Central Information Commission
S S Nandisha vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation on 13 January, 2017
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26101592
File No. CIC/BS/A/2015/901853+002202/12057
10 January 2017
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Nandisha SS
No. 6/30-3, Shankara Nilaya
9th Cross 4th Main Chamarajapet
Karnataka - 560018
Respondent : CPIO / RPFC - II
EPFO,
Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan,
No. 13, Rajaram Mohanroy Road,
P.B.No.25146. Bangalore -560025
RPFC / CPIO
EPFO,
Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan,
14 Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066
CPIO (HRM)
EPFO,
Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan,
14 Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066
CPIO (IS)
EPFO,
Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan,
14 Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066
RTI application filed on : 06/03/2014, 22/08/2014
PIO replied on : 01/05/2014, 01/10/2014
First appeal filed on : 20/05/2014, 25/10/2014
First Appellate Authority order : 08/07/2014, 21/04/2015
Second Appeal dated : 06/10/2015, 26/10/2015
Information sought:
CIC/BS/A/2015/901853
1. The action taken on letter dated 26/06/2013, photocopy of the office note sheets and the orders passed by the bill section, on the clarifications quoted at Para 3,4 & 5 of the said letter.Page 1 of 3
2. Whether the above deputation was ordered on Administrative grounds? The various benefits entitled to me during the period of deputation.
3. The order of deputation dated 20/11/2009 do not show any clear indication about the local journey and there is a direction for me to work under the RPFC Peenya until further orders.
Hence I was under the orders of deputation to work at Peenya till March 2010. Therefore, provide the information with regard to the circumstances and orders to treat the period of Deputation as Local Journey, only after I applied for TA/DA Benefits.
4. The relevant rule under which the deputation was ordered and the entitled benefits available during the period of deputation.
5. During the period of the above deputation period, the Normal Place of my duty was the RO Bangalore and the duty place has been shifted temporarily by the issue of relieving order to report for duty at RO Peenya and to work at the temporary place until further orders. Inspite of my shifting of duty place, consequent on the order of deputation, the relevancy of SR46(6) be clarified.
6. I was entitled for reimbursement of mobile phone bills as per HO Order no. R- I/Hon/2006/245 dated 10/05/2007, and my bills are pending at RO Bangalore for payment since 2009 despite repeated requests.
The head office has also clarified vide letter dated 12 March 2013 to continue the payment and I have represented vide letter dated 18/03/2013 for clearing all my pending bills. The action taken on my representation may be intimated along with the photocopy of the office note sheets/orders passed by the competent authority in response to representation dated 18/03/2013.
7. A photocopy of the reminder letter No. KN/BNG/CT/249/10-11 dated 06/01/2011 may be provided.
8. A photocopy of the letter, addressed to Head Office seeking the clarification for which the reminder letter no. KN/BNG/CT/249/10-11 dated 06/01/2011 was issued may be provided CIC/BS/A/2015/002202
1. Provide the information with regard to the circumstances to appoint the outside persons as Assistant Programmers without giving chance to the existing staff as per the decision of Executive Committee of the CBT in its meeting 14/07/1997.
2. Provide the information with regard to the basis on which the Assistant Programmers were appointed in the EPFO during the 1998 before the relevant Recruitment Rules came into force. A copy of the relevant decision taken by the competent authority for deviating the above said decision.
3. Provide a copy of the notification issued for appointing the Assistant Programmers prior to July 1998.
4. Provide the details of the eligibility conditions satisfied by the candidates who have been appointed as Assistant Programmers during 1998 and the eligibility conditions prescribed in the notification with regard to the Qualification, Experience, Previous cadre etc, while applying for the said post.
5. Provide a copy of HO letter no. HRM/V/A-17(5)/2005/4704 dated 17/05/2013. Grounds for the Second Appeal:
The CPIO has not provided the desired information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Mr. Nandisha SS Page 2 of 3 Respondent: Mr. Amit Singla CPIO Delhi & Mr. Nitesh Rajmane CPIO's representative Bangalore through VC CIC/BS/A/2015/901853 The applicant stated that he had given a representation dated 06/03/2014 to the CPIO Bangalore and he wants the relevant file notings vide which the representation was dealt with. The CPIO's representative stated that he will provide the information Decision notice:
As stated by the CPIO's representative Bangalore he should provide copy of relevant file notings vide which the applicant's representation dated 06/03/2014 was disposed of within 7 days from the date of receipt of this order..
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
CIC/BS/A/2015/002202 The applicant stated that despite FAA's order the respondent have not supplied the information sought under queries 1 to 4 of his RTI application dated 22/08/2014. The CPIO stated that he has collected all the records and will supply the information to the applicant immediately.
Decision Notice:
As stated by the CPIO he should furnish the information as requested above by the applicant forthwith.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy:
(R. L. Gupta) Dy. Registrar/Designated Officer Page 3 of 3