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 4, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Raj Pal Goel vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation on 29 May, 2020

Author: Vanaja N Sarna

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                            कें द्रीय सुचना आयोग
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                बाबा गंगनाथ मागग
                            Baba Gangnath Marg
                        मुननरका, नई दिल्ली - 110067
                        Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                              Decision no.: CIC/EPFOG/A/2020/104389/03602
                                          File no.: CIC/EPFOG/A/2020/104389

In the matter of:
Raj Pal Goel
                                                                ...Appellant
                                        VS
CPIO/APFC/OIC - District Office Sonepat,
Employees Provident Fund Organization (EPFO)
1st Floor, R Square Building, Agrasain Chowk,
Sonepat (Haryana)
                                                               ...Respondent

RTI application filed on : 02/09/2019 CPIO replied on : 01/10/2019 First appeal filed on : 07/10/2019 First Appellate Authority order : 06/11/2019 Second Appeal dated : 25/01/2020 Date of Hearing : 28/05/2020 Date of Decision : 28/05/2020 The following were present:

Appellant: Heard over phone Respondent: Shri Hansraj, Officer Incharge & CPIO, heard over phone.
Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information in respect of Ms.Seema Gulati, who was temporarily transferred from EPFO, Karnal, Haryana to District office at Sonepat:
1. Provide a copy of the permission given to Ms. Gulati to leave the station of residence at Panipat and information about her residential address since her posting at Sonepat.
1
2. Provide information about residential address beyond 8 kms. from office location, which was given by Ms. Gulati during her posting at District Office, Sonepat.
3. Copy of claim along with all its enclosures submitted by Ms.Seema Gulati with her claim regarding daily temporary transfer allowance for posting at District office at Sonepat, Haryana.
4. And other related information.

Grounds for filing Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant submitted that Smt. Seema Gulati was temporary transferred from Karnal Haryana to District Office at Sonepat, Haryana who is permanent residing at Panipat, Haryana and not eligible for daily temporary transfer allowances, however, she has claimed reimbursement of travel allowances to which she was never entitled. Thus, he has sought information about the bills claimed by her for daily temporary transfer allowances and other relevant documents but the CPIO refused to supply the sought for information while referring to an earlier order passed by the Commission. He further stated that the CPIO was not right in rejecting his RTI application as he had sought new information through the above mentioned RTI application and has not filed any similar RTI before. This information is important to establish the fact that public money is being misappropriated by the respondent authority and hence the desired information should be provided to him.
The CPIO while giving the background of the case submitted that the appellant has filed the above mentioned RTI application as a tool of blackmailing, harassment and personal vendetta against government officers and officials as a complaint was filed by Shri Amit Nain, Smt. Seema Gulati, Shri Sunil Saini and

2 other officials against the appellant on 14.12.2018 for criminal trespass in government office, criminal intimidation on duty public servant, criminal mischief to hamper the investigation against him with malafide intentions to avoid legal action against him in PF money fraud case, criminal conspiracy for destroying public property etc. Consequent upon the receipt of the complaint, a fair investigation was conducted by the police. After that on the basis of fair investigation a FIR bearing number 1627 dated 15/12/2018 was lodged in 2 Police Station Panipat against the appellant. After filing this complaint, the appellant has been continuously harassing officers and officials by filing many false complaints and RTIs. This RTI application is also a part of this harassment. In this RTI application he is asking about the personal information of a female employee. It is also worth mentioning here that the appellant had filed 34 false complaints and 61 RTI applications till February, 2018 only with EPFO with malafide and criminal intention to hamper the investigation against him and sabotage the system, and now the number of his false complaints and RTI applications has crossed 100. Details of available complaints and RTI applications are as follows: -

