S Srinivas vs Ministry Of Labour & Employment on 24 February, 2026

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

S Srinivas vs Ministry Of Labour & Employment on 24 February, 2026

                            के ीय सूचना आयोग
                      Central Information Commission
                         बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
                      Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
                       नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067

िशकायत सं     ा / Complaint No.                CIC/MLABE/C/2024/654193



S Srinivas                                   ....िशकायतकता/Complainant

                                   VERSUS
                                    बनाम

CPIO,
Ministry of Labour & Employment
New Delhi                                       ... ितवादीगण /Respondents

Date of Hearing                   : 23/02/2026
Date of Decision                  : 23/02/2026

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER :                  Ashutosh Chaturvedi

Relevant facts emerging from Second Appeal/Complaint:

 RTI application filed on                19/10/2024
 CPIO replied on                         14/11/2024
 First appeal filed on                   Not on Record
 FAA's order dated                       Not on Record
 Complaint dated                         30/10/2024

Information sought

The complainant has filed RTI application dated 19/10/2024 seeking the following information regarding ministry of labour and employment:

"1:-your offices in India 4(1) b provide with RTI I ii records with FAA and commission orders in 2005 to 2024.

2:-your office employees using all acts rules regulations codes bylaws provide.

Second Appeal/ Complaint No. - CIC/MLABE/C/2024/654193 Page 1 of 5

3:-the all welfare schemes of your govt. provide with its eligibility procedure and citizen charter of you provide in 2004to 2024.

4:-your pro-actively disclosed information records to public provide.

5:- newly made labour laws labour code provide. Epfo pension increase case details provide with it applied to whom details provide...."

2. The CPIO has furnished a reply to the complainant dated 14/11/2024 stated as under:

"1. ...I am to refer to your RTI applications no. MLABE/R/E/24/01870 dated 20/10/2024, MLABE/R/T/24/01330 dated 25/10/2024, MLABE/R/X/24/00124 dated 25/10/2024, MLABE/R/T/24/01333 dated 25/10/2024 and MLABE/R/T/24/01407 dated 06/11/2024 received in Labour Reforms Cell (LRC), Ministry of Labour & Employment for furnishing requisite information.

2.Point no. 5 of the aforesaid RTI application pertains to Labour Reforms Cell of this Ministry and information in respect of the same is as follows:-

3."The Parliament has enacted four Labour Codes, namely, the Code on Wages, 2019, the Code on Social Security, 2020, the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 and the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 which have also been assented by the Hon'ble President. The Code on Wages, 2019 was notified in the Official Gazette on 08.08.2019 and remaining three Codes i.e., the Code on Social Security, 2020, the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 and the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 were notified on 29.09.2020 in the Official Gazette for the general information. A copy of the four Labour Codes is available on the website of the Ministry, i.e., www.labour.gov.in."

4.It is also to inform that under the RTI Act, 2005, only such information can be supplied which already exists and is held or under the control of the public authority. The PIO is not supposed to create information or to interpret information or to solve the problems raised by the applicant or to furnish replies to hypothetical questions....."

3. First Appeal and the First Appellate Authority Order is not on record.

4. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the complainant approached the Commission by filing instant Complaint on 30/10/2024.

Second Appeal/ Complaint No. - CIC/MLABE/C/2024/654193 Page 2 of 5

5. Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:

The following were present:-

Complainant: Absent Respondent: Absent Neither the complainant nor the Respondent has availed the opportunity to participate in the hearing despite due notice of hearing DECISION The Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that appropriate reply was provided to the complainant by the CPIO within the prescribed time limit of the RTI Act, 2005. The Commission therefore does not find any malafide intention on the part of then CPIO.

Commission further observes that the Complainant has chosen to approach the Commission with a Complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act wherein the Commission is required to examine whether there was any deliberate denial of information by the public authority. It is worthwhile to place reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Chief Information Commissioner and Another v. State of Manipur and Anr. in Civil Appeal Nos. 10787-10788 of 2011 dated 12.12.2011, relevant extract whereof is as under:

"...28. The question which falls for decision in this case is the jurisdiction, if any, of the Information Commissioner under Section 18 in directing disclosure of information. In the impugned judgment of the Division Bench, the High Court held that the Chief Information Commissioner acted beyond his jurisdiction by passing the impugned decision dated 30th May, 2007 and 14th August, 2007. The Division Bench also held that under Section 18 of the Act the State Information Commissioner is not empowered to pass a direction to the State Information Officer for furnishing the information sought for by the complainant." "30. It has been contended before us by the Respondent that under Section 18 of the Act the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission has no power to provide access to the information which has been requested for by any person but which has been denied to him. The only order which can be passed by the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, under Section 18 is an order of penalty provided under Section 20. However, before such order is passed the Second Appeal/ Complaint No. - CIC/MLABE/C/2024/654193 Page 3 of 5 Commissioner must be satisfied that the conduct of the Information Officer was not bona fide."

31. We uphold the said contention and do not find any error in the impugned judgment of the High court whereby it has been held that the Commissioner while entertaining a complaint under Section 18 of the said Act has no jurisdiction to pass an order providing for access to the information." "37. We are of the view that Sections 18 and 19 of the Act serve two different purposes and lay down two different procedures and they provide two different remedies. One cannot be a Substitute for the other...."

Thus, the limited point to be adjudicated in complaint u/s 18 of RTI Act is whether the information was denied intentionally.

In the light of the above observations, the Commission is of the view that there is no malafide denial of information on the part of the concerned CPIO and hence no action is warranted under section 18 and 20 of the Act.

The Commission notes with concern that CPIO has failed to appear before the Commission for the scheduled hearing. A stern warning is hereby issued that any repetition of such non-appearance in future proceedings shall result in appropriate action as per law.

No further action lies. The complaint stands disposed of.

Sd/-

Ashutosh Chaturvedi (आशुतोष चतुवदी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) िदनांक/ Date: 23.02.2026 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) Ram Singh Meena (राम िसंह मीना) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011- 26715467 Second Appeal/ Complaint No. - CIC/MLABE/C/2024/654193 Page 4 of 5 Address of the Parties:

1. PIO Ministry of Labour & Employment, Shram Shakti Bhawan, 5, Rafi Marg, Block G 6, Sansad Marg Area, New Delhi - 110001

2. S Srinivas Second Appeal/ Complaint No. - CIC/MLABE/C/2024/654193 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-

Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission

S Srinivas vs Ministry Of Labour & Employment on 24 February, 2026