Central Information Commission
Mrs.Raji S Panicker vs Insurance Division on 20 June, 2012
Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi110066
Telefax:01126180532 & 01126107254 websitecic.gov.in
Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/003261
Appellant /Complainant : Smt. Raji S. Panicker, Cochin
(Kerala)
Public Authority : Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.,
NewDelhi
(Sh. Ved Prakash, CPIO, Sh.
V.V.Mohlla, Mgr. & Ms.
Meenakshi Talwar, Chief Mgr.)
Date of Hearing : 20 June 2012
Date of Decision : 20 June 2012
Facts:
1. RTI application dated 3 September 2010 was submitted by the appellant before the CPIO, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, New Delhi to obtain a copy of her marked answer sheets for all subjects of the written examinations held on 19 July 2009 and 2010 July 2010 for promotion to the post of Administrative officer (Scale I). Vide CPIO order dated 18 November 2010, applicant was informed that the matter had been referred to the Insurance Institute and that information would be provided as soon as a response is received.
2. Appellant preferred appeal dated 11 January 2011 before the first appellate authority which was disposed of vide FAA order dated 10 June 2011 vide which the appellant was informed that as per CIC order no. CIC/DS/A/2010/000290 dated 11 October 2010, the insurance Institute had been exempted from providing information and therefore the same would not be provided to her.
3. Appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.
4. Matter was heard today via videoconferencing from Cochin where appellant was present. Respondent appeared in person. Respondent states that as per the existing policy, the Insurance Institute is required to preserve answer sheets for a period of 3 months from the date of declaration of result (reference letter of GIPSA dated 21 September 2010) Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/003261 Decision notice
5. Both parties have been heard, Commission notes that the petitioner has sought information in respect of two examinations, one that was held on 19 July 2009 and the other on 25 July 2010. Therefore the earliest date on which the answer sheets of these two examinations could be destroyed would be October 2009 and October 2010 respectively. Noting that the RTI application is dated 3 September 2010, it would be an acceptable argument that the answer sheets in respect of examination held on 19 July 2009 would in all likelihood have been destroyed prior to the date of the RTI application. However in respect of the second examination which was held on 25 July 2010, the answer sheet of the applicant would have been available in material form with the public authority at the point of receiving the RTI application dated 3 September 2010 and should not have been destroyed due to the pendency of the applicant's request. Therefore the CPIO is provided with four weeks in which to trace out this information and provide the same to the appellant. In case the information pertaining to the examination held on 19 July 2009 is also available with the Insurance Institute, the same will also be provided to the appellant. In case the CPIO has not taken adequate care to preserve the information pertaining to the examination held on 25 July 2010 and has allowed the same to be the destroyed in a routine fashion, then he has erred grievously and has deprived the applicant of the right given to her under the RTI Act. The applicant has been pursuing the matter since September 2010 and has been put to mental stress on account of nonfurnishing of the requested information and must in all fairness be compensated. Therefore in the event that answer sheets pertaining to the examination of 25 July 2010 have been destroyed, the applicant must be compensated by the public authority and this compensation is fixed at Rs. 5000 which amount will be paid to her within two weeks after it is ascertained that the information has been destroyed.
6. Commission also notes that the first appellate authority has relied on Commission's above mentioned order dated 11 October 2010 in denying information to the appellant on the grounds that the insurance Institute of India has been exempted by the Commission from providing information under Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/003261 the RTI Act. This reliance is misplaced as the order categorically states that, "this decision however cannot be quoted as precedence for denying information and each similar case would have to be settled individually."
(Smt. Deepak Sandhu) Information Commissioner (DS) Authenticated true copy:
(T. K. Mohapatra) Dy. Secretary & Dy. Registrar Tel. No. 01126105027 Copy to:
1. Mrs. Raji S. Panicker W/o A. Ajaya Ghosh, 1/837A, Nandanam, Padamugal - Palachuvadu Road ] Kakkanad, Cochin682030 (Kerala)
2. The CPIO Dy. General Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Oriental House, PB No. 7037 A25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi110002
3. The Appellate Authority General Manager Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Oriental House, PB No. 7037 A25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi110002 Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2011/003261