RTI Corner

The appellant sought certified copies of complete documents based on which details relating to his employee code were entered in the SECL record. He alleged that the Date of Birth entered in his service record is 1956 instead of 1966, hence, he had to retire early from his services. The appellant filed a second appeal before the CIC on the grounds that the CPIO did not provide the information sought for by him stating that no such documents are available. The CIC observed that as per the respondent, the documents sought by the appellant cannot be retrieved since the same are not available in the records of the respondent authority. The CIC directed the respondent to file an affidavit with it deposing that the records, on the basis of which the NEIS data relating to the appellant was generated, are not available with respondent. Hence, no information can be provided to the appellant. A copy of the affidavit was directed to be provided to the appellant.
Comments
There have been many instances, including some high profile ones, where superannuation has been challenged on the basis of second set of birth documents. The proper maintenance of records by the authorities can avoid such controversies.
Citation: Mool Singh v. CPIO, Western Coalfields Limited in Second Appeal No. CIC/WCLTD/A/2017/163501, Date 16.04.2019
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an expert on RTI matters and has co-authored the books RIGHT TO INFORMATION - LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link: http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/