Central Information Commission
Thomas P A vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 11 February, 2026
केन्द्रीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ मागग, मुननरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई निल्ली, New Delhi - 110067
नितीय अपील संख्या/Second Appeal No. CIC/LICOI/A/2024/632923
Thomas P A ......अपीलकताग /Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: LIC ....प्रनतवािीगण/Respondents
Date of Hearing : 11.02.2026
Date of Decision : 11.02.2026
Information Commissioner : Shri Surendra Singh Meena
Relevant Facts emerging from appeal:
RTI application : 09.07.2024
PIO replied on : 26.07.2024
First Appeal filed on : 26.07.2024
First Appeal Order on : 31.07.2024
2nd Appeal received on : Not in Record
CIC/LICOI/A/2024/632923 Page 1 of 5
Information soughtand background of the case:
The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 09.07.2024 seeking information on the following points:
"With reference to the delay in payment of the financial benefits available consequent on the sudden death of Smt. Preeti Thomas, Development Officer, LIC of India, Bangalore Civil Station East Branch in October 2014, the following information may kindly be furnished to me (spouse). The information is sought as per the provisions of Right to Information Act.
1. As per the records in LIC, what is the reason for delay in payment of family pension to the spouse and payment of other benefits like gratuity, addl Gratuity Group Term Insurance, etc., to the nominees.
2. What is the legal provision/administrative instruction relied by the LIC, for insisting on the production of a succession certificate issued by competent court for payment of family pension to the spouse and other payments to the nominees. Is there any amount not covered by any nomination.
3. Is there any Will claimed to be executed by the late Smt. Preeti Thomas submitted to LIC by the daughter of the late employee. If so, what is date on which the will is received by LIC and what is date of its execution. Is it a registered will and if not, provide the details of witnesses to the execution of the will. Did LIC take any steps to verify the genuineness of the will which is presented after a long time and prima facie it shows the possibility of the said document being fabricated or forged and if so what is the result of such verification.
4. If the will was received earlier by the LIC, what is the reason as per the records in LIC for not mentioning the existence of a will in the reply to RTI as well in earlier correspondences by LIC, though it was informed that nominations were filed by the employee.
5. According to the records in LIC, the applicable Rules and the practice followed by LIC, can a succession certificate or will authorise the LIC to CIC/LICOI/A/2024/632923 Page 2 of 5 disburse the family pension to any person other than the spouse being the only claimant and other benefits to persons other than the nominees.
6. If succession certificate is required as insisted by the LIC, what is the reason recorded in the files of LIC for disbursement of provident fund accumulation to the nominee without a succession certificate."
The CPIO replied vide letter dated 26.07.2024 and the same is reproduced as under:-
"These questions are not coming under the purview of RTI ACT, 2005.
The information which relates to personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. Further the information available to person held in his fiduciary relationship, hence unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority, as the case may be, satisfied that the larger public interest justifies and disclosure of such information, hence it is exempted as per 8(1)(c) and 8 (1) (j) of RTI Act,2005.."
Refused access to information requested, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 26.07.2024. The FAA vide order dated 31.07.2024 stated as under:-
"You are advised to submit the SUCCESSION CERTIFICATE from the Jurisdictional Court to enable us for the settlement of financial benefits consequent upon the death of Late Smt. Preethi Thomas, as informed by our Marketing Department vide their letter Ref.Mktg/Dev.Off, dated 16.01.2024 by Registered Post with acknowledgment due.
In view of above reply, the appeal is disposed of as consequence."
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.
CIC/LICOI/A/2024/632923 Page 3 of 5Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
The appellant remained absent.
The respondent Ms. Preeti, D.M and Mr. Venkat Rao, Administrative Officer (Bengalore), was present through video conference.
The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the appellant is husband of their deceased employee and seeking information regarding payment of family pension. She further submitted that the appellant is neither nominee in the record of the family pension nor submitted succession certificate, hence denied u/s 8 (1) (j) of the RTI Act.
Decision:
In the light of the above facts and perusal of the available record, the Commission noted that respondent given the reply to the appellant vide letter dated 26.07.2024, the appellant remained absent during hearing, it appears the appellant is not interested in pursuing the case further, accordingly, the appeal is disposed.
Sd (Surendra Singh Meena) (सुरेंद्र ससिंह मीना) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयुक्त) निनां क/Date: 11.02.2026 Authenticated true copy Ramesh Babu Krishnan (रमेश बाबू कृष्णन) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26105027 CIC/LICOI/A/2024/632923 Page 4 of 5 Addresses of the parties:
1. Thomas PA
2. The CPIO LIC of India, Bengaluru Divisional Office II, Jeevan Jyoti, Indira Nagar II Stage, Near BDA Shopping Complex, Bengaluru - 560038 CIC/LICOI/A/2024/632923 Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)