Details of RTI`s Filed by Shri. Raj Pal Goel Sr. RECEIPT RTI No. NO DATE PERSON INFORMATION SOUGHT Rules, section and power for Om 1 124 20.06.2014 withdrawl of money from bank Prakash account Binda 2 15 20.06.2014 Singh Same Nature RTI Information about 3 316 08.11.2013 R P Goel recommendation of FIR against R P Goel by S SBawalia, RPFC Karnal 4 313 08.11.2013 R P Goel AGAINST S S BAWALIA, RPFC 5 317 08.11.2013 R P Goel SANJAY SHARMA, EO 6 216 19.11.2013 R P Goel AGAINST SH. M K SHARMA, APFC Copy of letter demanding SH. R P GOEL & his family member bank statement, info about Sh. Subhash 7 391 16.12.2013 R P Goel Chandra, EO suspension, detail of withdrawl of family pension fund, info in r/o Sh. S S Bawalia, RPFC IR HR/38174, copy of order 8 376 22.11.2013 R P Goel amount waive off Copy of complaint received from Vigilance, copy of detail of all 9 151 21.03.2014 R P Goel eligible employee alongwith name, addrss, phone no, pf no in r/o HR/17910, HR/18384 & HR/18053 3 COPY of Form-9 in r/o HR/6036, HR/15368, HR/7466, HR/35969, HR/19682, HR/19866, HR/3843, HR/4469, HR/19039, HR/6280, 10 97 27.05.2014 R P Goel HR/15300, HR/37539, HR/37538, HR/18114, HR/6583, HR/16554, HR/15252, HR/15935, HR/16294, HR/35029, HR/17703, HR/35331, HR/16482, HR/15249 & HR/16554 Copy of Specimen Signature attested by EO HR/18099, Form-5A 11 9 12.06.2014 R P Goel & coverage proforma, correspondence regarding death claim /hr/18099/25 etc. copy of letter submitted by M/s Vegioengg. Hr/18384 & HR/18053, 12 57 10.11.2014 R P Goel copy of original records M/s NRP Project hr/17910, hr/18384 & HR/18053 Copy of rule to recommend FIR against consultant as he is not 13 58 17.11.2014 R P Goel authorised, copy of rule under IPC for false declaration for withdrawal copy of statement/letter given to police on 18.12.2016 by Sh. Satish Kumar, SSA Investigating team of RO Gurgaon. Office order in r/o Sh.
14 528 05.02.2016 R P Goel Satish Kumar, SSA and copy of rules, power section under which Sh. Satish Kumar, SSA is competent to declare any person as a Criminal type person.
15 45 29.04.2016 R P Goel all information about FIR in detail copy of notice u/s 160/91 of CRPC given by police to RPFC as on 22.03.2016, copy of reply 16 717 17.02.2017 R P Goel submitted to police by EPFO on behalf of above mention notice dated 22.03.16 with annexures.
17 FAX details of Sh. S S Bawalia, RPFC Angoori Against officers involved in FIR 202 18 138 12.06.2014 Devi case Angoori 19 123 20.06.2014 Devi Information against FIR no 198 20 122 20.06.2014 Priya Information against FIR no 198 21 136 01.07.2014 R P Goel Information against FIR no 198 Angoori 22 135 01.07.2014 Devi 4 23 03.02.2014 R P Goel Against Jitender Bansal Asking about documents 24 314 29.09.2014 R P Goel pertaining to case of FIR 198 Asking about documents 25 27.11.2013 R P Goel pertaining to vigilance inquiry 26 29.01.2014 R P Goel Inspection reports of Sanjay 27 376 22.11.2013 R P Goel Sharma, AEO 28 12.06.2014 R P Goel Information against FIR no 198 29 05.06.2014 R P Goel Information against FIR no 198 30 05.08.2014 R P Goel 31 30.01.2014 R P Goel Against Sh. M K Sharma, APFC Information pertaining to Sanjay 32 20.09.2017 R P Goel Sharma 33 06.09.2017 R P Goel Information against FIR no 198 34 18.08.2017 R P Goel Information against FIR no 198 35 01.08.2017 R P Goel Information against FIR no 198 Police notice reply sent by RPFC-II 36 23.06.2017 R P Goel and related information Personal information of Jitender 37 25.01.2016 R P Goel Bansal, Vigilance Personal information of Jitender 38 08.09.2017 R P Goel Bansal, Vigilance IOCL Inspection report done by the 39 29.12.2017 R P Goel Squad District Office data under Karnal 40 26.12.2017 R P Goel Region Details of Complaints filed by Shri. Raj Pal Goel Sr. RECEIP No. T NO DATE To From Nature of complain Office, non-diary of 1 25.06.2013 CPFC Om Prakash claim Sh. Dilip Raj, non-
2 06.08.2013 CPFC Om Prakash withdrawl of claim 3 85 04.02.2014 CPFC R P Goel against CPIO 4 196 16.08.2013 CPFC un-known Sh. S S Bawalia, RPFC Against Sh. S S Bawalia, RPFC, Sh.

Sanjay Sharma, EO and Sh. Subhash 5 211 27.08.2013 CBI un-known Chandra, EO Against Sh. S S Bawalia, RPFC, Sh.

Sanjay Sharma, EO and Sh. Subhash Chandra, EO & Sh.

6         243         16.09.2013       CPFC             un-known       Sharma and Bansal
                                                 5
                                                    (Vigilance)




