Jump to content

The commission will take action against the two revenue officials

Recommended Posts


KOCHI: State Information Commission has issued notices to two revenue officials in Ernakulam for not providing information under Right to Information Act (RTI) on use of land reoccupied in the eviction drive on MG Road in 2007.


The drive against encroachments on MG Road was launched by the district administration while A P M Mohammed Hanish was the district collector.


In an RTI query filed to Ernakulam Collectorate, advocate D B Binu, secretary of Human Rights Defence Forum, sought information on how the land that was reoccupied by the government through the 2007 eviction was put to public use.


Records related to the eviction, including the sketch prepared for the eviction and the directions issued, were sought by the RTI activist.


Further, information was sought as to how many encroachments were evicted on MG Road, from whom all the evictions were made, and for what public use, such as parking, was the reoccupied land used.


State information commission said in its order that then deputy collector EJ Gracy, who was the public information officer, and Kanayannoor additional tahasildar C K Venu failed to provide timely and correct information to the applicant under RTI.


The commission will take action against the two revenue officials as per section 20 of RTI Act, the order issued by state information commissioner MN Gunavardhanan said. As per section 20, the commission can recommend for disciplinary action under the service rules applicable as well as order the officers at fault to pay a fine up to Rs 25,000.


Asking the officials to showcause for not taking action against them, the Commission has ordered the revenue officials to provide the information sought for under RTI within 10 days.


Denying RTI info on MG Road eviction: Notice to two officials - The Times of India

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • kirannagesh.rao
      By kirannagesh.rao
      iam new to this site want to know , how to file an rti petition... how to track it... i enetered in to buisiness and want to do it ethically without giving bribes or cheating anyone getting inspired by big names like tatas, infy ... unfortunately i entered into realestate wher bribe has to be paid for every paper....soem one pls suggest me how to file an rti ..my first rti would b y dont ppl in revenue dept give an acknowledge with file num when an application is given to them , in major cases ..they run only on bribes and not on priority basis..soem on efrom banaglore pls respond...
      i feel india is great just bcoz iam an indian ..if iam an alean from mars who has to live on earth .. ,would never prefer india ... thousands other also wont... lets make india better
    • karira
      By karira
      As reported in deccanchronicle.com on 21 January 2011:
      Info denial: IIT officer told off | Deccan Chronicle | 2011-01-21
      Info denial: IIT officer told off
      Jan. 20: The Central Information Commission (CIC) has pulled up the registrar (public information officer) of IIT-Madras for not providing details under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The CIC has also asked why penal action under section 20 (1) of the RTI Act should not be taken against the registrar while seeking an explanation for the delay in providing the information requested.
      Tamil Nadu Human Rights Movement state general secretary M. Mathiayazhagan filed a petition under the Right to Information Act on March 5, 2010 to IIT-M’s PIO, seeking various details including functioning of the institute’s administration. But the institute’s PIO did not provide the details sought within 30 days as prescribed in the RTI Act.
      The official of the Pothanur, Namakkal-based human rights outfit then approached the CIC, seeking that IIT-M’s public information officer be directed to provide all the details he had sought.
      Information commissioner Annapurna Dixit in her recent order directed the institute to provide all the details Mr Mathiayazhagan had asked for free of cost and permit him to inspect the records by February 15.
      “It appears that the PIO’s action attracts the penal provisions under section 20 (1) of the RTI Act, according to which the PIO is liable to pay a penalty of Rs 250 each day till the information is furnished or Rs 25,000,” the commissioner noted. “Ms Dixit sought clarifications from the PIO as to why the information had not been supplied to the petitioner within the mandated time.”


  • Create New...

Important Information

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