Central Information Commission
Srinivasa Chakravarthy Abbaraju vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation on 23 April, 2026
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/BOARB/A/2025/622214/EPFOG
Srinivasa Chakravarthy Abbaraju ....अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO,
Employees Provident Fund Organisation
Hyderabad ... ितवादीगण /Respondents
Date of Hearing : 23/04/2026
Date of Decision : 23/04/2026
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Ashutosh Chaturvedi
Relevant facts emerging from Second Appeal/Complaint:
RTI application filed on 27/02/2025
CPIO replied on 28/03/2025
First appeal filed on 31/03/2025
FAA's order dated 19/06/2025
Second Appeal dated 17/05/2025
Information sought:
The appellant has filed RTI application dated 27/02/2025 seeking the following information:
"I worked in CMC Limited (formerly Computer Maintenance Corporation Limited), a Central Public Sector Undertaking under Department of Electronics (Later, Ministry of Information Technology), Old Mumbai Highway, Gachibowli, Hyderabad 500032 from 31-October-1984 to 16-February-2009.
CMC Limited was amalgamated into Tata Consultancy Services Limited (TCS) on 01-October-2015. But, the employer code AP/HYD/5954 is still active. As per Second Appeal/ Complaint No. CIC/BOARB/A/2025/622214/EPFOG Page 1 of 3 the workflow defined by EPFO, my application for higher pension had gone to CMC/Employer login AP/HYD/5954 on 02-May-2023 for uploading the wage details, Joint option form and according approval. Upon follow-ups, I was informed by TCS/CMC that:
1) They did try to login employer code AP/HYD/5954 and upload my wage details and joint option form so many times during December 2023 to April, 2024 but could not do due to technical/network issues between RPFC and TCS/CMC
2) Informed the same to EPFO/RPFC through their e-mail on 15-April-2024 sent to [email protected] and also submitted my wage details and joint option form through the same e-mail.
3) They also submitted my wage details and joint option form along with their letter dated 20-May-2024 offline, submitted at your office under acknowledgement on 28-May-2024."
2. The CPIO has furnished a reply to the appellant on 28/03/2025 stated as:
"...Assistance was sought from concerned branch officer for providing information. Information provided by the branch officer vide U O Note dated 28.03.2025 is enclosed herewith...."
3. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant filed the First Appeal with the first Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority order dated 19/06/2025 is taken on record.
4. Aggrieved, the Appellant filed the Instant Second Appeal on 17/05/2025. Written Submission of the Respondent dated 22/04/2026 is taken on record.
5. Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing:
The following were present:-
Appellant: Present on VC Respondent: Taavance RPFC-II/CPIO participated in the hearing on VC The Appellant reiterates the facts of the case and further submits that information sought has not been provided by the Respondent. The Respondent submits that they will locate and produce the documents sought.
DECISION Commission, on the basis of submission of parties during hearing and perusal of case records, observes that an appropriate response has not been furnished by the Second Appeal/ Complaint No. CIC/BOARB/A/2025/622214/EPFOG Page 2 of 3 concerned CPIO. Therefore, Commission directs the Respondent to revisit the instant RTI Application and provide a revised reply, with regards to the instant RTI Application, to the appellant, free of cost via speed post, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and accordingly compliance report to this effect be duly sent to the Commission within 7 days thereafter. In case relevant information, as sought in the instant RTI Application, pertains to some other Branch/Department, then the CPIO should procure and provide the same to the Appellant. In doing so, CPIO must make sure that information which is exempted from disclosure under RTI Act, 2005 must not be disclosed to the appellant and same must be redacted as per section 10 of the RTI Act. No further action lies.
The Appeal stands disposed of.
Sd/-
Ashutosh Chaturvedi (आशु तोष चतु वदी) Information Commissioner (सू चना आयु ) िदनां क/ Date: 23.04.2026 Authenticated true copy (अिभ मािणत स ािपत ित) Ram Singh Meena (राम िसंह मीना) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011- 26715467 Address of the Parties:
1. CPIO, EPFO, Regional Office (Madhapur), 3-4-763, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, Barkatpura Chaman, Hyderabad 500027
2. Srinivasa Chakravarthy Abbaraju Second Appeal/ Complaint No. CIC/BOARB/A/2025/622214/EPFOG Page 3 of 3 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)