Central Information Commission
Parth B Patel vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 26 August, 2025
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग, मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई िद ी, New Delhi - 110067
File No: CIC/LICOI/A/2024/612708
Parth B Patel .....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Life Insurance Corporation of India
Mumbai Divisional Office-III, CRM
Department, 1st Floor, New India
Building, S.V. Road, Santacruz (West),
Mumbai - 400054 .... ितवादीगण /Respondent
Date of Hearing : 18.08.2025
Date of Decision : 25.08.2025
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
Relevant facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application filed on : 14.02.2024
CPIO replied on : 29.02.2024
First appeal filed on : 29.02.2024
First Appellate Authority's order : 14.03.2024
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 22.03.2024
Information sought:
1. The Appellant filed an (online) RTI application dated 14.02.2024 seeking the following information:Page 1 of 8
"Under which law, or terms and conditions, LIC can prevent my full withdrawal of policy no. 936810974, parth babubhai patel at this moment. Lic told me about it in emails in past.
( just for your information: i got this funds through my national pension scheme full withdrawal. I have full discretion of this funds as its my saved money deducted from my salary during govt. job in India in past and currently am living overseas so LIC has no right to hold my all money and to say no to full withdrawal as per my best knowledge and information)"
2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant on 29.02.2024 stating as under:
"National Pension Scheme (NPS) funds, as per Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) rules are invested in pension plans through the companies chosen by the NPS member and as per the details of the proposal form, you have chosen LIC of India as the service provider and purchased and invested in Jeevan Akshay -VII, an immediate annuity plan online. As per the Terms & Conditions of Jeevan Akshay VII plan, of the said policy no. 936810974, the option selected by you is A Life Annuity without return of purchase price. Hence, question of full withdrawal of funds under the policy, does not arise, as it is not allowed. All the options were clearly mentioned in the proposal form (a copy of the same is enclosed herewith), wherein it is clearly seen that you have chosen the Option "A" Annuity for life without return of purchase price and ticked the Box against the same and have also duly signed the form.
Further, the first two paragraphs printed on right side of the first page of the policy Bond in English is reproduced herewith:
"Re: Your policy No. 936810974 We have pleasure in forwarding herewith the above policy document comprising of Part A to Part G which please find in order. We would also like to draw your kind attention to the information mentioned in the Schedule of the Policy and the benefits available under the Policy. Some of our plans have certain options available under them. It is important that the options, if any, available under this Plan and mentioned in the Policy Document are noted carefully as it will be helpful to you, in case you decide to exercise any of the available options. It is also essential to note that such option, if available and mentioned in the document of this Plan has to be exercised in the right manner and during the stipulated time limit as prescribed herein.Page 2 of 8
Free Look Period We would request you to go through the terms and conditions of the Policy and in case you disagree to any of the terms and conditions, you may return the Policy within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the electronic or physical mode of the Policy Document, whichever is earlier, stating the reasons for your objections and disagreement. On receipt of the policy, we shall cancel the same and the amount of premium deposited by you shall be refunded to you after deducting the charges for stamp duty and Annuity paid (if any)".
It is clear from above that you had time of 30 days to cancel the policy, if Terms & Conditions of the Policy were not agreeable to you. However, it is pertinent to note that as you have purchased the aforementioned policy through NPS funds, even if you had exercised the option for return of policy under Free Look period, the money would have been routed back to your CRA/NPS account as per PFRDA rules. In that case also, money is not payable to you but you could have opted for another Service provider/Company and annuity plan.
In view of above, it is re-iterated that as per the terms and conditions of your policy, you'll get monthly annuity for your entire life as per Option A and request for full withdrawal of policy purchase price cannot be acceded to, as it is not allowed. The above clarification has also been conveyed to you, vide letter dated 26.02.2024 of CRM dept., MDO-III, in response to your CPGRAMS complaint ref no. DEAID/E/2024/0001832."
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 29.02.2024. The FAA vide its order dated 14.03.2024, held as under.
"First of all, Terms and Conditions under the said annuity policy are same for all policy holders including non-resident Indians and there is no provision for exception to the rule. It is further clarified that the respondent organisation is not holding the Appellant's money and is only the Fund Manager as chosen by the Appellant himself for providing life- long annuity per month, from the money invested in the annuity policy of the respondent organisation.
The Appellant agrees that he himself chose option "A" under which there is no return of purchase price and hence the question of withdrawal of money invested in the policy doesn't arise in the instant case. The Appellant also agrees that he had to purchase the Annuity policy to withdraw his savings invested in National Pension Scheme as there is no Page 3 of 8 other way of withdrawal of subscriber's money invested in National Pension Scheme.
It is pertinent to note that to address the concern of the growing senior citizen demography in the Country, the Indian Government has introduced schemes like the National Pension Scheme to encourage habit of Savings and creation of substantial corpus before retirement to allow Senior Citizens sail through their post-retirement life with least hassles. Contributions made by individual subscribers to the National Pension Scheme is purely voluntary and is chosen as way of investment because the invested amount earned return and maturity withdrawal is tax-free. The annuity policy chosen by the NPS subscriber is governed by the Terms and Conditions mentioned in the policy bond issued under the policy. If exceptions are allowed, the very purpose of Government initiative gets defeated.
It is observed that the Appellant is seeking decision in the matter through RTI. The domain of adjudication in the matter is out of purview of RTI Act. Further, Redressal of Grievance, Non-compliance of rules, contesting the actions of respondent public authority and suggesting correction in government policies are outside the purview of the RTI Act. Also, under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, only such information as is available and existing and held by the office of Public Authority or is under the control of the Public Authority can be provided.
