Central Information Commission
Mr.Devendra Bahadur Singh vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation on 8 December, 2010
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002178/9808Adjunct
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/002178
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Devendra Bahadur Singh
258, Mahipal Nagar, Prabhu Town,
Raibareli, Uttar Pradesh.
Respondent : Mr. Arif Lohani,
CPIO & RPFC, Employee's Provident Fund Organisation Sub-Regional Office, 5, Meerabai Marg, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh RTI application filed on : 02/05/2010 PIO replied : 18/06/2010 First appeal filed on : 08/06/2010 First Appellate Authority order : Not ordered Second Appeal received on : 30/07/2010 Notice of Hearing sent on : 21/09/2010 Hearing held on : 18/10/2010 Information Sought:
Details of action taken on the letter dated 19/02/2010, 09/03/2010 and 22/03/2010 and the date by which the order dated 02/07/2009.
Reply of the PIO:
The company/organization has been ordered to make the 41 employees members of PF Scheme and to deposit the amounts in accordance with the order no. 7446/EPF/SRO/LKO/Compliance/UP/7543 dated 02/07/2009. But the same has not been deposited. The information would be supplied once the company/organization deposits the amount.
First Appeal:
Non-receipt of information from the PIO within the stipulated time.
Order of the FAA:
Not ordered.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Non-receipt of complete information from the PIO and no action taken by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing held on October 18, 2010: The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Devendra Bahadur Singh on video conference from NIC-Raebareli (UP) Studio; Respondent : Absent;
"The appellant described that PF was no being deducted of 41 employees in his organization. RPFC Lucknow has issued an order on 02/07/2009 to the organization to make the 41 employees members of EPF and to deposit the contribution as per law. The appellant has sought information about the action taken on this order as well as their reminders of letters dated 19/02/2010, 09/03/2010 and 22/03/2010. Instead of providing information on action taken on the order the PIO has stated that since the company has not deposited the money the Public Authority is unable to do anything. Inspite of the wide powers and responsibility cast of PF officers if no action is taken it appears to be a very lame excuse. At any rate the PIO should have informed the appellant about the action taken by the EPF office. In case they had decided not to take any action and allow the employer to continue flouting the law this should have been stated. The PIO is now directed to provide information to the appellant about the action taken on the order of 02/07/2009 in the following format:
Date on which Name and designation of Action taken Date on which forwarded to Order received The officer receiving it. Next officer/office.
*there will be as many rows as the number of officers who handled the order.
Attested photocopies of all letters and notings will be provided."
Decision dated October 18, 2010:
The Appeal was allowed.
"The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the appellant before 10 November 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act.
It appears that the PIO's actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 08 December 2010 at 10.30am alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also bring the information sent to the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the Commission with him."
Relevant facts emerging at the show cause hearing held on December 8, 2010: The following were present:
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. K. K. Madnani, Section Supervisor on behalf of Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC.
Mr. K. K. Madnani stated that further to the order of the Commission dated 18/10/2010, information was provided to the Appellant vide letter dated 04/11/2010. On perusal of the same, it was noted that the information was not in accordance with the format specified in the order of the Commission dated 18/10/2010. It appears that the CPIO has failed to comply with the order of the Commission. The Commission has further observed that the information provided to the Appellant initially vide letter dated 18/06/2010 was unsatisfactory.
Adjunct Decision:
In view of the aforesaid, the Commission hereby directs Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC to provide information to the Appellant about the action taken on the order of 02/07/2009 in the following format:
Date on which Name and designation of Action taken Date on which forwarded to Order received The officer receiving it. Next officer/office.
*there will be as many rows as the number of officers who handled the order Attested photocopies of all letters and notings shall also be provided.
Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant before December 31, 2010.
Further, Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC is summoned to appear in an inquiry to be held before the Commission to consider the issues arising in CIC/SG/A/2010/002178/9808 at the above address on January 7, 2011 at 11:00 am.
Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC may make oral or written submissions to the Commission on that date to show cause why penalty should not be imposed on him under Section 20 of the RTI Act. Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC is directed to produce before the Commission the information provided to the Appellant and any relevant document that he may have relied on in his written submissions. If there are other persons responsible for not complying with the order of the Commission and who have not been included in this show cause notice, Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC is directed to serve this show cause to them and direct them to appear before the Commission on 07/01/2011 along with them. In the event Mr. Arif Lohani, CPIO & RPFC fails to appear before the Commission on 07/01/2011, the Commission shall assume that he has no reasons for disregarding the Commission's orders and a penalty will be imposed on him as per Section 20 of the RTI Act ex parte.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of the RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner December 8, 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(GJ)