Central Information Commission
Girdhari Lal Ranwan Fwd By Sic Jaipur vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 30 September, 2016
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
website-cic.gov.in
Appeal No. CIC/MP/C/2015/000240
Complainant : Shri Girdharilal Ranwa, Sikar
Public Authority : Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jaipur
Date of Hearing : September 19, 2016
Date of Decision : September 19, 2016
Present:
Complainant : Not present.
Respondent : Shri B.D. Yadav, Manager (CRM) & CPIO and Shri R.K.
Mishra, AO - through VC
RTI application : 07.02.2015
CPIO's reply : --
First appeal : 09.03.2015
FAA's order : --
Complaint : 25.04.2015
ORDER
1. Shri Girdharilal Ranwa, the complainant, through his RTI application, sought information about the gratuity that was to be paid to him mentioning that he had worked as an agent for 21 years.
2. The CPIO does not appear to have replied to the complainant. Therefore, the complainant approached the first appellate authority who also did not respond to him. Hence, the complainant addressed his complaint to the Commission reiterating the non provision of information regarding his gratuity and asking for clarifications in the matter. However, from the record made available by the respondents, it is seen that the CPIO had replied to the complainant vide his letter dated 12.3.2015 intimating him that the documents relating to his gratuity had been received in the divisional office-I, Jaipur on 11.3.2015 and requisite action was being taken for payment. The first appellate authority had also duly dealt with his appeal and intimated vide his decision dated 25.3.2015 that the CPIO had given a response to him on 12.3.2015 and his appeal was received on 14.3.2015 and therefore it does not fall in the category of appeal. He, however, informed the complainant that the branch office had sanctioned an amount of Rs. 4526/- vide cheque no. 046236 dated 23.3.2015 as gratuity to him.
3. The matter was heard by the Commission. The complainant was not present in spite of a notice of hearing having been sent to him. The respondents stated that the complainant had sought information about the payment of gratuity and they had duly sanctioned the payment through cheque dated 23.3.2015 of an amount of Rs. 4,526/- and the complainant had taken the payment on 24.3.2015. The Commission finds that while as per the respondents' record, the complainant had taken payment on 24.3.2015, but he had made a complaint to the Rajasthan State Information Commission on 25.4.2015. The complainant was not present, therefore, the reason for his having made the complaint to Rajasthan State Information Commission, who had forwarded his complaint to CIC, was not clear.
4. The Commission, however, finds that the complaint does not survive as the complainant has, as reiterated by the respondents during the hearing, accepted the payment. The complainant has not, even after the issue of notice for haring from this Commission, given any reason for his dissatisfaction. The Commission, therefore, closes the complaint.
(Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(T.K. Mohapatra) Dy Secy & Dy Registrar Tele No. 011-26105027 Copy to :
The Central Public Information Officer Life Insurance Corporation of India Divisional Office-I, Jeevan Prakash Bhawani Singh Marg Jaipur-302005 Shri Girdharilal Ranwa S/o Shri Panna Lal Jat Deeppura Char...
Tehsil Ghond Distt Sikar (Rajasthan)