Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
  • 0
oppilamani

Information available in the service register and nomination for family pension

Question

oppilamani

I am 69 years old. My only younger brother Mr. Jayaraman was working in the Registraation Dept.of Tamil Nadu Govt in CHENNAI.He retired on 31-1-2012. In 1981 he married Mrs. Malarkodi on his own accord without the knowledge of myself,my mother and sisters all living at Ariyalur. On knowing the fact that Jayaraman was already living with one Tmt. Sampathkumari, a co worker of his office Malarkodi ran away to her parents. Jayaraman never cared for his first wife and his blood relations(me and my relatives) and living with Sampathkumari illegally, we had neglected him for his misconduct and immoral turpitude. He never visited to our family at Ariyalur from 1980 till to his death in April, 2017 at Ariyalur. ON his death only it was known to us that he had left Sampathkumari and was living with another lady Ramadevi from 2003. As Ramadevi had failed to take care of his health and left to her mother, Jayaraman came to Ariyalur, native place and surrendered to my sister for treatment on 25-3-2017 in a critical condition.He died at the hospital on 10-4-2017 without informing anything to us.At the time of his death I was living at Coimbatore and unable to get any information about his service. As he had no child through all the said three ladies, being an available brother I had performed his obituaries etc and put fire on the body.As Ramadevi claimed rights over the properties left over by him at Chennai, pensionery benefits etc. I had submitted a petition to the Dt. Registrar, Chennai South requesting information under RTI Act. He is the appointing authority and maintaining his Service Register and pension sanctioning authority.

The petition dt 07-09-2017 is attached herewith as per the additional option. It may kindly be perused. Out of the 10 items relating to information sought, the PIO Dt.Registrar, Chennai south has refused to furnish information on items No.1, 2,3,6 and 8. as no records are available in his office.and rejected my request for items No.4,5,7,9 and 10 as they related to Private individual.

As regards the information about his service etc they should have been entered in the Service Register of a Govt. Servant prescribed by the Tamil Nadu Govt as per Service Rules.The transfer from Chennai South District to far away district Tuticorin and reposting to Chennai South should have been entered in the Service Register of the individual which is a basic statutory record for claiming pay and allowances by the respective pay drawing officers, pension sanctioning authority.Based on the entries alone, the qualifying service of a person for pension, Dcrg, Family pension, GPF accumulations,withdrawals etc may be calculated and ordered to be paid to a retired Govt.Servant. Nominations filed for all the above claims should have been obtained by the respective officers and filed in the Service Register of a Govt.Servant. Acquisition of immovable and movables and its disposals and permission to construct a building on the plot owned by the govt.Servant should have been entered in that register. Without the Service register, the appointing authority viz the Dt. registrar should not have been counter signed the Pension proposals signed by the retired Govt.Servant. Jayaraman. In 1986.Jayaraman had purchased a plot No. 24 at Vandalur in S.No.113/1 now valued to Rs.2 crores and constructed a house building in 2010.All of them should have been entered in the SB. The marriage details of Malarkodi, Sampathkumari and Ramadevi should have been entered by the Officers maintaining authority. In the absence of valid nominations supported by records, the Dt.Registrar should not have forwarded the proposals to the Accountant General for Pension, Family pension, Withdrawal of GPF amount etc. How the Dt. Registrar had ordered for such things.

As regards the enquiry conducted by the Dept, the records might be available with the Head of the Dept for which, the PIO should have forwarded the relevant portion of my petition to the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai under Sec 6(3) of the RTI Act.

The PIO has utterly failed in his duties.

As regards the reply of the PIO that relates to a private individual is not acceptable. All the details are available in Public Records. More over Jayaraman had died on 10-4-2017 and I am his elder brother becoming a II class legal heir provided under the Hind Succession Act 1956. the Tasildar, Chengalpattu who is the competent authority to issue a legal heir certificate under Law has rejected the request of Ramadevi for legal heir ship and directed her to approach the Civil Court. Therefore there is no privacy for a dead person and the particulars available in the Service Register of a Govt.Servant is not a private matter and cannot be rejected to his own brother so as to enable him to seek remedies in a court of Law against the Wrong claimants posing themselves as heirs.

