Jump to content
MANOJ B. PATEL

Rejection of RTI applications by PMO office

Recommended Posts

MANOJ B. PATEL

The Prime Minister's Office is among the top public authorities to have rejected the maximum number of RTI applications received by them during 2013-14, according to an annual CIC report released on Wednesday.

 

The top slot in the list is taken by Ministry of Corporate Affairs which has rejected 28.85 per cent RTI applications received during 2013-14 followed by the PMO (20.49 per cent) and Ministry of Finance (19.16 per cent). Following them closely are ministries of Power and Home, Cabinet Secretariat, ministries of Personnel and Defence, President's Secretariat, Ministries of Housing and Petroleum and Natural Gas.

 

The data for 2013-14 shows slight change as for the previous three years, Finance Ministry topped the list of public authorities rejecting highest number of RTI applications received by it. Another trend mentioned by the transparency watchdog in its report is that the public authorities are rejecting the RTI applications citing reasons which are other than those listed out in the RTI Act.

 

An RTI application can only be rejected under categories listed out in sections 8, 9, 11, and 24 of the RTI Act which gives various provisions under which information can be denied to an applicant.

 

The analysis by the CIC shows a whopping 44 per cent of RTI applications being rejected by the public authorities in 2013-14 citing reasons as "others" and not giving any of the reasons in the RTI Act for rejecting the requests for information.

 

"This calls for scrutiny and introspection by public authorities to ascertain the reason(s) for rejecting requests for information on the ground instead of judiciously applying provisions of Section 8(1), 9, 11 and 24 of the RTI Act," the report says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GirijaSiva

Very interesting statistics.

 

From the article is this derivation correct : 'Information is made available to the applicant not at first appeal stage but after order is passed by CIC.'???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

Yes, that is totally correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira
Very interesting statistics.

 

From the article is this derivation correct : 'Information is made available to the applicant not at first appeal stage but after order is passed by CIC.'???

 

If the matter is "sensitive", applicant will not get information even after the order of CIC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Members,

 

Please DO NOT believe these figures.

 

They are provided by the public authorities themselves and have not been verified by the CIC.

 

Most of the figures given are figments of peoples imagination.....as I found out and proved to the APSIC. The answer was, "What can we do ? We depend on the PA to provide this information which is incorporated in our report".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
koteswararaonerella

what APSIC told is the basic truth and the report published by the CIC mentioned in Manoj posts are also the figures supplied by the CPIO's the irony is that ministries dealing with corporate , spectrum , coal, etc will never give you the true picture since it is full of scam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 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
       
       
       
    • garg0505
      By garg0505
      On 14.03.2018 a complaint was filed under RTI Act,2005 with CIC under section 20(1), on the grounds that the CPIO did not provide the information despite the orders of FAA.
      During the hearing the respondent CPIO of PMO office submitted that information had been provided to complainant vide letter dated 01.03.2018 through speed post.
      Whereas, the information wasn't received by me and after having hearing submission of both the parties and persuing the records the commission directs the respondent to resend the letter dated 01.03.2018 alongwith the proof of its dispatch including tracking number to the complainant within two weeks. Furthermore my complaint have been disposed of.
      The CPIO of PMO has coplience the orders of CIC and now I received the information alongwith proof of dispatch on 05.07.2019.
      Since the copy of reply furnished by CPIO of PMO is unprincipled and immature, & very much fishy. Therefore, expert advice is needed on the following issues
      1. Can I still file my appeal against the reply of CPIO of PMO in the event of disposed of my complaint in CIC orders.
      For your convenience I am enclosing the CIC orders.
       
      .CIC Order on PMO CPIO

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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