Information regarding premium deposited by clients was sought to get agency commission from LIC - It was denied on the ground of non-availability of records as retention schedule was 4 years - CIC: provide information if policy numbers are produced
1. The appellant, Shri Vijay Kumar Nahta, submitted RTI application dated 26 August 2013 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), LIC of India, Alipurdwar seeking information regarding premium deposited at the said Branch by his clients/policyholders under his agency code 00244459 from January 2003 to November 2004, date of payment of yearly premium due etc.; through a total of 4 points.
2. Vide reply dated 20 September 2013, the CPIO replied that as per Section 2(i) “record” includes. (a) any document, manuscript and file; (b) any microfilm, microfiche and facsimile copy of a document; (c) any reproduction of image or images embodied in such microfilm (whether enlarged or not); and (d) any other material produced by a computer or any other device; of the RTI Act 2005, they did not have the relevant record hence they were unable to provide the information; however, they informed about the date of payment of yearly premium due July 2001 (FP) was 25.7.2001. Not satisfied by the decision of CPIO, the appellant preferred appeal dated 19 October 2013 before the first appellate authority (FAA) stating that baseless and frivolous reply had been furnished to him by the CPIO concerned. Vide order dated 4 December 2013, the FAA upheld the CPIO’s decision and also explained the matter in detail.
3. Dissatisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commission.
4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant submitted that he had filed the RTI application as a means to get his agency commission which was due. He submitted that he wanted to know the total commission due to him against the premiums paid by his clients to the LIC. He submitted that he transferred his agency to Guwahati from Alipurdwar as his agency status was degraded and that information sought by him had been denied by the respondent on the ground of nonavailability of records w.r.t. the requirement of the appellant and the FAA had also upheld the CPIO’s decision. He insisted that the appellant had the information sought for with them and they were not providing him the same.
5. The respondents submitted that the appellant had not mentioned any specific policy no. in respect of which he wanted the commission details and that they do not maintain their records agent wise rather they maintain their records policy number wise. They also submitted their record retention schedule for the records of commission bills was of 4 years and after that they destroy the information. The appellant submitted that similar information had been provided to him earlier but upon query he admitted that in that case he had provided the policy no. which enabled the respondents to provide the information about his commission.
6. After hearing both the parties in detail, the Commission accepts the submissions made by the respondents and upholds their decision. The respondent are, however, directed to furnish the information to the appellant if he produces the policy nos. for Alipurdwar Branch for the year 2003-2004 within 20 days of submission of the said information with them. The appeal is disposed of.
Citation: Shri Vijay Kumar Nahta v. LIC of India in Appeal: No. CIC/MP/A/2014/001163