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
nk agarwal

Violation of Provisions of RTI Act-2005

Recommended Posts

nk agarwal

What actions can be taken by Information Commissioners on  violation/abuse of Section 6(3) of the RTI Act-2005 by PIO ?

or What if a PIO  violate's/abuse  Section 6(3) of the RTI Act-2005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Only the applicant can bring that to the attention of IC during second appeal hearing.  It depends on IC, and mostly it is just mention to avoid it in future.  The inconvenience maximum to the applicant is 5 days if it is misused.  If it is purposefully transferred knowing that the other authority is not concerned then it amounts to deliberate and malafide action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

Here it concerns with following situation :

The PIO, who is also a Law Officer transfers the application citing Section 6(3), within the same Public Authority and within the same city to an "officer" to send info directly to the applicant - abuse of Section 6(3). 

In turn the application is transferred again by "this  Officer" citing Section 6(3), to other Officer within the same PA

This "other Officer" too does the same and provides incomplete and incorrect info as an officer of the PA

The PIO and Law Officer  did not use Section 5(4 & 5) to seek assistance of any other officer.

This delayed the process of seeking info; 

This caused a need for filing avoidable appeals

Can I mention its deliberate and malafide action on the part of the PIO and it has caused delay in the process of seeking info (its 14 years since RTI Act-2005 has come into force, (PIO cannot plead innocence and lack of knowledge)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Definitely you can first bring this to attention of FAA first and then in second appeal as deliberate and malafide.  If the PIO is ordinary officer it is different, but here in this case he is law officer and supposed to know fundamentals in RTI.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

Oh yes; the FAA  ignored it in the 1st Appeal.

Thanks would follow it in 2nd appeal too.

regards

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Write separate letter to FAA for not directing to follow the stipulations in RTI Act and that when a law officer is not knowing fundamentals what is his public authority and who is the other authority after 14 years of enactment shows lack of sincerity at various levels and ask him to direct PIOs on such transfers under 6 (3).  Wait for a response and enclose this to second appeal.  If you want you can file RTI Application to FAA as to the status of your letter on functioning of PIO.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

Yes,  it seems to be a good idea but, before that I would like to understand ramification of following options  :

(1) will this letter to FAA post communication of his decision will amount to making another 1st appeal/review appeal before him? - for which there is no provision in RTI Act-2005.

instead

(2) Can such a letter be written to the Public Authority i.e. the CMD of the State Govt. Deptt.to which my application is concern and who has nominated the SR. Law officer as PIO Chief and the FAA who flout the provisions of RTI Act-2005 - Actions taken can be followed up on this letter by subsequent RTI application. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

In a democracy, Citizen is master and Government officials are public servant.

Every public servant is accountable and his functioning must be transparent.

FAA is also a public servant and has the obligation to control as he is superior and is having his own designation with public authority.

There is no bar on writing letters to any public servant to my knowledge.

We give options for consideration as suggestion and it is left to the members to decide and guidance is not ultimate unless it is well considered by implementing member.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

If convenient, any citation -CIC/court decision making it  mandatory to put name by signatory on any communications to applicant/appellant? say by PIO & FAA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

In this  forum DOPT directives are uploaded stating the process of response to applicant by CPIO and it is clearly stated a format.  Kindly search, you can find diamonds in that mine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

I am not able to locate the DOPT directives!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

Thank you very much.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deepak Dang
On 7/14/2019 at 6:38 PM, Prasad GLN said:

Definitely you can first bring this to attention of FAA first and then in second appeal as deliberate and malafide.  If the PIO is ordinary officer it is different, but here in this case he is law officer and supposed to know fundamentals in RTI.

In my view "Ignorance of law is no excuse".  A new advocate or CPIO can't plead ignorance of law.  However, in practical life it happens as Mr. Prasad referred above that to avoid in future. But applicant regularly insist at every stage so that it may help at any stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

Letter addressed and sent to FAA as discussed in above posts; a reply recd. today (5.8.19) from Suptd. Engineer and not FAA stating that the FAA has already disposed the 1st Appeal hence now there is no justification for 1st Appeal.

Two points emerges here :

(1) It was a plain letter to FAA requesting him to advice the PIO as well as the FAA to follow section 6(3) of the RTI Act-2005; hence, any reply was to be received from the signature of the FAA and not from any other officer?

(2) No review appeal lies with CIC; is there a  bar of review of decision by FAA too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deepak Dang

In my opinion THE FAA has considered your letter as Ist Appeal.  Because it was requested to him to advise the PIO as well as the FAA to follow section 6(3) of the RTI Act-2005.  However a letter may be sent to Suptd. Engineer that the letter was addressed to FAA hence disposal was required from him & move to CIC or SIC.

(2) Yes, there is no provision of any review by any authority under RTI 2005.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
nk agarwal

My letter was crisp and clear giving reference to the FAA's decision on my 1st Appeal; its the who cares for RTI Act-2005 attitude by PIOs and FAAs

 

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
Reply to this topic...

×   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.


Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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