Central Information Commission
Biswanath Parida vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 22 September, 2020
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/LICOI/A/2018/171758
Biswanath Parida ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, Life Insurance Company ... ितवादी /Respondent
Limited, Bhubaneswar.
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 25.09.2018 FA : 18.10.2018 SA : 07.12.2018
CPIO : 10.10.2018 FAO : 23.11.2018 Hearing : 18.09.2020
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Life Insurance Company Limited, Bhubaneswar seeking following information:-
1. "What does regulation 39(l)(a) of LIC staff Regulation 1960 describe ?
2. Does Regulation 39(l)(a) pronounces pecuniary punishment "One increment deferred for one year?"
3. Has the regulation 39(l)(a) been amended after LIC Staff Regulation 1960 coming into force?
4. Does OS manual supersede LIC Staff Regulation 1960?"
2. The CPIO responded on 10.10.2018. The appellant filed the first appeal dated 18.10.2018 which was disposed of by the first appellate authority on 23.11.2018. Thereafter, he filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 and also to direct him to provide the sought for information.
Page 1 of 4Hearing:
3. The appellant, Mr. Biswanath Parida attended the hearing through audio conferencing. Mr. D Nayak, CPIO participated in the hearing representing the respondent through audio conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.
4. The appellant stated that the sought for information should be provided to him.
5. The respondent submitted that the queries raised by the appellant are not covered within the definition of 'information' u/Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005.
He further submitted that the Staff Regulation 1960 and OS Manual are already available in the public domain on the LIC website under the given link. Decision:
6. This Commission observes that the queries seeking answers and explanations from the CPIO with regard to interpretation of the Staff Regulation 1960 and OS Manual are not covered within the definition of 'information' u/Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005. In this regard, the Commission refers to the definition of 'information' u/s Section 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005 which is reproduced below:-
"information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, report, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force."
Furthermore, a reference can also be made to the relevant extract of Section 2 (j) of the RTI Act, 2005 which reads as under:-
"(j) right to information" means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes ........"
In this context, a reference is also made to the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in CBSE and Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay and Ors, 2011 (8) SCC 497,wherein it was held as under:-
35..... "It is also not required to provide 'advice' or 'opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any 'opinion' or 'advice' to an applicant. The reference to 'opinion' or 'advice' in the definition of 'information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in Page 2 of 4 the records of the public authority. Many public authorities have, as a public relation exercise, provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens. But that is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act."
Similarly, the High Court of Bombay in Dr. Celsa Pinto, Ex-Officio Joint Secretary (School Education) v. The Goa State Information Commission on 3 April, 2008 (2008 (110) Bom L R 1238) had held as under:-
"Section 2(f) -Information means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; The definition cannot include within its fold answers to the question why which would be the same thing as asking the reason for a justification for a particular thing. The Public Information Authorities cannot expect to communicate to the citizen the reason why a certain thing was done or not done in the sense of a justification because the citizen makes a requisition about information. Justifications are matter within the domain of adjudicating authorities and cannot properly be classified as information."
The definition cannot include within its fold answers to the question why which would be the same thing as asking the reason for a justification for a particular thing. The Public Information Authorities cannot expect to communicate to the citizen the reason why a certain thing was done or not done in the sense of a justification because the citizen makes a requisition about information. Justifications are matter within the domain of adjudicating authorities and cannot properly be classified as information."
7. In light of the factual matrix of the instant appeal and the aforesaid case- laws, this Commission is of the considered opinion that the CPIO is not obliged to provide clarification to the appellant. Nonetheless, the respondent has made efforts to judiciously dispose of the RTI application vide letter dated 10-10-2018. Hence, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the matter.
8. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Page 3 of 49. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज कु मार गु ा) ा) सूचना आयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक / Date 18.09.2020 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स#ािपत ित) S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा), Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक), (011-26105682) Addresses of the parties:
1. The CPIO, Life Insurance Company Limited, Manager (CRM/CPIO), RTI Cell, Bhubaneswar Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash LIC Building, 1st Floor, Bhubaneswar-751001.
2. Biswanath Parida, Page 4 of 4