Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Information Commission

Rajnish Ratnakar vs Employees State Insurance Corporation on 22 May, 2025

Author: Heeralal Samariya

Bench: Heeralal Samariya

                                   के न्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
                          Central Information Commission
                               बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
                          Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                           नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067

नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/ESICO/A/2024/637569

Shri Rajnish Ratnakar                                     ... अपीलकताग/Appellant
                                VERSUS/बनाम

PIO, Employees State Insurance Corporation            ...प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent

Date of Hearing                      :   20.05.2025
Date of Decision                     :   20.05.2025
Chief Information Commissioner       :   Shri Heeralal Samariya

Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on          :      10.06.2024
PIO replied on                    :      14.06.2024
First Appeal filed on             :      08.07.2024
First Appellate Order on          :      01.08.2024
2ndAppeal/complaint received on   :      27.08.2024

Information sought

and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 10.06.2024 seeking information on the following points about a Supreme Court judgment wherein it was held that Anganwadi workers and helpers do not hold any civil post and as per the Appellant it has resulted in denial of benefits of EPF and MP Act, 152, ESI Act 1948, social security legislation like Maternity Benefits Act 1961 to the complete section of honorary anganwadi workers/helpers/Asha workers etc:-

"(1) SUPREME COURT HAS DENIED THESE HONORARY WORKERS STATUS OF EMPLOYEES/ WORKER UNDER VARIOUS SOCIAL SECURITY LEGISLATION IN THIS JUDGEMENT OR HELD THAT ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAS NO JURISTICTION TO ENTERTAIN THIS APPLICATION AND LABOUR COURT/TRIBUNAL HAS ONLY JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN THIS APPLICATION (2) WHETHER MINISTRY OF WOMEN AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, GOVT OF INDIA HAS AUTHORITY TO INTERPRET THE JUDGEMENT OF HONORABLE SUPREME COURT IN SUCH MANNER OR ONLY MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE HAS ONLY SUCH POWERS AND AUTHORITY TO INTERPRET THE JUDGEMENT OF HONORABLE SUPREME COURT (3) THAT IF ONLY MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, GOVT OF INDIA HAS SUCH POWERS AND AUTHORITY, THEN WHETHER BOTH THESE MINISTERIES HAS TAKEN OPINION FROM MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AT THAT TIME OR NOT (4) WHETHER HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN ITS JUDGEMENT DATED 25TH APRIL 2002 IN THE MATTER OF MANIBEN MANGANBHAI BHARIYA Page 1 of 3 VERSUS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DAHOD HAS HELD THESE ANGANWADI WORKERS AND HELPERS FULL TIME WORKERS OR NOT (5) WHETHER HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN ITS JUDGEMENT HAS OPINED OR NOT THAT BOTH CENTRAL AS WELL AS STATE GOVERNMENT IS NOT GIVING EVEN MINIMUM WAGES TO ALL THESE HONORARY WORKERS AND IT IS HIGH TIME FOR LEGISLATURE TO THINK OVER IT."

Reproduced verbatim The CPIO, Employees State Insurance Corporation, New Delhi vide letter dated 14.06.2024 replied as under:-

"केंद्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी, श्रम एवं रोजगार मं त्रालय, नई धिल्ली ने आपका ऑनलाइन आरटीआई आवेिन संख्या ESICO/R/X/24/00019 धिनां क 10.06.2024, ऑनलाइन आरटीआई पोटट ल के माध्यम से इस कायाट लय को अग्रेधित धकया है । उक्त के संबंि में सूधचत करना है धक आप द्वारा मां गी गयी सूचना, इस कायाट लय से संबंधित ना होने के कारण, आपको सूचना प्रिान नहीं की जा सकती है ।"

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 03.07.2024. The FAA vide order dated 01.08.2024 upheld the reply sent by the CPIO.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

A synopsis has been received from the Appellant seeking various remedies some of which are as follows: 1. Immediate provision of the requested information under the RTI Act, 2005; 2. Judicial monitoring and direction to MLABE and DoPT for compliance with central social security legislations; 3. Stern action under Section 20(1) and (2) against the CPIO and FAA; 4. Registration of FIR under BNS, 2023 AND Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 etc. A submission dated 08.05.2025 by the CPIO, ESIC reiterating the PIO's reply and the FAA's order, as mentioned hereinabove.

Hearing was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties. Appellant: Not present Respondent: Shri Maninder - Assistant (RTI Branch); Shri Sanjay Kumar - Nodal Officer- ESIC Hqrs. were present during hearing.

The Appellant has chosen not to attend the hearing. The Respondent present during hearing contended that response in accordance with the queries raised by the Appellant had been duly provided to him, in terms of the mandate of the RTI Act.

Decision Upon perusal of records of the case and after hearing averments of the Respondent, the Commission notes that queries raised by the Appellant do not relate to the public authority from whom information had been sought. In the given circumstances, therefore, the response sent by the Respondent is found befitting and in sync with the provisions of the RTI Act.

Considering the fact that appropriate response in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act has been duly provided by the Respondent and the Appellant has chosen not to contest the case, no further intervention is warranted in this case under the RTI Act. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

Heeralal Samariya (हीरालाल सामररया) Chief Information Commissioner (मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त) Authenticated true copy (अनिप्रमानणत सत्यानपत प्रनत) S. K. Chitkara (एस. के . नचटकारा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26186535 Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)