Central Information Commission
Rukmini Devi vs East Central Railway (Hajipur) on 29 August, 2024
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मनु नरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई दिल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
File No : CIC/ECRHJ/C/2023/606034 & CIC/MORLY/A/2023/617967
RUKMINI DEVI ...Complainant/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
1. CPIO,
Office of the Sr. Divisional
Railway Manager, East Central
Railway, Dhanbad - 826001.
2. CPIO,
Ministry of Railway, Banaras
Locomotive Works, Varanasi,
UP - 221004. ....प्रनिवािीगण /Respondents
Date of Hearing : 20.08.2024
Date of Decision : 28.08.2024
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari
CIC/ECRHJ/C/2023/606034
Relevant facts emerging from complaint:
RTI application filed on : 06.01.2023
CPIO replied on : 17.01.2023
First appeal filed on : Not on record
First Appellate Authority's order : Not on record
2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 07.02.2023.
Page 1 of 10
Information sought:
The Complainant filed an RTI application dated 06-01-2023 seeking the following information:
"I Rukmini Devi W/O Ram Jatan Pathak here by want to state that kindly furnish information Details Regarding the matter as I mention below:-
(1) How many years copy of Service book & Pension payment order kept Safe as per Rule (2) Kindly Provide me complete Details of the Departmental action to Taken If the Service book or pension payment order is Lost or Destroyed Kindly provide me the details along with all the information Under RTI ACT 2005.
AS per section 6 (3) of the RTI Act 2005 in case the requested information is held by another public authority I requested the PIO TO Transfer the application or part of it within FIVE days and immediately inform me about such transfer.
As per section 7(8)(iii) and 7(3)(ii) of the RTI Act 2005 I requested the PIO to inform me of the first Appellate Authority."
The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the complainant on 17-01-2023 stating as under:
"1. Reply has already been made vide this office letter no. 47/DHN/PEN/RTI/RD/2023, Dt. 06.01.2023.
2. Reply has already been made vide this office letter no. 47/DHN/PEN/RTI/RD/2023. Dt. 06.01.2023."
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, complainant approached the Commission with the instant Complaint.
Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 19.03.2024:
The following were present:-
Complainant: Shri Ram Prakash Pathak, son and representative of the Complainant, attended the hearing.
Respondent: Shri Nuas Topno, ADFM/Dhanbad & CPIO, attended the hearing.Page 2 of 10
Respondent: Shri Shyam Babu, Deputy Chief Personnel Officer & PIO, attended the hearing.
Order on 21.03.2024:
In case file No. CIC/ECRHJ/C/2023/606034 Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that the instant matter is a complaint filed under Section 18 of the RTI Act. Hence, the only adjudication required to be made by the Commission is to determine if the information has been denied with a mala fide intention or unreasonable cause to the information seeker. The Commission finds that the Complainant has filed two RTI Applications seeking similar and generic information, one before Northeastern Railway which is replied by Respondent No. 2 i.e., Varanasi office and the second before East Central Railway, which is replied by Respondent No. 1 i.e., Dhanbad Office, but both the offices have provided contradictory replies to the Complainant. In this regard, the Complainant during the hearing has expressed his satisfaction over the reply provided by the Respondent No. 2.
The Commission observes that a misleading reply was given to the Complainant by the Respondent No. 1, with mala fide intent. Therefore, the Commission deems it expedient to direct the Registry of this Bench to issue Show Cause notice to Shri Nuas Topno, ADFM/Dhanbad & CPIO, for flouting the provisions of RTI Act. The CPIO shall explain in writing as to why penal action should not be initiated against him under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act for the foregoing reasons.
If the onus of providing misleading reply lies either with a deemed PIO or former/the then CPIO, the present CPIO shall serve a copy of this decision to them and who shall explain in writing as to why penal action should not be initiated against him/her under Section 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act. The written explanation of the erring CPIO should reach the Commission within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
In case file No. CIC/MORLY/A/2023/617967:Page 3 of 10
Upon perusal of the facts on record as well as on the basis of the proceedings during the hearing, the Commission observes that a sufficient reply has been provided by the Respondent and the Appellant has also expressed his satisfaction over the same. Hence, no intervention is required in the instant matter."
SHOW CAUSE HEARING PROCEEDINGS Relevant Facts emerged during Hearing on 20.08.2024: The following were present:-
Complainant: Represented by her son Shri Ram Prakash Pathak present in person. Respondent: Below mentioned officers attended the hearing in person:
• Mr. Nual Topon, ADFM & CPIO, O/O Sr. DFM, Dhanbad.
