S Rudraprakash vs The CPIO Life Insurance Corporation of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

Advocates:
For the Appellant/Complainant: S Rudraprakash
For the Respondents: Ms. Gayathri, Shri Rajeev Kapoor, Shri Sriram Vaidya

Table of Content
1. the appellant sought regulations and rules pertaining to lic provident fund. (Para 1 , 3)
2. the cpio provided rules regarding the fiduciary nature of the information requested. (Para 2 , 4 , 5)
3. the applicant contended the unavailability from public domain, citing failures by the cpio. (Para 6 , 7)
4. observations noted that public authorities are not obliged to disclose records not in possession. (Para 8 , 10 , 12)
5. the commission dismissed the appeal affirming transparency and adherence to provisions of the rti act. (Para 9 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)

Information sought:

1. The Appellant/Complainant filed an RTI application dated 18.03.2024 (online) seeking the following information:

1) Kindly provide a copy of the standing rules, regulations, statutes applicable for LIC of India for provident fund of its employees.

2) copy of the guidelines, rules, statutes applicable to LIC of India wrt to unpaid provident fund gratuity, bonus etc of LIC employees.

3) If no such rules guidelines exist, kindly let me know if you are bound by regulations of the Provident Fund.

2. The CPIO furnished a reply to the Appellant/Complainant on 16.04.2024 stating as under:

1) The applicant is info