Central Information Commission
Mrmange Ram vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi on 17 June, 2014
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
(Room No.315, BWing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066)
File No.CIC/AD/A/2013/000871SA
(Mr. Mange Ram Vs. Social Welfare Dept. , GNCTD)
Appellant : Mr. Mange Ram
Respondent : Deptt.of Social Welfare, GNCTD,
Date of hearing : 05062014
Date of decision : 17062014
Information Commissioner : Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu
(Madabhushi Sridhar)
Referred Sections : Sections 3, 19(3) of the
RTI Act
Result : Appeal allowed / disposed of
Observation : A case of abuse of RTI
The appellant is present. The Public Authority is represented by Mr. Ananda Rao,
District Official (SW) and Mr. Akhilesh, Data Entry Operator, Deptt. Of Social Welfare, Govt. of
NCT of Delhi.
FACTS
2. The appellant submitted that through his RTI application dt. 19102012, he is seeking to know the details of the documents which formed the basis to sanction old age pension to Shri Jogi Ram, who is the father of the appellant. According to the appellant, Shri 1 Jogi Ram is not entitled to old age pension as he is having immovable properties. PIO's reply is not available on the file. Being unsatisfied with the reply provided the appellant preferred First Appeal. First Appellate Authority by his order 712013 directed the PIO/DSWO(South West) to provide the specific information to the appellant as per record within 21 days of the receipt of the order and disposed of the appeal. Not satisfied with the information furnished by the Public Authority, the appellant filed 2nd appeal before the Commission.
Decision:
3. Heard the submissions. The appellant, aged 65, retired employee, is seeking the documents, which formed the basis for the sanction of old age pension to his father Shri Jogi Ram, aged 95 years. The appellant is also a senior citizen (65) and retired from the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) as Inspector. He claims that his father had 60 acres of land, a house and some more properties which disentitle him to get old age pension. After talking to appellant, the Commission found that he wanted to settle his personal vengeance against his father for allegedly denying his due share of property to him. He stated that it was not his father's selfacquired property but ancestral property and that his father made a willdeed in without giving him any share. He alleged that a propertied person claiming pension would amount to fraud and thus his RTI application was in public interest aimed at stopping the pension to his nonagenarian father.
4. The appellant was seeking a copy of the documents based on which his father was given pension. The respondent authority says that they do not have any documents on their 2 file which disclose that Mr. Jogi Ram had any property in his name. He also produced a letter written by the neighbors of Mr. Jogi Ram revealing that he does not have any source of income. Thus they do not have any record to prove that Mr. Jogi Ram is not eligible to get the old age pension.
5. Assuming that his father was having property as alleged, it would have been locked up with shares held by his sons, and there is every possibility that other younger sons might had the possession of the property, which might have not yielded any income or the grand old man might have no access to that income. The very fact that property held in his name was ancestral property, means that the appellant too had a share in that property along with his sons, daughter and grandsons & granddaughters. A son who is also senior citizen and retired as police inspector is expected to know that the ancestral property cannot be wholly transferred or distributed by will, because the sons, daughters, grandsons and granddaughters would have share in it.
6. It is difficult for the Commission to assume that 95 year old man was fraudulently drawing pension, especially when public authority was not pleading it. In fact, such grand aged persons have a right of maintenance guaranteed under THE MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT, 2007. Senior citizen means any person being a citizen of India, who has attained the age of sixty years or above [Section 2 (h)]. Relevant Provisions of the Act are:
THE RIGHTS OF SENIOR CITIZENS UNDER THE MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT, 2007 "Section 4. Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens 3
1. A senior citizen including parent who is unable to maintain himself from his own earning or property owned by him, shall be entitled to make an application under section 5 in case of i. parent or grandparent, against one or more of his children not being a minor ii. a childless senior citizen, against such of his relative referred to in clause (g) of section 2
2. The obligation of the children or relative, as the case may be, to maintain a senior citizen extends to the needs of such citizen so that senior citizen may lead a normal life.
3. The obligation of the children to maintain his or her parent extends to the needs of such parent either father or mother or both, as the case may be, so that such parent may lead a normal life.
4. Any person being a relative of a senior citizen and having sufficient means shall maintain such senior citizen provided he is in possession of the property of such senior citizen or he would inherit the property of such senior citizen:
Provided that where more than one relatives are entitled to inherit the property of a senior citizen, the maintenance shall be payable by such relative in the proportion in which they would inherit his property."
Thus if he is unable to maintain from the property owned by him, a senior citizen is entitled to get the maintenance, one of such measures is the payment of pension by the state under its social welfare scheme.
5. Application for maintenance
1. An application for maintenance under section 4, may be made a. by a senior citizen or a parent, as the case may be; or b. if he is incapable, by any other person or organisation authorised by him; or c. the Tribunal may take cognizance sua motu Explanation: For the purposes of this section "organisation" means any voluntary association registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, or any other law for the time being in force.