Kindly advice in the matter to file an appeal to the Appellate authrityscan0009.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Prasad GLN

This is a fit case for going for first and second appeals.

PIO can not reject any third party information without invoking Sec.11.

In case of dead persons PIO can never do that.

There is larger public interest in the issue and mere providing of information on record is not a crime or facilitating a crime, as claim settlement is only as per laid down procedure.

File this as grievance in the state portal and also go for first appeal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
oppilamani

ir, thanks for your opinion.After a prolonged battle, I have collected documents from the Registration Dept and Court. In the order dt 13-6-1990 in HMOP No.1026 of 1989, the Addl Pricipal Judge of the Addl Principal Family Court, Chennai has passed an exparte order and declared that the first Marriage between Jayaraman and S.Malarkodi,(first wife married in 1981) is dissolved under Sec 13(1)(i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of desertion. As per the registered Doct.No.11 of 2001 registered in the Sub Registrar's office, Ambatore, Chennai on 4-1-2001, Jayaraman and Sampathkumari, a co worker of his office have executed a marriage cancellation deed in which they had declared that they had earlier married as per hindu Customs and lived as husband and wife from 1981 to 2001and they had no children. They have therefore decided to separate themselves as per the mediator's decision and therefore cancelled their earlier marriage without any awards, compensation. On the date of registration of the deed, Jayaraman was at the age of 48 and they have themselves accepted to marry other persons on their own accord. As per the deed, it is clearly evident that both of them had married in 1981 after sending out Malarkodi (first wife) without divorse, which has been termed by the Family Court in 1990 as desertion The question now arise is whether such a cancellation deed executed by Jayaraman with his second wife is valid before law. There is no legal separation as per law. It means that the marriage took place between Jayaraman and Sampathkumari is in force at that time of marriying another lady Ramadevi at her age of 38. More over She had come to Jayaraman without divorcing her first husband and she herself had accepted the fact before my relatives on 12-10-2017, after the death of Jayaraman that Jayaraman is her second husband. As per the Ration card and voter list entries, Ramadevi was living with her mother at a dfferent place at Chennai with a name of RAMABAI. At her 38 th year, she had changed her name as Ramadevi and started living with Jayaraman from 2003.We are not sure till today that the marriage of Jayaraman with Ramadevi was performed stautorily or not. The main question to be clarified to me is whether the marriage of Ramadevi said to be taken place with Jayaraman in 2003 is valid as per law, in the absence of Legal separation order issued by the Court granting divorse between Jayaraman and Sampathkumari and whether the the marriage cancellation deed executed between them in 2001 alone is sufficient for marrying another lady.Will it not amount to bigamy punishable under IPC. If the marriage of ramadevi said to be taken place with Jayaraman is held to be invalid, Ramadevi will lost her right as his Wife and she can never get Legal Heir ship Certificate from the Tahsildar or competen Courts. Then automatically she cannot claim rights over the ancestral propertis at ariyalur. Anothe question has also now arisen. Jayaraman before his death have executed a settlement deed in favour of Ramadevi in 2015 transferring One Ground of house site together with House building totally valued Rs1,00,00,000/- for which he has paid Rs,10,000/- as stamp duty treating her as kis wife. If it is held that Ramadevi cannot hold the status of "Wife" as defined in Law, the transfer made by Jayaraman has to be treated as conveyance for wich stamp duty at the rate of 13% has to be paid.Rs.13,00,000/-. In such case whether the settlement deed executed in 2015 with in sufficient stamp duty can be held as valid document?Steps to be taken by me in this regard may kindly be indicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Prasad GLN

Please understand that this is not a legal forum and you can not get exact guidance on such Registration fee, etc., without knowing entire facts and going through documents, as to the manner in which the deceased acquired the property etc.

Simply because the stamps under charged, the document can not be declared as invalid. If a complaint is booked, they may collect additional stamps as per the act with penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
oppilamani

Respected Sir,

As advised by our Members I filed an appeal to the Dy.Inspector General of Registration, Chennai on 28-10-2017 in time. In that appeal I had already explained in detail about the irresponsible and vague reply given by the PIO. The Cic decision in which it was held that quoting the provisions of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act to deny the information without giving any justification or grounds as to how these provisions are applicable is simply not acceptable, and clearly amount to malafide denial of legitimate information. The public authority must provide reasons for rejecting the particular application. The Commission further held that not providing the reasons of how the application for information was rejected according to a particular provision of the Act would attract penalties under Section 20(1) of the Act. As no reply was furnished from the Appellate Authority within the time limit prescribed in the Act, Additional grounds of Appeal has also been filed by me on 12-12-2017. My Appeal petition with grounds of appeal, together with the Addl grounds are attached herewith. They may be kindly perused.

Today I have received a reply from the Appellate Authority stating that the reply furnished by the PIO on 5-10-2017 on my RTI petition is sufficient and there is no need to modify the reply furnished by PIO. Simply rejected my request without quoting any provision of the request and how my request for information is exempted under Sec 8 of the ACt. The AA has also failed to follow the prescribed procedure and replied that the rejection of my request is in order. In page 5 of my appeal I had pointed out the ill-legality of the PIO in rejecting my request

The PIO and the AA has totally failed to go through my points put forth, but tried to safe guard the interest of the Field officers who had failed to collect particulars about the nominations etc. filed by the Govt.servant then and there. Now the Family pension is being given to the illegal wife (concubine)from the consolidated fund of the State for which every citizen has right to safeguard the Exchequer. Reply furnished by th AA i also attached herewith. Because of corruption and amazed wealth all officials are having two wives or three

Kindly quote the recent decisions in the matter so as to file Second Appeal before State Information Commission.Tamil Nadu. I am aged 69. Can my case may be taken up expeditiously or not.

Thanking You Sir

scan0011.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Prasad GLN

There is no need to provide additional grounds, and it is also not permitted to bring fresh issues in second appeal go for second appeal with same grounds as per first appeal. The grounds in first appeal as stated by you is in order and proper for second appeal. Add one more sentence that FAA has without application of mind, without considering specific grounds for first appeal delivered a non speaking order. Hence second appeal is filed.

 

 

PIO and FAA must have taken shelter on Supreme Court judgment in Girish Despande case, and the application filed by you is also not precise and simple and more of questioning the authorities. The essence in Girish Desihpande case is that the relations between employer and employee is in between them and there is no larger public interest involved in seeking that information.

The remedy for your issue is somewhere else and there is no use of resorting to RTI, as it is never a final remedy for your issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Sunil Ahya

Please understand the RTI process, if a FAA does not reply within the time limits laid down under the Act then there is no provision under RTI Act for filing additional grounds with the FAA but the way forward is to file a second appeal before Information Commission.

 

If you are not satisfied with the FAA's response then the best way forward is to file a second appeal.

 

Be very precise in the grounds of your second appeal and focus only on the merits of the case with respect to the provisions of the RTI Act and try and avoid emotions.

 

Also please note that, RTI Act can only help you access the required information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • shrivar1212
      By shrivar1212
      Hello,
      I require help on co-operative issue. I had filed the RTI with the PIO, Dy registrar of co-op societies seeking information on affairs of society.
      The PIO has replied stating that the information I am seeking is available with co-operative society. My query is:
      1] Can PIO direct an applicant to private body for information?
      2] The society in question comes under the jurisdiction of the PIO, since PIO is public authority and co-operative society a private body, is it not duty of PIO to seek information from society and give it to me? How can PIO direct me back to society? This is RTI application, either I have to appeal or I have to forego. I cannot complaint against reply. So I want to approach FAA, under what grounds can I?
      3] What kind of violation PIO has committed by directing me back to private society? 
      4] Does co-operative society come under the purview of RTI ACt?
      Your views are appreciated. I am fighting lone battle with corrupt system. 
       
    • Shree Vathsan
      By Shree Vathsan
      Can the General Diary of the police station where particulars of "All the details in r/o criminals arrested and entry of arrival/departure of all enrolled police officers on duty with nature of their duties, duty performed and places visited etc."   are maintained be inspected and photo copies sought from a particular police station under RTI?
      Is there any particular clause/section that needs to be quoted for inspection under RTI? Any format available for inspection under RTI?

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy