Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

D C Yadav vs North Western Railway on 7 February, 2024

                           केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                     Central Information Commission
                        बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मनु नरका
                      Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                      नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067



File No : CIC/NWRLY/A/2023/160912

D C Yadav                                            .....अपीलकर्ाग/Appellant


                                    VERSUS
                                    बनाम


PIO,
O/o Office of the DRM, NW
Railway, Jaipur Division,
Jaipur - 302006                                   ....प्रनर्वािीगण
/Respondent


Date of Hearing                 :    01-02-2024
Date of Decision                :    06-02-2024

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :           Vinod Kumar Tiwari

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on        :    08-03-2022
CPIO replied on                 :    04-04-2022
First appeal filed on           :    02-05-2022
First Appellate Authority's     :    28-06-2022
order
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated      :    08-10-2022




                                       1
 Information sought

:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 08.03.2022 seeking the following information:

"Subject: Less Payment of PF & VPF In reference to above self-worked in different station as below

1. FROM 13.10.1972 TO 25.06.80 IN WORKED BVP DIVION

2. FROM 26.06.80 TO 24.08.1982 IN WORKED AT PLSN

3. FROM 25.08.1982 ΤΟ 1989 IN WORKED AT RGS

4. FROM 1989 TO 18.07.91 WORDKED AT RNW

5. FROM 19.07.1991 ΤΟ 03.08.1995 WOKED PWI (NORTH) JP

6. FROM 04.08.1995 ΤΟ 12.03.1999 WOKED AT AS CPWI (1) BKI

7. FROM 13.03.1999 ΤΟ 2004 AT CPWI (S) JP

8. FROM 2004/2005 ΤΟ 22.12.2006 CPWI (CT) & SAFTY COUNSELER JP DETAIL OF MY PF & VPF

1. FROM 13.10.1972 TO DECEMBER 1986 > no pf detail with me in my record

2. (FROM 13.10.1972 ΤΟ 25.06.1980) + 26.06.1980 to Dec 1986 (PF deduction by BVP Division) (PF Deduction not with in my record) + Jan 87 to Nov 06 PF =12,923 + VPF = 4,64,032 Total amount 5, 93,263/ This as per pay Slips

2. 16761777 On pay Slips

3. 16661199 On pay Slips (Missing in Type) But also, PF No- 1676179 Shown in my office order date 27.12.2006 & in my service sheet.

At the time of these changes, I have given an application account in account section against my PF number at time Smt. Rajkumari dealing in my PF account but up till now I am not satisfied with my PF account. Now in Summary PF=Jan 87 to Nov 06) (VPF=Jan 88 to Aug 06) Total Amount = 129231 + 46403 = 5,93,263 But PF+VPF Paid to me = 5,80,699/.

At Retirement

(a) Less payment (PF+VPF) = 5,93,263-5,80,699/-

-12,564/-(+) (+) But also, less payment will be PF /VPF=13.10.1972 TO Dec to 1986 Record of this period not available with me Final less payment due = (-) (12,564+ PF/VPF 13.10.1972 TO Dec 1986) Note-on my PF passbook balance amount up to 31.03.2006=4.69,870/- Please give me reply as per my detail shown above so that may I satisfied because I am already suffered lot beyond my limit." The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 04.04.2022 stating as under:

"Please find enclosed the reply of the Nodal Officer pertaining to Jaipur Division to the Information sought vide your letter under reference. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 02.05.2022. The FAA vide its order dated 28.06.2022, held as under:

1- आपके द्वारा प्रस्र्र् ु मूल आवेिन पत्र के कम में आपको पूवग में इस कायागलय द्वारा जयपुर मंडल से संबंधिर् सूचना का जवाब उपरोक्र् संिर्भगर् पत्र (2) के द्वारा भेजा जा चुका है ।

2-आपके द्वारा प्रस्र्ुर् उपरोक्र् अपील के कम में मंडल वव.प्रबंिक / जयपुर द्वारा जवाब दिया गया है ,जा आपको इस पत्र के साथ संलग्न करके भेजा जा रहा है जो कक एनेक्सर क के साथ 02 पष्ृ ठ है ।

3-इसके अनर्ररक्र् आपको सूचनाथग है कक यदि आपको अपने प्रकरण के संबंि में कोई शंका हो र्ो आप पव ू ग सच ू ना के ककसी भी कायग दिवस में संबंधिर् अधिकारी से संपकग स्थावपर् कर सकर्े है ।

Letter Dated 17.06.2022:

उपरोक्र् संिर्भगर् अपील के सम्बन्द्ि में लेख है कक सेवा ननवत्त ृ कमगचारी श्री िे वनचंि यािव द्वारा सेवाननववृ त्त के 16 वर्ग के पश्चार् ् 13.10.1972 भववश्य ननधि खार्े से सम्बंधिर् ररकॉडग की सत्यावपर् प्रनर् चाही गई है । इस सम्बन्द्ि में यह स्पष्ट ककया जार्ा है कक भारर्ीय रे ल संदहर्ा, भाग 1 (APPENDIX IX) की मि संख्या 133 (प्रनर् संलग्न) के प्राविान के र्हर् भववष्य ननधि से सम्बंधिर् ररकॉडग 35 वर्ग र्क ही रखे जार्े है । अर्ः चाही गई उक्र् सूचना कालार्ीर् होने के कारण उपलब्ि नहीं करवाई जा सकर्ी है ।

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Appellant: Present through Video Conferencing Respondent: Mr. Arnav Shivendu Divisional Finance Manager PIO, Present through Video Conferencing The Appellant while reiterating the contents of the RTI Application submitted that incorrect and misleading information has been furnished to him.

The Respondent relied on the contents of (APPENDIX IX) "PERIOD FOR WHICH RECORDS IN ACCOUNTS OFFICE ARE TO BE RETAINED" Serial No. 133 and stated that records related to Provident Funds are kept for 35 years.

By interpreting the contents of the said APPENDIX IX, the Commission counselled the Respondent that 35 years are counted from the date of retirement of the individual. The Appellant retired on 22.12.2006 as submitted by him during the hearing.

The respondent apprised the Commission that due to consecutive transfers of the Appellant his three different PF accounts has been created. Since all his PF accounts were not merged/ reconciled the same has resulted into mismatch in the PF amount, as claimed by the Appellant. In this regard, he sought time to verify the office records and to facilitate due assistance to the Appellant in resolving the issue.

Decision:

The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of the records, observes that the reply furnished by the Respondent is not appropriate against the information sought by the Appellant. The Commission further notes that prima facie there are discrepancies in the PF amount paid to the Appellant. Further the Respondent is not aware from which date the period of retention of record is to be reckoned because many employees render service far in excess of 35 years, which would mean that during their service period their PF records will be destroyed. There cannot be more ignorant an interpretation than made by the Respondent in the instant case. The Respondent present and his predecessor are admonished for their casual approach.

In view of the above, the Respondent is directed to thoroughly investigate the claim of the Appellant and as per the findings of the matter either pay his dues as admissible or give him a detailed reply on the queries of the RTI Application along with cogent reasons and upload the finding of investigation along with the reply at the link given in the hearing notice of the Commission. This direction should be complied by the Respondent within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. FAA to ensure compliance.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार तििारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्ि) Date 06-02-2024 Authenticated true copy (अर्भप्रमाणणर् सत्यावपर् प्रनर्) (R K Rao) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181827 Date 5 6