Jump to content
  • 0
msrehill

Denial of information on pretext of certain supreme court judgements

Question

msrehill

I had filed an RTI application to MAGADH UNIVERSITY, BIHAR seeeking info about a degree certificate issued to a candidate who had secured a govt job using that certificate. As per the information collected by me, through my earlier RTI applications, it was amply clear that the degree used by the candidate(the other party) was a fake one. I was denied the same govt job as I was placed in the waiting list at number one position. The state commision had asked the university to set up an enquiry commision to find out the truth. University had submitted the enquiry report in a sealed envelope to the state commision. The other party's lawyer argued in the court that the copy of report should not be given to me without the permission of his client. He argued that there are certain judgements by supreme court which he will produce in the court. My request to the members in this forum is that whether court can deny me the copy of the enquiry report? Copy of latest order attached.

dc4722559e1b27559dce82da7da6cd10.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Prasad GLN

Every denial must be done only through quoting relevant exemptions given under Sec. 8 or 9. Unless any Court specifically prohibits providing that information, any information has to be given.

Now that SIC has passed an order, the next alternative is for going to court.

As an affected party, try to file complaint against PIO in District Consumer Forum.

 

You can file RTI Application to MU seeking copy of enquiry report and seeking citation of that SC Judgment in which such denial is justified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
RAVEENA_O

In this case the Inquiry ordered by SIC was based on the Appeal filed by Complainant. The finding of the inquiry shall form part of RTI Second Appeal proceedings pending before the SIC. The complaint / appellant has a right to know the report of inquiry, being the affected party and the cause of inquiry itself is the appeal/complaint preferred by the appellant. The report of inquiry is a public record held by and under the control SIC. The inquiry report is not exempted under any of the clauses of the RTI Act and even if there be, the findings of the inquiry shall be required to be dislcosed to the applicant under Sec-10.

 

If any person obtained employment by producing fake, forged or fabricated educational certificate, he has no right to continue in employment. The inquiry report in question throw light to the illegalities committed by the candidate and transparency must show him the door. If the SIC do not disclose the inquiry report, then the very purpose of RTI shall be defeated. Such an act on the part of SIC shall aid the candidate to continue in service illegaly, even though he obtained employment by producing fake/forged/fabricated certificate. That is not the object and purpose of RTI Act.

 

How the other party's lawyer came before the SIC? There is no provision of entertaining an intervener under the RTI Act at tje stage of SA. Since the infomation sought or the investigation report has no 3rd party implication within the meaning of the RTI Act, he has no locus to make any say in this case. SIC is wrong in entertaining any such an intervenor at the stage of SA hearing. SIC is not an adjudicating court on service mattes, and any precedents pertaining to service law shall be required to be looked into by an appropriate court of law and not by SIC.

 

As far as as the present appeal is concerned, the SIC after receiving the investigation report, must arrive at a conclsuion whether the larger public interest necessitates disclosure of the information by the University and accordingly direct the University to disclose the information. That is what is expected from the SIC. The SIC shall discharge its duties within the framework of the Act and shall not step into the shoes of the Court of law to decide whether the candidate obtained employment illegally shall continue AND/or his rights and prejudices.

 

You have sought information from the University. PIO and FAA of University denied information. You preferred appeal. SIC ordered inquiry by University. Where is the question of other party (intervenor) coming into picture. The other candidate or candidate's lawyer has no locus in this case. Immediately consult a lawyer and contest the case further befoe SIC. Submit counter argument. Also pray that copy of any submission made by respondent and reliance placed by SIC be supplied to you.

 

In the meantime,

 

[1]file another RTI Applciation with the PIO of the SIC and seek the Inquiry Report submitted by ................... in connection with Second Appeal No......................

 

[2] file another RTI Application with6 the PIO of the University nad seek the copy of inquiry report submitted to SIC based on investigation ordered by SIC in Appeal No. ....... dated ....

