Applicant: Is Provident Fund at IIFM, Bhopal was governed by PF Act, 1925? - CIC: Appellant is not allowed to deviate from the subject matter of the RTI application at appellate stage; For additional information, a fresh RTI application may be filed
13 Nov, 2017ORDER
1. Shri Rajendra Jayaswal, the appellant wanted to know whether Provident Fund at IIFM, Bhopal was governed by PF Act, 1925; the rule under which withholding PF over a period of more than 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. years by the institute was justified along with the details of the FAA for IIFM, Bhopal.
2. The CPIO intimated the appellant that the employees of the institute were governed by IIFM CPF Trust Deed 1987 Rules and as per clause 13(v) any person who desired to claim payment under these rules should send a written application in the context to the Secretary for Payment. Dissatisfied, the appellant approached the first appellate authority. The FAA does not appear to have adjudicated in the matter. Aggrieved, the appellant came in second appeal before the Commission stating that the desired information regarding his PF account number, its accumulated balance amount and valid reasons for non-payment has not been provided to him.
3. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant stated that the CPIO had not provided the appellant’s CPF account details viz. number, credited balance and annual interest paid etc.
4. The respondent stated that the RTI application dated 27.04.2016 which was addressed to the Ministry of Environment and Forests, New Delhi was received in the Ministry on 05.05.2016 and was transferred to the CPIO, IIFM on 09.05.2016 and again on 11.07.2016. The RTI application was received by the CPIO, IIFM along with the letter dated 11.07.2016 from the Ministry. A point wise reply had been provided to the appellant on 29.07.2016 stating that the IIFM employees were governed by IIFM CPF Trust Deed 1987 Rules and also explained the procedure to claim PF payment under clause 13 and sub clause (v) of IIFM CPF Trust Deed 1987 Rules.
5. On hearing both the parties the Commission observes that the point wise reply had been provided to the appellant on 29.07.2016. Further, with respect to the additional information i.e. the appellant’s CPF account details viz. number, credited balance and annual interest paid etc. was not a part of the appellant’s RTI application dated 27.04.2016, the appellant was expanding the scope of his RTI application. The Commission in its earlier decision dated 15.02.2013 in File No. CIC/DS/A/2012/001062- Smt. Priyadarshani Prakash Kulkarni Vs LIC of India held as under :-
“9. Commission accepts the CPIO’s submission as the appellant is not allowed to deviate from the subject matter of the RTI application dated 03 March 2010 at this stage. Appellant may file a fresh RTI application to seek additional information”.
6. In view of the above, the Commission does not find any reason to intervene in the matter. The appeal is disposed of.
(Manjula Prasher)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri Rajendra JayaswalShri Rajendra Jayaswal v. Indian Institute of Forest Management, in Appeal No. CIC/MOENF/A/2017/18 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. 46/MP and Appeal No. CIC/MOENF/A/2017/18 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. 46/MP, Date of Decision : October 30, 2017