                                                   against
                                                   commissioner and 2
                                                   inspector    without
7                       CPFC          un-known     name
                                                   AGAINST Sh. S S
                                                   Bawalia, RPFC & Sh.
8          09.10.2013   SP            Om Prakash   Sanjay Sharma, EO
                                                   against Sh. M K
9    112   03.06.2014   CPFC          R P Goel     Sharma, APFC
10   16    01.07.2014   CPFC          R P Goel     against CPIO
                                                   Against      officers
                                      Angoori      involved in FIR 202
11   328   10.10.2014   CPFC          Devi         case
                                                   Against      officers
                                                   involved in FIR 202
12   325   13.10.2014   CPFC          Priya        case
                                                   Against      officers
                                                   involved in FIR 202
13         03.10.2013   Sr.SP         R P GOEL     case
                                      Angoori
14                      SP            Devi         Againt FIR no 198
                        Prime
15   22    27.08.2014   Minister      AngooriDevi Againt FIR no 198
                                                  Against       officers
                                                  involved in FIR 202
16   24    24.09.2014   CPFC          R P Goel    case
                        Labour        Bhagwan
17   299   19.09.2014   Minister      Das         Againt FIR no 198
                                                  M      K      Sharma
18   302   23.09.2014   CPFC          R P Goel    corruption charges
                                                  Jitender       bansal
19   301   23.09.2014   CPFC          R P Goel    corruption charges
                                      Angoori
20   300   23.09.2014   RPFC-II       Devi        Against FIR no 198
21   315   29.09.2014   CPFC          R P Goel    Againt FIR no 198
                        Central
                        Women         Prachi D/O
22         31.10.2013   Commission    R P Goel     Fir no 202
                                      Reeta W/O
23         07.01.2014   CPFC          R P Goel     Fir no 202
                                      Joint
                                      Complaints
                                      of         6
24         13.01.2014   RPFC-II       Individual   FIR no 198
                                  6
                                 Central
                                Women
  25             20.01.2014     Commission    Anonymous     FIR no 202
  26             09.02.2014     CPFC          R P GOEL      FIR no 202
                                              R P GOEL
  27             20.05.2014     CPFC          and Wife      FIR no 202
                                              Angoori
  28             03.06.2014     CPFC          Devi          FIR no 198
  29             03.06.2014     CPFC          R P Goel      FIR NO 198
  30             12.06.2014     CPFC          R P Goel      FIR NO 198
                                              Angoori
  31             01.07.2014     CPFC          Devi          FIR NO 202
                                Prime         Angoori
  32             27.08.2014     Minister      Devi          FIR NO 202
                                                            Legal notice to all
                                VIGILANCE                   officers involved in
  33             09.10.2014     TEAM          Binda Singh   vigilance inquiry
                                                            Complaint      against
                                                            RTI Reply furnished
  34             18.08.2017     CPFC          R P Goel      by CPIO

He stated that majority of the time of the RTI section and the grievance section of Regional Office, Karnal is consumed in framing replies to the RTIs and replying to false complaints of the appellant. It causes a big loss to the exchequer because he asks for information which is not available with the department only with intention to blackmail the officer and hamper the investigation against him. It can be seen from the record of RTIs and complaints filed by him in the last 5 years that he has hampered the core functioning of their organization and hence the appeal needs to be dismissed.

The appellant contested the CPIO's submissions and submitted that he had sought the information as there is huge misappropriation of public funds within their organisation. While rebutting this contention, the CPIO submitted that in their organisation, both internal and external audits are being done at regular intervals and in case there is misappropriation of the funds, the same would be taken care during the audits. The appellant further submitted that the CPIO has stated that the information is related to a third party and this means that all the information is available with them which substantiated the fact that there was misappropriation of some funds done by Smt. Seema Gulati.

7

At this point, the Commission informed the appellant of the provisions of the RTI Act and told him to substantiate larger public interest if any in disclosure of information. While the CPIO was making his submissions, the appellant started shouting in between and showed disorderly behaviour during the hearing. Despite repeated requests he failed to maintain the decorum of the court hearing. He was also told that any case of misappropriation of the funds cannot be sorted out by the Commission as this is purely an internal matter of the organisation.

Observations:

It is noted that the appellant has filed more than 100 RTI applications just to harass the public authority and even if there was some merit in his contentions, however, the method adopted by the appellant speaks volumes of his ignorance of the spirit of the RTI Act. As much as a CPIO has a statutory responsibility of complying with the provisions of the RTI Act, it is also expected of the RTI applicants to not transgress the spirit of RTI Act by clogging the functioning of public authorities with such repetitive, cumbersome and implausible RTI applications, more so, when such applicant was already restrained from filing further RTI applications by a former bench of this Commission. In the garb of obtaining information, the appellant has sufficiently used the RTI Act for his personal interest, devoid of any public interest for his personal vengeance against the public authority, forcing them to devote all their valuable time, resources and energy. Further, the appellant has not shown any respect towards the functioning of the court.. It is necessary that decorum has to be maintained at all times and even when the contention is justified it must be in a language of utmost restraint, always keeping in view that the person making the comment is also fallible. Since the behaviour of the appellant during the hearing was acutely aggressive such that the hearing could not be conducted smoothly and despite the fact that repeated advice was given to the appellant to show restraint failing which the Commission would have no alternative but to dismiss the matter the appellant kept on showing disorderly behaviour and disrespect and failed to heed the advice given. Under such circumstances, the proceedings could not proceed further in any meaningful direction and the hearing had to be stopped at that point.
.
8
Decision:
In view of the above, without going into the merits of the case, the matter is dismissed.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानित सत्यानित प्रनत) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के . असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उि-िंजीयक) 011- 26182594 / दिनांक / Date 9