Information regarding the staff regulations which stipulate Privilege Leave encashment and other information was sought - PIO: PL encashment is allowed to the employees who retire after putting in at least 28 years service - CIC: appeal dismissed
1. The appellant, Shri S. S. S. Babu Rao, submitted RTI application dated 31 December 2012 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Machilipatnam, seeking information regarding the staff regulations which stipulate Privilege Leave encashment and other information regarding payment of Privilege Leave (PL) to Ms. N. S. Savitri Kumari, through a total of 2 points.
2. Vide reply dated 16 January 2013, CPIO furnished information on point no. 1 to the appellant and denied the other information relating to Ms. N. S. Savitri Kumari u/s 8(1)(j) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, 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 unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information: Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. of the RTI Act, 2005. Not satisfied with the CPIO’s reply, the appellant preferred appeal dated 8 February 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) alleging that his RTI application had not been properly replied to and he was not satisfied with that. Vide order dated 12 March 2013, FAA upheld the CPIO’s decision.
3. Not satisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred second appeal before the Commission.
4. The matter was heard today via videoconferencing. The appellant, Shri S.S.S. Babu Rao, was not present at the hearing. The respondents, Shri Y. Nageshwaram, CPIO/Manager and Shri D. Rama Rao, Manager (CRM) made submissions from Machilipatnam.
5. The CPIO submitted that the information sought by the appellant regarding the reasons for rejection of his Privilege Leave encashment were provided to the appellant. The respondent added that PL encashment is allowed to the employees who retire after putting in at least 28 years service. The employees who resign are not entitled to PL encashment. He stated that Ms N.S. Savitri Kumari had fulfilled the criteria.
6. The Commission is satisfied with the CPIO’s submissions that the information as held has been provided to the appellant. The appeal is dismissed and the case is closed.
Citation: Shri S. S. S. Babu Rao v. Life Insurance Corporation of India in Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2013/00861/MP