Central Information Commission
Ram Krishna Mehta Suman vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation on 28 August, 2018
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.313, CIC Bhawan, Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka, New Delhi-110067)
Before Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar), CIC
CIC/EPFOG/A/2018/120628
Ram Krishna Mehta Suman v. PIO, EPFO
Order Sheet: RTI filed on 20.11.2017, CPIO reply - Nil, FAO - Nil, Second appeal filed on
26.03.2018, Hearing on 26.06.2018;
Proceedings on 26.06.2018: Appellant absent, Public Authority represented by CPIO. Mr Rakesh
Kumar Sinha, Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner
Date of Decision-27.08.2018: Directions, Show-cause and compensation notice issued
ORDER
FACTS:
1. The appellant sought information regarding his letter dated 22.04.17 pertaining to Pension Upgradation. He specifically sought (i) the receipt to the letter submitted by him on 22.04.17, (ii) Certified copy of Action Taken report and Investigation report. The appellant not having received any reply from the CPIO or the FAA filed an appeal before the CIC.
Decision :
2. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, representing the Kolkata Regional Office, submitted that there was error in calculation of the appellant's pension. The appellant had requested for the revision of his pension and the PPO was given from the Patna Regional Office.
3. Mr. Rakesh Kumar stated that the input data sheet of appellant's pension was sent form the Kolkata Office to Patna office and action was awaited from Patna Office.
4. The Commission finds that both Kolkata and Patna Regional Offices have caused delay in addressing the appellant's grievance. The Public Authority has erred in calculating the appellant's pension and the same has not been rectified despite the lapse of eight months. The officers have failed to respond to the RTI queries and address the complaint reflected in the application. It is the duty of CIC/EPFOG/A/2018/120628 Page 1 the CPIO as an employee of EPFO to facilitate supply of the calculation sheet of pension to the appellant along with explanation of the errors on calculation as claimed by the appellant, if any.
5. In view of the above, the Commission directs the CPIO, Patna Regional Office, to provide the certified copies of the documents sought by the appellant, in co-ordination with Kolkata Regional Office. The CPIO is directed to inform the appellant time within which his grievance will be resolved.
6. The Commission directs Mr. S.K. Padhee, CPIO, Kolkata Regional Office as on date of filing of RTI, to show-cause why maximum penalty should not be imposed upon him for not furnishing the information sought. The Public Authority is also required to explain why it should not be directed to compensate the appellant for the delay caused in furnishing the information that caused delay in payment of rectified pension amount.
SD/-
(M.Sridhar Acharyulu)
Central Information Commissioner
CIC/EPFOG/A/2018/120628 Page 2