• Ms. Manjoosha Pathak, AGM & CPIO, CPPC, SBI, Lucknow. • Mr. Aparence Das, CM Admn., CPPC, SBI.
• Mr. Chandra Mohan Verma, AGM & CPIO, SBI, R.O. Azamgarh, U.P. • Mr. Ajit Kumar, Sr. DPO-cum-PIO, DRM(P).
• Mr. Prem Prakash, Sr. SO (A), O/O Sr. DFM, Dhanbad.
• Mr. Ritesh Kumar, A.A., O/O Sr. DFM, Dhanbad.
• Mr. Tarkeshwar Prasad, OS, Sr. DPO, DHN.
• Mr. Manish Chandra, CLA, Sr. DPO, DHN.
Written explanation dated 10.04.2024 to show-cause notice filed by Mr. Nual Topon, ADFM & CPIO, O/O Sr. DFM, Dhanbad is taken on record, contents of the same are reproduced below for ready reference:
"In this regard it is further humbly submitted that prior to the instant RTI applicant has also submitted a RTI vide Registration Number ECRDB/R/E/22/00415 date of Receipt 31.12.2022.
(Xerox Copy of the RTI application dated 31.12.2022 is attached herewith and marked Annexure 'C').
Reply to the RTI dated 31.12.2022 was replied by this office vide letter No.47/DHN/PEN/RTI/RD/2023 dated 06.01.2023.Page 4 of 10
(Xerox Copy of the reply is attached herewith and marked Annexure 'D' from page D- 1 to D-6).
As the applicant was same and query of the applicant was also same in case of query No.1 of dated 06.01.2023, it was replied connecting the reply given previously to the same query No.1 of dated 31.12.2022. Reply to the current query was also connected to the previous reply, as RTI of dated 06.01.2023, was received on the same date in which reply was sent for RTI related to 31.12.2022, Query No.2 was related to details of the departmental action to taken if the service book or pension payment order is lost or destroyed, which was similar to the previous query No.4 of RTI dated 31.12.2022, it was also connected with the reply given previously. As the query was related to departmental action taken, it was replied regarding departmental action taken in case of loss of pension payment order, where correspondence with the bank was made. As there was no case for loss of service record, nothing was replied on this score. Further, no such rules exist for such departmental action, accordingly reply was given considering action taken by this office in such cases.
Further, as the applicant was making regular correspondence in regard to her pension to this office, reply was given duly considering the context of the applicant. Moreover, reply of Varanasi office is more or less in line with this office reply however it was generic but this office reply was specific, as it was based considering the case of the applicant.
In light of the above, it is kindly submitted that this office has never failed to comply with the directives of the rules of Right to Information. All the applications received on account of RTI are disposed at the earliest by this office, duly complying the guidelines of the RTI.
I submit humbly that I have never tried to give misleading reply to the applicant due to case being considered specifically reply was accordingly which I have explained above.
2. As far as the complain of the pensioner, raised during hearing, that she is still alive and service book has been lost by the Railway. Apart from above the representative of complainant also stated that his PPO has not been revised for 5 & 6 CPC and benefit thereof was still not given.
In this regard, the earnest submission is as follows: The claim of representative of complainant that service record is lost, is not factual and same is still available with Page 5 of 10 Railway. Secondly, his claim that the benefit of 5 und 6 CPC has not been given is also not factual. The Xerox copy of 5th CPC Revision Sheet, 6 CPC Revised PPO and 7 CPC Revised PPO are attached herewith and marked Annexure-E'(page from E-1 to E-5). In this regard, it is mentioned that due to several correspondences (Xerox Copy of the letters are attached herewith and marked Annexure-'F' page from F-1 to F-6) made by this office to State Bank of India, Centralised Pension Processing Cell, Lucknow HAT Building, 1st & 2nd floor, Lucknow-226010 (Uttar Pradesh) for payment of revised family pension as per 5 CPC to Smt. Rukmini Devi family pensioner of this division. Astt. General Manager, State Bank India, Centralised Pension Processing Cell Lucknow has also confirmed to this office vide letter No. CPPC-LKO/REV/22-23 date 04-03-2024, that an amount of Rs.1,21,335.00 (Rupees one lakh twenty one thousand three hundred thirty five only) has been paid to Smt. Rukmini Devi as an arrear against revised family pension as per 5 CPC after advise received from East Central Railway, Dhanbad. The Xerox copy of details particulars issued by the bank are enclosed herewith and marked Annexure-'G' page from G-1 to G-5.
