Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mranant Meghji vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd. on 15 April, 2014

                   Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New 
                                Delhi­110066
                             website­cic.gov.in

                  Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2013/000847/MP
 
Appellant                                  :      Shri Anant Meghji 
Nandu, Mumbai
Public Authority               :     NIACL, Mumbai

Date of Hearing                :     15 April 2014 
Date of Decision               :     15 April 2014  

  Facts:­ 

1.   The   appellant,   Shri   Anant   Meghji   Nandu,   submitted   RTI 
application   dated   25   October   2012   before   the   Central   Public 
Information   Officer   (CPIO),   New   India   Assurance   Co.   Ltd., 
Mumbai,   seeking   information   regarding   the   total   charges 
considered and payable to TPA by The New India Assurance Co. 
as per agreement, action against the TPA for failure to issue 
material   like   guide   book,   ID   Card   to   the   insured   and   the 
number   of   policy   holders   (Senior   Citizens)   who   opted   for 
remigration from new   product mediclaim policy (2007) to the 
earlier one  through a total of 5 points.
2.    Vide letter dated 12 November 2012, CPIO acknowledged the 
receipt of the RTI application and informed the appellant that 
they   had   taken   the   matter   with   the   department   concerned   and 
since the information had been asked in specific format and in 
detail, it would take more time, but no information had been 
provided   afterwards.   The   appellant   preferred   appeal   dated   4 
January   2013   to   the   first   appellate   authority   (FAA).   Vide 
order dated 17 January 2013, FAA held that CPIO had responded 
vide letter dated  12.11.2012 & 18.12.2012.  Vide letter  dated 
18.12.2012,   the   CPIO   did   not   respond   to   all   points   of   RTI 
application,     the   matter   was   remanded   back   to   the   CPIO   for 
fresh disposal with the direction that the CPIO should furnish 
the said information within 2 weeks.
3.    Dissatisfied with the response of the public authority, 
the appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.  
4.   The   matter   was   heard   today   via   videoconferencing.   The 
appellant,  Shri Anant Nandu, and the respondents, Shri Ranjit 

Gangadharan, Dy. GM/FAA   and Shri Kiran Wanpal, CPIO,     made  submissions from Mumbai. 

5.     The appellant submitted that he had sought information  regarding action against the TPA for failure to issue material  like   guide   book,   ID   Card   to   the   insured   and   the   number   of  policy   holders   (Senior   Citizens)   who   opted   for   remigration  from new  product mediclaim policy (2007) to the earlier one.  The   appellant   submitted   that   initially   he   had   not   been  provided any reply by the CPIO in spite of the fact that the  said CPIO asked for some more time to reply as the information  was asked in specific format and in detail,  but later on no  reply was provided.  The FAA had directed the CPIO to furnish  information   within   2   weeks   he   delayed   replying   to   the  appellant.  He also submitted that he was satisfied with reply  given   on   point   no.   1   but   not   with   the   reply   given   on   point  nos. 2, 3, 4 & 5 of the RTI application. He also added that  the CPIO concerned had not followed the provisions of Section  6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 for transferring the RTI application  to the appropriate department. 

6. The   respondent   /CPIO   submitted   that   the   RTI   application  was   originally   dealt   by   Shri   N.G.   Sawant   who   had   already  retired and he had taken charge in the month of July only. On  point  no. 2 & 3, respondent  submitted  that one TPA had been  removed.   As   per     point   no.   4   regarding   the   total   no.   of  remigration allowed the respondents stated no separate record  is   being   kept   for   that   purpose   as   there   are   31   Regional  Offices spread across all over India and also submitted that  they allow remigration of mediclaim policy on merits on case  to   case   basis.   The   CPIO   also   submitted   on   point   no.   5   that  they were ready to provide a copy of the terms and conditions  for allowing remigration. 

Decision Notice

7.       The Commission directs the CPIO to furnish a copy of  the   terms   and   conditions   for   allowing   remigration   for   new  product (2007) to the appellant within 15 days of the receipt  of the order of Commission.

(Manjula Prasher)  Information Commissioner  Authenticated true copy: 

(T.K. Mohapatra)  Dy. Secretary & Dy. Registrar  Tele.No. 011­26105027  Copy to: 
Central Public Information Officer  The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai Region Office V, 2nd Floork Sector 11, CBD, Belapur,  Navi Mumbai­400004. First Appellate Authority  The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Regd. & Head Office,  New India Assurance Bldg., 87, M.G.Road, Fort, Mumbai.
Shri Anant Meghji Nandu, Room No.24, 2nd Floor, 20/22, Khemraj Building No.5, Khambata Lane, Khetwadi, Mumbai­400004.