 

Please post further developments from time to time, to enable our members to help you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
msrehill
In this case the Inquiry ordered by SIC was based on the Appeal filed by Complainant. The finding of the inquiry shall form part of RTI Second Appeal proceedings pending before the SIC. The complaint / appellant has a right to know the report of inquiry, being the affected party and the cause of inquiry itself is the appeal/complaint preferred by the appellant. The report of inquiry is a public record held by and under the control SIC. The inquiry report is not exempted under any of the clauses of the RTI Act and even if there be, the findings of the inquiry shall be required to be dislcosed to the applicant under Sec-10.

 

If any person obtained employment by producing fake, forged or fabricated educational certificate, he has no right to continue in employment. The inquiry report in question throw light to the illegalities committed by the candidate and transparency must show him the door. If the SIC do not disclose the inquiry report, then the very purpose of RTI shall be defeated. Such an act on the part of SIC shall aid the candidate to continue in service illegaly, even though he obtained employment by producing fake/forged/fabricated certificate. That is not the object and purpose of RTI Act.

 

How the other party's lawyer came before the SIC? There is no provision of entertaining an intervener under the RTI Act at tje stage of SA. Since the infomation sought or the investigation report has no 3rd party implication within the meaning of the RTI Act, he has no locus to make any say in this case. SIC is wrong in entertaining any such an intervenor at the stage of SA hearing. SIC is not an adjudicating court on service mattes, and any precedents pertaining to service law shall be required to be looked into by an appropriate court of law and not by SIC.

 

As far as as the present appeal is concerned, the SIC after receiving the investigation report, must arrive at a conclsuion whether the larger public interest necessitates disclosure of the information by the University and accordingly direct the University to disclose the information. That is what is expected from the SIC. The SIC shall discharge its duties within the framework of the Act and shall not step into the shoes of the Court of law to decide whether the candidate obtained employment illegally shall continue AND/or his rights and prejudices.

 

You have sought information from the University. PIO and FAA of University denied information. You preferred appeal. SIC ordered inquiry by University. Where is the question of other party (intervenor) coming into picture. The other candidate or candidate's lawyer has no locus in this case. Immediately consult a lawyer and contest the case further befoe SIC. Submit counter argument. Also pray that copy of any submission made by respondent and reliance placed by SIC be supplied to you.

 

In the meantime,

 

[1]file another RTI Applciation with the PIO of the SIC and seek the Inquiry Report submitted by ................... in connection with Second Appeal No......................

 

[2] file another RTI Application with6 the PIO of the University nad seek the copy of inquiry report submitted to SIC based on investigation ordered by SIC in Appeal No. ....... dated ....

 

Please post further developments from time to time, to enable our members to help you.

 

Many thanks for your valuable suggestions. Shall post further developements

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Prasad GLN

Raveena Madam, can you just elaborate on read colored sentence contest the case further before SIC, Submit counter argument" (I could not read the SIC order as the letters are too small)

 

Also please clarify as to when a certain RTI application was filed and disposed by IC, can applicant restart the entire procedure once again by filing same RTI Application a fresh with changed date in case first decision is not satisfactory.

Can the IC during hearing of second appeal just refuse to take action stating that as per PIO, the case has been disposed earlier, hence no further interference required now.

(Instead of going to Court, when IC disposes application, some applicants are starting the procedure of filing fresh applications in their own name for second time with a hope that they can place good written arguments during second appeal)

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

    • Shree Vathsan
      By Shree Vathsan
      I had sought details of loan and copies of agreement entered with World Bank, JICA etc. of IT Expressway Chennai (created in partnership with Govt of TN) However the PIO has replied that they have moved out of world bank loan and taken loan from other banks details of which cannot be disclosed under 8(1) d of RTI Act citing "commercial confidence".
      However the IT Expressway is a public limited company having entered into agreement with Govt of TN and others for developing and maintaining a particular stretch of road.
       
      Kindly help me frame a good first appeal.
       
      Sent from my SM-J510FN using RTI INDIA mobile app
       
       
       
    • 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. 
       

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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