Central Information Commission
Kishore Nayar vs Ministry Of Corporate Affairs on 6 January, 2020
Author: Vanaja N Sarna
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
Decision no.: CIC/MOCAF/A/2018/637671/02519
File no.: CIC/MOCAF/A/2018/637671
In the matter of:
Kishore Nayar
... Appellant
VS
Sr. Accounts Officer & CPIO
IEPF Authority,
Ministry of Corporate Affairs
Jeevan Vihar Building, Ground Floor,
Sansad Marg, New Delhi - 110 001
...Respondent
RTI application filed on : 29/08/2018 CPIO replied on : 07/09/2018 First appeal filed on : 10/10/2018 First Appellate Authority order : Not on record Second Appeal dated : 29/12/2018 Date of Hearing : 03/01/2020 Date of Decision : 03/01/2020 The following were present:
Appellant: Present in person alongwith Advocate Jaiteyan Singh Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar, Assistant Director and CPIOs representative and Arvind Kumar, Junior Technical Assistant and Shri M.M Pandey, Consultant, present in person Information Sought:
The appellant has sought the following information:
1. Does IEPF have any record of shares owned by Mr. Gurparshad Nayar.
2. If the answer to Question No. 1 is yes, whether the said shares pertain to Reliance Infrastructure Limited.1
3. If the answer to Question No. 2 is yes, provide the Folio number and certificate numbers of those shares.
4. As per records, is it correct that investor Mr. Gurparshad Nayar owns 1114923 number of shares of Reliance Infrastructure Limited.
5. 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 submitted that he had asked for information on 19 points from which the answer to only the first question has been received by the Appellant and no response has been given to any of the other questions. He further submitted that the Appellant had placed before the CPIO a screenshot taken from the website of IEPF showing large number of shares of Reliance lnfrastructure Ltd. belonging to Shri Gurparshad Nayar who was his father. The said screenshot is an extremely important document as the same shows that there are 1114923 number of shares lying in the name of Late Sh. Gurparshad Nayar. He pointed out that the said screenshot has completely been ignored by the CPIO and no response has been given to the Appellant regarding the same. ln fact, the response received from the CPIO does not even acknowledge the said screenshot which shows that it has completely been ignored without providing any reason. He further submitted that the questions that have been asked by him in the RTI application are extremely direct and are not a fishing or roving enquiry, but asked based on information received from the IEPF website, the screenshot of which has been shared. The questions asked are within the parameters of the Right to lnformation Act, 2005 and are as such liable to be answered by the IEPF and there is no reason why the information should be withheld from him who is the legal heir of Late Sh. Gurparshad Nayar. He submitted that, as suggested by the CPIO in the brief response given by her, in order to file an IEPF Form 5 to generate an SRN Number, it is extremely important that the folio numbers qua the said shares are given to the Appellant so that appropriate steps can be taken in order to claim the said shares. He summed up requesting that information as sought for in the RTI Application be given to him.
The CPIO submitted that an appropriate reply was sent to the appellant on 07.09.2018. It was informed that as per records available with IEPF authority, no shares in the name of Guruprasad Nayar were available. It was suggested that he should pursue his claim with the concerned company asking whether 2 File no.: CIC/MOCAF/A/2018/637671 the shares have been transferred to IEPFA or not, if transferred ,visit the IEPF official website [email protected] and filed IEPF form-5 to generate SRN.'' He further submitted that the first appeal of the appellant was not received.
On a query by the Commission he submitted that an additional reply was sent to the appellant on 26.12.2019.
Observations:
Based on a perusal of the record it is noted that a point wise reply was not provided to the appellant. Moreover, the reply dated 26.12.2019 was simply a repetition of the earlier reply. The appellant has substantiated his contentions in detail and a point wise reply is imperative.
Decision:
In the interest of justice and as the appellant's father is no more, the CPIO is directed to take assistance from the Nodal Officer of Reliance Infrastructure Limited and Karvy Computer Share Pvt Limited as suggested by the appellant and provide a point wise reply to the appellant within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Vanaja N. Sarna (वनजा एन. सरना) Information Commissioner (सच ू ना आय! ु त) 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