Moreover, it is again submitted that the representative of the appellant/complainant raised the claim during CIC hearing held on 19.03.2024 that the appellant (Smt. Rukmini Devi) is still alive and service record has been lost by the Railway. It has also been raised during hearing that PPO has not been revised for 5 & 6 CPC and benefits thereof was still not given. As such the RTI reply was provided to the appellant keeping in view of her own grievance matter. Although reply was provided to the appellant along with the copy of the rules.
The Service Record of the appellant's deceased husband Late Ram Jatan Pathak, Ex. MCM under EF/SGRL is available in this office. The appellant may inspect the said Service Record and available relevant records along with here representative as per provision of RTI Act, 2005 on any working day, prior fixing a suitable date and time.
That, it is once again most humbly submitted that myself being responsible and duty bound officer cannot even think or dream to violate the directives of RTI Act 2005.1 beg unqualified apology for any act of omission or commission, if your honour think so. If any actions and/or omissions of mine has led your honour to believe that there have been any violation of the directives of the RTI Act 2005, 1 respectfully say that I hold your honour in highest esteem and there is no question, much less any intention on my part of not complying with any part of directives.
It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully requested to please drop the matter ."
Contents of Annexure F 6 are as under:
Page 6 of 10"Accounts Department East Central Railway, Dhanbad No.47/A/DHN/Pen/Bank/2024 Dt.25/01/2024 The Manager SB/CPPC, 1 & 2 Floor, Lucknow Haat Bhavan PCF Near- PICUP Building, Vibhuti Khand Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, U.P.-226010 Sub.:- Payment of family pension as per revised PPO of 5 CPC in f/o Smt. Rukmini Devi holding PPO No. xxxxxxxxxxxxx Smt. Rukmini Devi w/o Late Ram Jatan Pathak holding PPO No xxxxxxxxxxxxx is a railway family pensioner having SB a/c no. xxxxxxxx at SBI/Velkunda Branch (IFSC- SBIN0008324). A correspondence followed by three reminders with copies to the concerned payee branch was made vide this office letter no. 47/DHN/Pension/Bank/2022 Dt.01/07/2022, 8/08/2022, Dt.06/09/2022, Dt.17/10/2022 for arranging payment of family pension as per following schedule:-
Rs. 900/- per month enhanced family pension w.e.f. 29/10/1993 to 31/12/1995. (As per 4th CPC) Rs.2882/-per month enhanced family pension w.e.f.01/01/1996 to 28/10/2000 and thereafter Rs.1576/- per month ordinary family pension as per 5th CPC.
But as intimated by you to Smt. Rukmini Devi vide letter no. RBO-V/22-23/F&C/325 D1.17/06/2022 enclosing pension revision details it seems that she was paid family pension @ Rs.1396/- w.e.f.29/10/1993 (ie. date of death of Late Ram Jatan Pathak) to 31/12/2005. She should be paid @ Rs. 2882/- per month enhanced family pension w.e.f. 01/01/1996 to 28/10/2000 and @ Rs.1576/-per month thereafter up to 31/12/2005.
In the meantime a correspondence has been made from your end to Smt. Rukmini Devi in response to a RTI reply stating that an amount of Rs.900/- per month plus D.A. was being paid to Smt. Rukmini Devi vide letter no. CPPC/Lucknow/ RTI/1834 Dt. 10/01/2024. As Such it seems that there is a contradiction in between your letter no. RBO-V/22- 23/F&C/325 Dt.17/06/2022 and above mentioned RTI reply. At this juncture there is a confusion regarding payment of family pension paid to Smt. Rukmini Devi whether the amount have been paid @ Rs.1396/- per month plus Dearness Relief or @ Rs.900/-per month plus Dearness Relief thereon. In such a crucial situation it is necessary to obtain a payment schedule from your end. As intimated by Smt. Rukmini Devi an amount of Page 7 of 10 Rs.121335/-on account of arrear has been paid by the bank. Let this office know whether the payment has been made @Rs.1396/- p.m. or @ Rs.900/-p.m. previously. If the arrear payment has been made @Rs.900/- then it should be done @Rs.1396/- up to 31/12/1995 as advised previously.
Therefore, it is requested to provide a payment details pertaining to the intervening period (i.e. 28/10/1993 tο 31/12/2005) at the earliest, so that proper compliance to the higher authority could be given without further delay.