I am satisfied with reply given by the CPIO in response to queries of the RTI application. In view of clarifications given to points raised in appeal, the appeal of Mr. Parth Patel is, as a consequence, disposed of."
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal on the following grounds:
"Thanks for providing RTI 1st appeal reply on 14 march 2024 but still it is unsatisfactory to me as I am living overseas and have not any income/job in India, have closed my NPS account permanently. So LIC can not hold my money and prevent me from full withdrawal of the policy. LIC should consult NPS/PFRDA about this (if needed) and provide me a full withdrawal of my policy money. I am saying again that rules, terms and conditions of full funds withdrawal are not applicable on me as I have been living overseas from past several years and I have closed my NPS account permanently as I neither have any job/income in India Page 4 of 8 nor it will be in future so I am entitled to fully withdraw my money. It is my democratic right, none of entity NPS/PFRDA/LIC can withdraw my democratic rights. These all are my salary deducted money which was accumulated in NPS during my service time and ultimately transferred to LIC so none of them have a right to stop my full withdrawal as they can do it till I am in India not after I Left India and closed my NPS account permanently. SO kindly allow me to withdraw all my money under my democratic right"
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Not present.
Respondent: Ms. Medha Tendulkar, Manager (CRM)/CPIO, Division- III, Mumbai present through video conference.
5. Proof of having served a copy of Second Appeal on respondent while filing the same in CIC on 22.03.2024 is not available on record. On a query, the Respondent confirms non-service.
6. Written submission dated 12.08.2025 filed by Ms. Anshuman Sinha, Sr. Divisional Manager/ FAA (copy shared with the Appellant) is taken on record. Relevant extracts of the same are reproduced below in verbatim-
"...Second Appeal:
The Appellant in his second Appeal has contended that the reply provided in Appellate Order is unsatisfactory to him as he is living overseas and does not have any income/job in India and has closed his NPS account permanently. So, LIC cannot hold his money and prevent him from full withdrawal of the policy. LIC should consult NPS/PFRDA about this (if needed) and provide him a full withdrawal of his policy money. The Appellant is only harping on the point that rules, terms and conditions of full funds withdrawal are not applicable on him as he has been living overseas from past several years and has closed his NPS account permanently as he neither has any job/income in India nor it will be in future so he is entitled to full withdrawal of his money. It is his democratic right and none of entity NPS/PFRDA/LIC can withdraw his democratic rights as it is his salary deducted money which was accumulated in NPS during his service time and ultimately transferred to LIC so none of them Page 5 of 8 have a right to stop his full withdrawal as they can do it till he is in India not after he has left India and closed his NPS account permanently and has requested to kindly allow him to withdraw all his money.
From above, it is observed that the Appellant has not brought forth any valid point for preferring second appeal and is not seeking information in the matter, as envisaged under the provisions of RTI Act. The Appellant is only seeking decision in the matter through RTI forum, claiming exception in the instant case as being an overseas living Indian, to cancel his Annuity policy purchased through NPS funds in order to take full withdrawal of the money invested in the annuity policy. It is pertinent to mention here that the Appellant agrees that he himself chose option "A" under which there is no return of purchase price and hence the question of withdrawal of money invested in his annuity policy doesn't arise in the instant case and as per the option chosen by the Appellant, a monthly annuity of Rs. 1473/- is being paid to the Appellant since 14.08.2023 without any gap till current month ie. 14.07.2025, credited to his AXIS Bank account, Asarwa, Ahmedabad Branch.
The concerned department has not received any complaint in the matter from the date of issue of Appellate order (14.03.2024) till date, in the matter and as such no grievance is pending in the matter.
It is re-iterated that the domain of adjudication in the matter is out of purview of RTI Act. Further, Redressal of Grievance, Non-compliance of rules, contesting the actions of respondent public authority and suggesting correction in government policies are outside the purview of the RTI Act. Also, under the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005, only such information as is available and existing and held by the office of Public Authority or is under the control of the Public Authority can be provided. The then CPIO and the then FAA have provided appropriate information to the Appellant, within prescribed time limit as per RTI provisions. The Appellant may approach appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance, if any. The Appellant's annuity policy no. 936810974 cannot be cancelled now as per Policy Terms & conditions and no further information remains to be provided, in the matter.
In view of above, the Hon'ble CIC is requested that the second appeal filed by Shri Parth B Patel, be dismissed summarily.
Page 6 of 8The hard copy of the submission is sent by registered post to the Appellant at his address mentioned in his first appeal-E************, Ahmedabad - 380060 on 11.08.2025 and also via email at his email address [email protected]."
7. The Respondent while inviting attention of the Commission towards the contents of his written submission stated that reply clarifying factual position has already been provided to the Appellant earlier and upon receipt of hearing notice from the Commission a revised updated reply was furnished to the Appellant through letter dated 04.08.2025 via speed post and email.
Decision:
8. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the Respondent and perusal of the records observes that as far as RTI application is concerned, appropriate response has been furnished by the Respondent now vide written submission dated 12.08.2025 which is treated as revised and updated reply, as the same is found to be as per the provisions of the RTI Act. A copy of which has already been shared with the Appellant on 13.08.2025.
9. Moreover, the Appellant neither appeared during hearing to contest his case nor filed any written submission to controvert the submissions of the Respondent.
10. Intervention of the Commission is not warranted in the matter.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (िवनोद कुमार ितवारी) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स!ािपत ित) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 26181927 Date Page 7 of 8 Copy To:
The FAA, Life Insurance Corporation of India Mumbai Divisional Office-III, CRM Department, 1st Floor, New India Building, S.V. Road, Santacruz (West), Mumbai - 400054 Page 8 of 8 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)