Central Information Commission
Sridharan vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 4 January, 2021
Author: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
Bench: Neeraj Kumar Gupta
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं ा / Second Appeal No. CIC/LICOI/A/2019/639155
Sridharan ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO, Life Insurance Corporation ... ितवादी /Respondent
of India, Mumbai
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 10-12-2018 FA : 15-01-2019 SA : 29-04-2019
CPIO : 17-12-2018 FAO : 25-01-2019 Hearing : 01-01-2021
ORDER
1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai seeking following information:-
"I seek the following information from the relevant/concerned competent authority of the Corporation under the RTI Act:
1. In each round of promotion of Officers to the higher cadres, Corporation had/has an employee motivation, rather a recognition and reward system of placing the Officers in the scale of pay of the next higher grade, particularly in respect of Officers who attain superannuation in the ensuing financial year and hence cannot complete a full financial year in the elevated cadre. Such category officers continue to serve in their existing cadre, but are eligible to draw their pay and allowance as applicable to the higher cadre to which they are placed with effect from the date of such placement till their date of superannuation.
2. I seek to be informed from the Competent Authority, the number of such Officers in the cadre of SDM/DZM who were considered for Page 1 of 3 elevation and placement in the higher scale of pay during the year for financial years 2013-14 to 2017-18, both years inclusive, and year- wise.
3. Out of the panel of Officers in the cadre of SDM/DZM considered for placement in the higher cadre viz., scale of pay of ZM (Ordinary scale), number of Officers who were actually granted and placed in the higher scale of pay, in the following format (for clarity of data furnished): No. of officers (SDM/DZM) No. of Officers who were actually who qualified for placement placed in the higher scale of pay in the higher scale of pay during the FYs 2013-14 to 2017-18."
2. The CPIO responded on 17-12-2018. The appellant filed the first appeal dated 15-01-2019 which was disposed of by the first appellate authority on 25-01-2019. Thereafter, he filed a second appeal u/Section 19(3) of the RTI Act before the Commission requesting to take appropriate legal action against the CPIO u/Section 20 of the RTI Act, 2005 and also to direct him to provide the sought for information. Hearing:
3. The appellant, Mr. Sridharan attended the hearing through audio conferencing. Mr. G S Wanwar, CPIO participated in the hearing representing the respondent through audio conferencing. The written submissions are taken on record.
4. The appellant stated that the respondent should be directed to provide him the details of the officers who were actually granted and placed in the higher scale of pay from the panel of officers in the cadre of SDM/DZM during the FYs 2013-14 to 2017-18 viz. (a) no. of officers in the cadre of DM placed in SDM scale of pay, (b) no. of officers in the cadre of SDM/DZM placed in ZM(ordinary) scale of pay & (c) no. of officers in the cadre of ZM(ordinary) placed in ZM(Special) scale of pay.
5. The respondent contended that the information in the format sought by the appellant is neither compiled by the LIC nor is there any regulatory requirement for the same. Therefore, they have sent a point-wise reply to the appellant along this line vide their letter dated 17-12-2018. The given reply was also read out by the respondent.
Decision:
6. This Commission observes that the CPIO is obliged to provide the information to the extent it is available in their records. If the information is not available, there is no bounden duty of the CPIO to create any fresh compilation for non-existent records. In the present case, the CPIO has categorically indicated that the information in the format sought by the appellant is neither compiled by the LIC nor is there any regulatory requirement for the same. Hence, it cannot be provided to the Page 2 of 3 appellant. This legal principle is supported by the decision dated 07-01-2016 of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in LPA 24/2015 & CM No. 965/2015 titled as The Registrar of Supreme Court of India v. Commodore Lokesh K Batra & Ors., wherein, it was held as under:-
"15. On a combined reading of Section 4(1)(a) and Section 2(i), it appears to us that the requirement is only to maintain the records in a manner which facilitates the right to information under the Act.
As already noticed above, "right to information" under Section 2(j) means only the right to information which is held by any public authority. We do not find any other provision under the Act under which a direction can be issued to the public authority to collate the information in the manner in which it is sought by the applicant."
7. With the above observations, the appeal is disposed of.
8. Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
नीरज कु मार गु ा)
Neeraj Kumar Gupta (नीरज ा
Information Commissioner (सूसूचना आयु )
दनांक / Date 01-01-2021
Authenticated true copy
(अिभ मािणत स#ािपत ित)
S. C. Sharma (एस. सी. शमा),
Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक),
(011-26105682)
Addresses of the parties:
1. CPIO
Life Insurance Corporation of India
RTI Cell, Central Office, 5th Floor
West Wing, Yogakshema, Jeevan Bima Marg
PO Box No. 19953, Mumbai-400021
2. Sridharan
Page 3 of 3