Your kind consideration in the matter will be highly solicited.
Sd/-
Sr. Divisional Finance Manager East Central Railway, Dhanbad."
Extract of Annexure - G:
"No. CPPC-LKO/REV/2132 122-23 Date :04.03.2024 The Senior Divisional Finance Manager East Central Railways Dhanbad-826001 Jharkhand Dear Sir, PAYMENT OF FAMILY PENSION AS PER REVISED OF 5TH CPC IN FAVOUR OF SMT RUKMINI DEVI ΡΡΟ ΝΟ xxxxxxxxx ACCOUNT NO xxxxxxxxxxx With reference to your letter no 47/A/DHN/Pen/Bank/2024 dated 25.01.2024, in the captioned matter, we have to advise as under:
(a) Family pension is being paid to Smt. Rukmini Devi w/o Late Shri Ram Jatan Pathak, w.e.f. 29.10.1993. As this outfit was not established at that time, the pension was paid by Velkunda (Azamgarh) Branch. As per our record, family pension was paid as per PPO (copy enclosed). Record of disbursement of pension by branch, available with us, is also enclosed for your perusal. It appears that pension was paid with basic of Rs.900/-.
(b) Further, as per your letter no 47/DHN/Pension/Bank/2022 dated 01.07.2022, revised family pension w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to 31.12.2005 (5th CPC), as already been paid with arrears of Rs.121335/- (copy again enclosed for your reference).
2. In this connection, if Family pension is to be revised w.e.f. 29.10.1993 to 31.12.1995, kindly arrange to issue PPO so as to do the needful at our end.
Yours faithfully, Asstt. General Manager Page 8 of 10 Ms. Manjoosha Pathak, AGM & CPIO, CPPC, SBI, Lucknow submitted that arrears of pension as per prescribed calculation sheet has been disbursed to the Appellant as per due drawn statement with an amount of Rs. 1,396/-. Appellant's representative claimed that although the Appellant received arrears of Rs. 1,21,335/-, however, it was not the total arrear amount which was to be disbursed in favour of Appellant. He contended that payment was made to the Appellant @ Rs. 900/- pm against Rs. 1,396/- pm as claimed by the Respondent. Moreover, it was not shown in the calculation sheet as to how the SBI/ Railways arrived at the figure of Rs. 1,396/- pm. To this, CPIO, CPPC, SBI, Lucknow showed calculation sheet and statement to the Commission which is taken on record. She further stated that if Appellant has any doubt regarding disbursal of payment, she may approach the bank with the passbook to clarify her doubts.
Respondent again emphasized the information as is available has been provided to the Appellant and also arrears of family pension as per calculations was disbursed to the Appellant. There is no malafide on their part, therefore, SCN be dropped in the interest of justice.
Decision:
Perusal of the documents submitted by the Noticee- Mr. Nuas Topno, ADFM/Dhanbad & CPIO reveals that the queries of the Complainant had been duly replied by the Respondent vide letter vide letter No.47/DHN/PEN/RTI/RD/2023 dated 6.01.2023 as per the available records, in terms of the provisions of the RTI Act and the Commission upholds the same. Further, revised family pension w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to 31.12.2005 (5th CPC), has already been paid with arrears of Rs.1,21,335/- as per letter no 47/DHN/Pension/Bank/2022 dated 01.07.2022. The Noticee tendered his unconditional apology and prayed the Commission that his bona fide mistake may be condoned in the interest of justice.
In view of the above discussion, the Commission accepts the reply/explanation of the Noticee- Mr. Nuas Topno, ADFM/Dhanbad & CPIO. However, the Commission Page 9 of 10 advised the Respondent to be cautious in future so as to avoid attracting penal action.
Before parting with the case at hand, the Commission wishes to remark that such pertinent facts, as submitted during Show Cause proceedings by the Respondent, should be put on record before the Commission prior to the first date of hearing itself in order to reduce the time, energy and efforts in adjudication on such matters.
Lastly, the Complainant is advised to visit the office of Respondent as suggested during hearing on a mutually decided date and time to resolve her issue.
The show cause notice is hereby dropped, and the instant matter stands disposed of accordingly.
Vinod Kumar Tiwari (विनोद कुमार तििारी) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आयक्ु ि) Authenticated true copy (अभिप्रमाणणि सत्यापिि प्रनि) (S. Anantharaman) Dy. Registrar 011- 011- 26181827 Date Page 10 of 10 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)