds that no further action is warranted in the present appeals. Information dating back to year 1968 has been sought in year 2016. Admittedly, the relationship of employer (respondent authority) and employee (appellant) came to an end in year 2005 with superannuation of appellant. Such belated request in raking up dormant claims of is nothing but abuse of RTI. The Commission concludes that the RTI applications have been dealt with adequately. The appeals are dismissed.
(Yashovardhan Azad) Information Commissioner 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.
(R.P. Grover) Designated Officer