Priyanka Devi vs Indian Army on 31 March, 2022

[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Priyanka Devi vs Indian Army on 31 March, 2022

Bench: Vanaja N Sarna

                             क य सच ु ना आयोग
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                              बाबा गंगनाथ माग
                            Baba Gangnath Marg
                         मु नरका, नई द ल - 110067
                        Munirka, New Delhi-110067

                                              File no.: CIC/IARMY/A/2020/132181
In the matter of:
Priyanka Devi
                                                              ... Appellant
                                         VS
Central Public Information Officer
Records the JAT Regiment,
PIN 900496, C/o 56 APO
                                                              ...Respondent

RTI application filed on : 08/07/2020 CPIO replied on : 06/08/2020 First appeal filed on : 29/08/2020 First Appellate Authority order : 30/09/2020 Second Appeal dated : 13/10/2020 Date of Hearing : 31/03/2022 Date of Decision : 31/03/2022 The following were present:

Appellant: Not present Respondent: Major Dinesh Kumar, CPIO's Representative, present over VC Information Sought:

The appellant has sought the following information with regard to distribution of retirement funds of her husband Mr. Ashok Kumar, No.3199595, Jat Regiment:

1. Provide details of action taken on her complaint dated 12/06/2020.

2. As to when the action on her complaint would be completed?

3. Whether the issues raised by her in the complaint will be resolved or not? If yes, then up to which time.

4. And other related Information.

Grounds for Second Appeal The CPIO did not provide the desired information.

Submissions made by Appellant and Respondent during Hearing:

The appellant was not present at the VC venue despite due service of notice on 15.03.2022vide speed post acknowledgment no.ED0081361101IN.

To a query as to why action taken on the complaint dated 12.06.2020 was not given, the CPIO submitted that on 03.10.2020 action taken was informed. Observations:

Based on a perusal of the record, it was noted that the CPIO vide letter dated 06.08.2020 denied the information stating that the same is not covered u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act. Moreover, the information sought is interrogatory in nature.

However, the FAA vide order dated 30.09.2020 informed that the Custodian of Jat Regiment had sent another reply on 27.08.2020 in which it was mentioned that pension of a person is immune from attachment as per Sec 11 of the Pension Act 1871 and provision (g) to Sec 60 CPC. Therefore, it is not feasible to divide the pension. Nonetheless, she was advised to approach the civil court/family court for maintenance.

The Commission observed that a point-wise reply informing the action taken on her complaint should have been given to the appellant. Moreover, the letter dated 03.10.2020 is not on record.

Decision:

In view of the above observations, the CPIO is directed to send a revised reply on point no. 1 to the appellant within 7 days from the date of receipt of the order. The rest of the points are interrogative in nature and thus are not covered under Sec 2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आय! ु त) 2 Authenticated true copy (अ$भ&मा'णत स)या*पत& त) A.K. Assija (ऐ.के. असीजा) Dy. Registrar (उप-पंजीयक) 011-26182594 / दनांक/ Date 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission