Central Information Commission
Ms. Daya Pyari Gupta vs Ministry Of Home Affairs, (Mha) on 29 October, 2009
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Adjunct to Complaint No. CIC/WB/C/2009/00298 dated 3-6-2008
Right to Information Act 2005 - Section 19
Appellant: Ms. Daya Pyari Gupta
Respondent: Ministry of Home Affairs, (MHA)
ORDER
Decision Announced 29.10.'09 In our decision of 29-6-2009 we had directed as follows:
"In this matter it appears that all parties from these Governments be they the Govt. of Nagaland or the Govt. of India have shown a remarkable level of callousness in dealing with the pleading of a mother of an officer of what is often described as the cream of India's civil services, the IAS, martyred in the service of this country in 1974. This is true also of the MHA which has indeed adhered to the letter of the law in some ways even though not fully, because transfer of an application under sub sec. (3) of Sec. 6 is required to be made within five days whereas in this case it has been made after the lapse of almost a month. Nevertheless they have at least the courtesy to respond, which cannot be said either of the Government of Nagaland or the Dep't. of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances. Nevertheless, we see that it is not the DoAR & PG, which is the concerned Department in this matter but the Dep't. of Pensions in the MPPG&P, which is the Ministry to which JS Shri Naveen Sharma has transferred Ms. D.P. Gupta's request in his letter of 25.1.08. On receipt of the notice from this Commission, it was however the responsibility of the DoAR&PG to transfer this to Dep't. of Pensions which it seems not to have cared to do.
CPIO Smt. S. N. Joshi, Under Secretary (PG), Dep't. of Administrative Reforms & Public Grievance will, therefore show cause as to why she should not be held liable for penalty u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act for failing to respond to an RTI application @ Rs. 250/- a day subject to a maximum of Rs. 25000/-. She th will submit her explanation in writing before us on or before 13 July, 2009. Besides Smt. S. N. Joshi will ensure that the application is transferred immediately to the appropriate CPIO in the Department of Pension who is directed to respond to the request of Ms. D.P. Gupta within ten working days of the date 1 of receipt of this Decision Notice. Since Nagaland is a separate State and, therefore, outside the jurisdiction of this Commission, this Commission will address a letter to the Chief Secretary of Nagaland to advise that the questions of Ms. D.P. Gupta are responded to forthwith."
Accordingly we have received a copy of the letter dated 31st August, 2009 addressed to Shri Naveen Verma, JS, MHA by Shri Khriesatuonuo informing him as follows:
"(a) the amount of cash compensation given;-
There is no record available for sanction of cash compensation either other assistance released to the bereaved family members.
(b) Family Pension and Gratuity paid;-
It may be mentioned here that the deceased incumbent was expired on 14,02,1974 whereas the full-fledged office of the Accountant General, Nagaland came into existence w.e.f. 14,12,1974. The pension case was finalized by the combined office of the Accountant General, Assam and Nagaland, Shillong at that time. As such, no detail record of the amount of Provident Fund and Gratuity paid is readily available in this office. However, the matter shall be been taken up demy officially, requesting the office of the Accountant General, Assam, Shillong to furnish the same and to be communicated as and when it is received.
(c) Family Pension to the dearness Govt. Servant;-
It is evident that the family pension was authorized @ Rs. 675/- Rupees Six hundred seventy five) only p.m. at that time for the period from 15.02.1974 to 11.8.2002 and thereafter @ Rs. 375/- (Rs. Three hundred seventy five) only p.m. till death or remarriage if whichever is earlier. Further, from the date following the date of her remarriage if happened, the amount of family pension shall be @ Rs. 120/- only p.m. till death. The widow was last authorized E. O. P. @ Rs. 10,650/- only p.m. w.e.f. 1.1.1996 till her death or remarriage whichever is earlier. (No dearness relief was admissible) even of remarriage she will be entitled to a family pension @ RS. 5,325/- (Rs. Five thousand three hundred twenty five) only p.m. plus dearness relief admissible from the date of her remarriage vide this office special Seal Authority No. Pen SSA/KKG/74-94/T2/1089 dated 3.1.2001.
(d) Car loan advance;-
2Car loan of Rs. 15,000/- only was sanctioned and taken by the officer. There is no record available for the recovery or waived off."
A copy of this response has been sent to appellant Ms. Daya Pyari Gupta at e-mail address [email protected]. In response to the show cause notice Ms. Shailja N. Joshi, Under Secretary has submitted as follows in a letter of July 14th 2009:
• I am not dealing with this case and have not received any of the earlier applications. I have received this notice only today and am responding to it today itself.
• From the information available in the notice I have been able to trace the receipt of CC Notice dated 16th June 2009 that was received by Smt. Shyama Kutty, Under Secretary (PG) who deals with grievances and Petitions relating to all the States. She marked it to her Assistant who was to attend to it further. • Tracing the application further back I found that the first U. O. Note from Joint Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs No. 7.5.2008-NE-1 dated 25th January 2008 was received by Secretary (AR and pensions) on 31st January 2008. Its Diary No. Was 144 and it was marked and forwarded to Shri M. P. Singh Director (Pensions) on 31st January 2008 itself.
• There after no further communication on the case has been received in the Public Grievances Division of DAR & PG, till the CIC Notice dated 16th June 2009 that was received by Smt. Kutty, US. From this it appears that the intermediate communications have been sent to Department of Pensions by Ministry of Home Affairs."
Clearly since Ms. Joshi had not received the initial application, she cannot be held liable for penalty. Besides, from the response of Ms. Joshi it is also clear that the movement of the whole process has been convoluted with a lack of focus as to which Department was dealing with this matter. We have had occasion earlier, notably in Adjunct to Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2008/00939 Ms Hiteshi Arora vs. DoPT announced on 27.10.'09, to refer the matter to Secretary DoPT to review the process of receipt of application and access to information in order to bring his Ministry which is 3 the nodal Ministry in the Government of India for Right to Information in full compliance with Section 4 (1) (a), which mandates that every public authority "shall maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and form which facilitate the Right to Information". This advice is reiterated in this appeal. There is no further action called for on this complaint, which now stands addressed.
Announced on this 29th day of October, 2009. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
(Wajahat Habibullah) Chief Information Commissioner 29-10-2009 Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this Commission.
(Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar) Joint Registrar 29-10-2009 4