2. The Tribunal may, during the pendency of the proceeding regarding monthly allowance for the maintenance under this section, order such children or relative to make a monthly allowance for the interim maintenance of such senior citizen including parent and to pay the same to such senior citizen including parent as the Tribunal may from time to time direct.
3. On receipt of an application for maintenance under subsection(I), after giving notice of the application to the children or relative and after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, hold an inquiry for determining the amount of maintenance
4. An application filed under subsection (2) for the monthly allowance for the maintenance and expenses for proceeding shall be disposed of within ninety days from the date of the service of notice of the application to such person:
Provided that the Tribunal may extend the said period, once for a maximum period of thirty days in exceptional circumstances for reasons to be recorded in writing.
5. An application for maintenance under subsection (I) may be filed against one or more persons:4
Provided that such children or relative may implead the other person liable to maintain parent in the application for maintenance.
6. Where a maintenance order was made against more than one person, the death of one of them does not affect the liability of others to continue paying maintenance.
7. Any such allowance for the maintenance and expenses for proceeding shall be payable from the date of the order, or, if so ordered, from the date of the application for maintenance or expenses of proceeding, as the case may be.
8. If, children or relative so ordered fail, without sufficient cause to comply with the order, any such Tribunal may, for every breach of the order, issue a warrant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines, and may sentence such person for the whole, or any part of each month's allowance for the maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be, remaining unpaid after the execution of the warrant, to imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made whichever is earlier:
Provided that no warrant shall be issued for the recovery of any amount due under this section unless application be made to the Tribunal to levy such amount within a period of three months from the date on which it became due.
Section 9. Order for maintenance
1. If children or relatives, as the case may be, neglect or refuse to maintain a senior citizen being unable to maintain himself, the Tribunal may, on being satisfied of such neglect or refusal, order such children or relatives to make a monthly allowance at such monthly rate for the maintenance of such senior citizen, as the Tribunal may deem fit and to pay the same to such senior citizen as the Tribunal may, from time to time, direct.
2. The maximum maintenance allowance which may be ordered by such Tribunal shall be such as may be prescribed by the State Government which shall not exceed ten thousand rupees per month.
Section 11. Enforcement of order of maintenance
1. A copy of the order of maintenance and including the order regarding expenses of proceedings, as the case may be, shall be given without payment of any fee to the senior citizen or to parent, as the case may be, in whose favour it is made and such order may be enforced by any Tribunal in any place where the person against whom it is made, such Tribunal on being satisfied as to the identity of the parties and the nonpayment of the allowance, or as the case may be, expenses, due.
2. A maintenance order made under this Act shall have the same force and effect as an order passed under Chapter I X of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and shall beexecuted in the manner prescribed for the execution of such order by that Code.
Section 23. Transfer of property to be void in certain circumstances
1. Where any senior citizen who, after the commencement of this Act, has by way of gift or otherwise, his property, subject to the condition that the transferee shall provide the basic amenities and basic physical needs to the transferor and such transferee refuses or fails to provide such amenities and physical needs, the said transfer of property shall be deemed to have been made by fraud or coercion or under undue influence and shall at the option ofthe transferor be declared void by the Tribunal.
2. Where any senior citizen has a right to receive maintenance out of an estate and such estate or part , thereof is transferred, the right to receive maintenance may be enforced against the transferee if the transferee has notice of the right, or if the transfer is gratuitous; but not against the transferee for consideration and without notice of right.5
3. If any senior citizen is incapable of enforcing the rights under subsections (1) and (2), action may be taken on his behalf by any of the organization referred to in Explanation to subsection (1) of section 5.
The sons have a statutory duty to maintain the parents after their age of 65. It is not left as 'pious obligation' as was done previously under the Hindu law. The law with these provisions shows that immovable property in their name would not provide enough safeguard or maintenance needed to the senior citizen at their old age.
Since the Respondents submitted that they have not 'held' any document which disclose property the name of Jogiram and they have a letter from neighbours revealing that the old man had no properties to support him, the Commission finds that the respondent authority need not give anything to appellant. The Commission directs the public authority to see whether Mr Jogiram himself personally is receiving the pension amount regularly and ensure the same to avoid possible exploitation by others. The Commission directs the respondents to give a copy of letter given by the neighbours of Mr. Jogiram stating he had no property.
6. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(M. Sridhar Acharyulu) Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy (Ashwani K. Sharma) Designated Officer Address of the parties:
1. The CPIO under RTI, Govt. of NCT of Delhi O/o Dy.Director(FAS), Deptt. Of Social welfare GLNS Complex, Delhi Gate 6 New Delhi
2. Shri Mange Ram S/o Shri Jogeram, M-27, Dharampura, Najafgarh New Delhi-110043 7