O R D E R

CIC/CWCND/A/2020/672800:

1. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Central Water Commission, New Delhi. The appellant seeking information is as under:-

“A certified copy of my duly filled GPF withdrawal application form on the basis of which GPF advance was sanctioned to me during the year

1981-1982.

A certified copy of sanctioned order by competent authority related to above withdrawal application for the year 1981-1982”.

2. The CPIO vide letter dated 29-01-2020 has given a response to the applicant. Being dissatisfied with the same, the appellant has file first appeal dated 09-02-2020 on ground that provided information is incomplete, Misleading or false and requested that the information should be provided to him. The FAO vide order dated 06-03-2020 upheld CPIOs reply and disposed the appeal. He has filed a second appeal before the Commission on the ground that information sought has not been provided to him and requested to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

CIC/CWCND/A/2020/672804:

3. The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) Central Water Commission, New Delhi. The appellant seeking information is as under:-

“A certified copy of my duly filled GPF withdrawal application form on the basis of which GPF advance was sanctioned to me during the year

1979-1980.

A certified copy of sanctioned order by competent authority related to above withdrawal application for the year 1979-80”.

4. The CPIO vide letter dated 29-01-2020 has given a response to the applicant. Being dissatisfied with the same, the appellant has file first appeal dated 09-02-2020 on ground that provided information is incomplete, Misleading or false and requested that the information should be provided to him. The FAO vide order dated 06-03-2020 upheld CPIOs reply and disposed the appeal. He has filed a second appeal before the Commission on the ground that information sought has not been provided to him and requested to direct the respondent to provide complete and correct information.

Hearing:

5. The appellant attended the hearing through audio-call. The respondent, Ms. Prerna Neeraj Mohan, Under Secretary/ CPIO attended the hearing through audio-call.

6. Both the parties submitted their written submissions and the same have been taken on record.

7. The appellant submitted that the desired information has not been provided to him by the respondent on his RTI application dated 03.01.2020.

8. The respondent while reiterating the replies of the CPIO/ FAA submitted that the queries of the appellant pertains to the Personal file and accounts department, and Estt.XI Section. The respondent only issues sanction order of GPF withdrawal, which is a matter of personal file and not of service book. Further the appellant took VRS in the year 1999 and has sought the information after 20 years of retirement and almost after 37-46 years of GPF withdrawal and hence he information sought by the appellant has already been weeded out as per the record retention policy.

Decision:

9. The Commission, after hearing the submissions of both the parties and after perusal of records, observes that the appellant has sought copies of the GPF withdrawal application form filed by him and information related to it. The Commission further observes that the information sought by the appellant is almost 37-46 years of GPF withdrawal document and the same has been weeded out by the respondent as per their record retention policy. The Commission further observes that the documents owned or submitted by the appellant himself are supposed to be in his knowledge and possession and hence the same cannot be treated as a documents/ information not known to him.

10. In this context a reference was made to the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras, decision in 2014, W.P.No.26781 of 20