Om Prakash Lakhina vs Uti Infrastructure Technolgoy And ... on 12 October, 2023

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Om Prakash Lakhina vs Uti Infrastructure Technolgoy And ... on 12 October, 2023

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 19.10.2020 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 27.07.2020 and first appeal dated 31.08.2020:-

(i) Salient features of Group Savings Linked Insurance (GSLI) Scheme alongwith its brochure.

(ii) The LIC branch office address through with GSLI policy of erstwhile Unit Trust of India, 13 Sir Vithaldas Road, Mumbai - 400020 new address, UTI Tower, BandraKurla Complex, Mumbai - 400051 now succeeded by UTI AMC Company Limited is being served from.

Page 1 of 6

      (iii)     The above mentioned GSLI Policy number
     (iv)      The balance of his 65% portion plus interest dues as on today in this policy in

which the appellant has contributed while he was in service of UTI since 1989 till the year 2005.

(v) The formalities to be completed by him for getting his GSLI dues back from LIC.

(vi) The requisite forms for getting his GSLI dues back sent to him at earliest.

(vii) Salient features of Medical Assistance Fund Scheme and its brochure and circulars.

(viii) Salient features of Voluntary Health Scheme and its brochure and circulars.

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 27.07.2020 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), UTI AMC Company Limited, Mumbai, seeking aforesaid information. The CPIO did not reply to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 31.08.2020. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) did not pass any order. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 19.10.2020 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 19.10.2020 inter alia on the grounds that no reply was received from the respondent. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. Perusal of the records submitted by the appellant while filing the second appeal dated 19.10.2020 reveals that neither the CPIO nor the FAA provided any information or any reply to the appellant.

Hearing on 03.10.2022 4.1. The appellantand on behalf of the respondent Shri Sandeep R Rajeshirke, PIO, Navi Mumbai, UTI Infrastructure Technology & Services Limited, Mumbai, attended the hearing through videoconference.

Page 2 of 6

Interim order dated 14.10.2022 4.2 The Commission has passed the following observations and directions on 14.10.2022:

"6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observedthatthe matter pertained to UTI AMC Limited which was different public authority. Since, the hearing notice was not sent to UTI AMC Limited hence matter could not be concluded. Accordingly, the Registry of this Bench is directed to make party to UTI AMC Limited, Mumbai. The matter is adjourned."

Hearing on 16.02.2023 4.3. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Sandeep R Rajeshirke, PIO, UTI Infrastructure Technology & Services Limited, Mumbai (Respondent No. 1) and Shri Vivek Pyasi, Vice President(Legal) and Shri Ravindra Bhagwat, Vice President (Legal), UTI, AMC Bandra, (Respondent No. 2), attended the hearing through video conference.

Interim order dated 11.05.2023 4.4 The Commission has passed the following observations and directions on 11.05.2023:

"6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that the appellant sought information regarding Group Savings Linked Insurance (GSLI) Scheme. The respondent no. 2, during the course of hearing submitted that they were not the public authority under the RTI Act. They further informed that the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 1968 of 2008, UTI Asset Management Company Limited & Others Vs. Central Information Commission & Another has vide its order dated 10th September, 2008 granted stay on the order dated 6th August of CIC on applicability of RTI Act on UTI AMC. They stated that the stay granted was still continued. However, they failed to produce copy of the latest order of Bombay High Court to substantiate his contention that stay was continued. The respondent No. 2 also informed that after 2009 the case was not listed for hearing.

Page 3 of 6

Therefore, they were not aware of the present status of the case. Moreover, the appellant remained absent despite notice and in his absence proper facts of the case could not be ascertained. In view of the above, the respondent is directed to file a detailed written submission covering how the UTI was formed, its constitution, process of registration, shareholding patterns and present status of the aforesaid stay order, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Accordingly, the matter is adjourned."

Hearing on 13.09.2023

5. The appellant remained absent and on behalf of the respondent Shri Sandeep R Rajeshirke, PIO, UTI Infrastructure Technology & Services Limited, Mumbai, attended the hearing through video conference.

5.1. The respondent No. 1 (UTI Infrastructure Technology & Services Limited) while defending their case inter alia submitted that information sought was not available with them. They stated that the appellant had filed RTI dated 27.07.2020 and first appeal dated 31.08.2020 to the UTI AMC Company Limited at UTI Tower, Gn Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 requesting information in respect of Group Savings Linked Insurance (GSLI). It was further submitted that UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services Limited (UTIITSL) and UTI AMC Company Limited were two different entities. However, UTI AMC Company Limited may not be a Public Authority as defined u/s 2 (h) of the RTI Act, 2005. Hence, the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 may not be applicable to them.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the respondent and perusal of records, observed that the respondent No. 1 informed that information sought was not available with them. They further submitted that the RTI and first appeal were filed before UTI AMC Company Limited (respondent no. 2) and not before UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services Limited (UTIITSL). The respondent no. 2 neither filed any written submission nor appeared before the Commission despite hearing notice having been sent to them. In the absence of the appellant as well the respondent no. 2 and any written submissions thereofit would not be appropriate to go into merit that the respondent no. 2 is the public authority within the definition of section 2 (h) of the RTI Act or not. It may be noted that the applicability of the RTI Act on the Page 4 of 6 respondent no. 2 was pending before the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. Perusal of the RTI application raveled that the appellant had sought general information. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, the respondent no. 2 (UTI AMC Company Limited) is advised to reply or provide the information to the appellant, within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. With the above observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुसुरेशचं ा) ा सूचनाआयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक/Date: 11.10.2023 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत#) Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

The CPIO UTI AMC Company Limited UTI Tower, GN Block, BandraKurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 The FAA UTI AMC Company Limited UTI Tower, GN Block, BandraKurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400051 The CPIO UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services Limited Plot No.3, Sector 11, CBD Belapur Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400614 Page 5 of 6 First Appellate Authority UTI Infrastructure Technology and Services Limited Plot No.3, Sector 11, CBD Belapur Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400614 Om Prakash Lakhina Page 6 of 6

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission