CIC decision in an RTI case against the Ministry of Finance

Central Information Commission
Room No.307, II Floor, B Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi110066
Telefax:01126180532
& 01126107254
Websitecic.
gov.in
Appeal: No. CIC/DS/A/2013/000612/MP
Appellant : Shri Shekhar P.
Kannao, Washim
Public Authority : DFS, New Delhi
Date of Hearing : 24 February 2014
Date of Decision : 24 February 2014
Facts:1.
The appellant, Shri Shekhar P. Kannao, has submitted RTI
application dated 19 October 2012, before the Central Public
Information Officer (CPIO), Ministry of Finance, New Delhi;
seeking information relating to the action taken report on his
earlier letter dated 5 July 2012 sent to Finance Minister,
Government of India.
2. Vide order dated 9 November 2012, CPIO informed the
appellant that the letter dated 5.7.2012 had been received by
the D/o Financial Services on 8 August 2012 and they had sent
to that letter to New India Assurance Co. Ltd. for taking
appropriate action. Not satisfied by the CPIO’s reply, the
appellant preferred appeal dated 5 December 2012, to the First
Appellate Authority (FAA). Vide order dated 3 January 2013,
the FAA upheld the CPIO’s decision.
3. Being aggrieved and not satisfied by the above response
of the public authority, the appellant preferred second appeal
before the Commission.
4. The matter was heard today. The appellant, Shri SP
Kannao, was present at the hearing in person. The respondents,
Shri S.K. Mohanty, CPIO and Shri Lalit Jha were present in
person.
5. The appellant submitted that he is seeking information
regarding Ex Gratia payment, fixed personnel allowance and
Terminal Benefits which had not been paid to him. The
appellant submitted that he had taken ‘VRS’ but was called for
and taken on duty again by the public authority and,
therefore, should get all benefits.
6. The respondents submitted that the companies are board
run companies and the role of the Ministry of Finance is only
as regards the policy making for the Finance/Insurance sector
of the country and they do not interfere with the
service/administrative matters of the Insurance Companies. The
Ministry would interfere only when the policy is being flouted
by the insurance company. It was further submitted that the
appellant’s letter has been forwarded to the New India
Assurance Company Limited and the same has been informed to
the appellant.
Decision Notice
7. The Commission upholds the CPIO’s decision as the
information on action taken on the appellant’s request, as
held by them has been provided to the RTI applicant. The
grievance matters of the appellant may be taken at the
suitable forum. The appeal is dismissed and the case is
closed.
(Manjula Prasher)
Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
*********************************************************************************

Blog by Mr. Venkatkrishnan, C.A.

Source: Venkat’s Expressions- Blog by Mr. Venkatkrishnan, C.A. on Management issues

LIC breach of Good Faith!  

(Blog-post, dated 06.03.2012)

Any early student of commerce would tell you that a contract of insurance is one of “Uberrimae Fidei” a latin term to indicate “Utmost Good Faith”. That being the case, the actions of the government in the handling and the management of the Life Insurance Corporation is anything but that. The genesis of the Life Insurance Corporation was the insurance fraud by owners of private insurance companies in response to which the Life Insurance Corporation of India was created by consolidating the life insurance business of 245 private life insurers and other entities offering life insurance services.

The actions of the government over the last couple of years have done very little to justify the stand and looks that the governance deficit in the management of the corporation has raised very serious questions.

To start with the largest insurance company has been functioning without a full time Chairman for over a year now.  If that is the importance the government bestows on the “Superbrand”, then it speaks very poorly of the discharge of its responsibilities.

The business of Life Insurance is primarily a fiduciary responsibility and the fact it is controlled or guaranteed by the government does not make it any less onerous. Unfortunately the government appears to have violated this cardinal principle and has begun to use the access to the funds a bit too liberally to make investments in PSU more particularly in banks. It is no wonder that the Insurance Regulator has raised concerns about the overexposure to PSUs. http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/lics-growing-exposure-in-psuscauseconcern-for-irda/466851/

Now the other concern about the investments is the recent fiasco in the disinvestment of ONGC shares.  There are two disturbing issues about the bids by LIC.  First news reports suggest that LIC had been accumulating shares in ONGC much before.  Would that be principles of transparency and good governance? http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/lic-stocked-upongc-before-govt-stake-auction/466890/  From an investment perspective, it appears that LIC was the only institutional investor in the bidding process!  Did LIC miss to see something serious that the other investment manager saw? The investment value has already eroded by nearly 25%.  If this had happened in any other private insurance company the roof would have come down by now.

The sequences of events and happenings have some stark resemblance to what happened to the UTI in the early nineties. It appears that we have not learnt our lessons from the past.

Charity begins at home, but not for LIC!

                   The Times of India dated 12^th March, 2015 carries a report that states that LIC of India would be investing Rs.1.5 lakh crores in the Indian Railways, over a period of five years. This initiative is note-worthy and appreciable.

                 However, the Corporation doesn’t think that it owes any responsibility towards its hard-working and sincere ex-employees; those who have resigned from its service. It has illegally refused to pay them the difference in wages and retirement benefits as arrears’ payments, arbitrarily.

                These payments, repudiated since 1997 by LIC, will be approximately equal to the amount that LIC has pledged to the Indian Railways.

               Thus we can safely state that charity begins at home, but not for LIC! Its largesse is for the outsiders, not for its insiders! Its step-motherly treatment towards its ex-employees is despicable. This step-mother feeds others' children and starves her own children. 

              

               Of course, what we are asking for is not charity, but our rightful dues.