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

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rti act'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Request for Community Support
  • Connect with Community
  • Learn about RTI
  • Website News & Support
  • Read RTI News & Stories
  • RTI Act Critics's RTI Act Critics Topics
  • Fans of RTI India's Fans of RTI India Topics
  • Insurance Consumer's Insurance Consumer Topics
  • Activists of Transparency and Accountability's Activists of Transparency and Accountability Topics
  • Issues with BWSSB's Issues with BWSSB Topics
  • Law+Order-Bangalore-32's Law+Order-Bangalore-32 Topics
  • Issues With Electricity Board's Issues With Electricity Board Topics
  • RTI Activists's RTI Activists Topics
  • YOGA's YOGA Topics
  • help each other's help each other Topics
  • forest and wild life's forest and wild life Topics
  • Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C.'s Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C. Topics
  • RTI Activist+Politics's RTI Activist+Politics Topics
  • hostels and lodging places's hostels and lodging places Topics
  • RTI Activists in Rajasthan.'s RTI Activists in Rajasthan. Topics
  • RTI info warriors in Haryana's RTI info warriors in Haryana Topics
  • DisABILITY Rights and RTI's DisABILITY Rights and RTI Topics
  • Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI.'s Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI. Topics
  • Eco club's Eco club Topics
  • Self Employment in Sport's Self Employment in Sport Topics
  • RTI related to land issue's RTI related to land issue Topics
  • Open SourceTechnology support to RTI's Open SourceTechnology support to RTI Topics
  • TRAP group's TRAP group Topics
  • Odisha RTI Activists's Odisha RTI Activists Topics
  • right to information activists's right to information activists Topics
  • Mumbai's Mumbai Topics
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA Topics
  • Chartered Accountants's Chartered Accountants Topics
  • ngosamachar's ngosamachar Topics
  • Growing INDIA's Growing INDIA Topics
  • we are all friends.'s we are all friends. Topics
  • RTI for Government employees's RTI for Government employees Topics
  • Dhanus - Pending Salaries's Dhanus - Pending Salaries Topics
  • Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors's Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors Topics
  • Mahamumbai's Mahamumbai Topics
  • FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS's FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION's ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Topics
  • MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS's MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS Topics
  • INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES's INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • AAKANKSHA's AAKANKSHA Topics
  • RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE's RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • JVG DUPED CUST.'s JVG DUPED CUST. Topics
  • anti corrupt police's anti corrupt police Topics
  • Save Girl in Punjab's Save Girl in Punjab Topics
  • Rent Apartment in US's Rent Apartment in US Topics
  • RTI Kerala's RTI Kerala Topics
  • maharashtra's maharashtra Topics
  • Right Way Of India(RTI)'s Right Way Of India(RTI) Topics
  • Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India's Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India Topics
  • Navi Mumbai's Navi Mumbai Topics
  • electricity curruption in up's electricity curruption in up Topics
  • SHARE n STOCKS trading's SHARE n STOCKS trading Topics
  • WEWANTJUSTICE's WEWANTJUSTICE Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS's MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS Topics
  • ex-serviceman activities's ex-serviceman activities Topics
  • SSCC's SSCC Topics
  • Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates's Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates Topics
  • jharkhand RTI activist group's jharkhand RTI activist group Topics
  • Suhail's Suhail Topics
  • govt.servant's govt.servant Topics
  • RTI Uttar pradesh's RTI Uttar pradesh Topics
  • anti-corruption team's anti-corruption team Topics
  • Manaism's Manaism Topics
  • Insurance's Insurance Topics
  • sonitpur datri sewa samity's sonitpur datri sewa samity Topics
  • indian youth manch's indian youth manch Topics
  • HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies's HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies Topics
  • youth's youth Topics
  • aastha's aastha Topics
  • RTI for Citizens's RTI for Citizens Topics
  • ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA's ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA Topics
  • learn always's learn always Topics
  • R.T.I.'s R.T.I. Topics
  • Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana's Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana Topics
  • Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna's Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna Topics
  • MBA, business and new entrepreneur.....'s MBA, business and new entrepreneur..... Topics
  • students seeking help's students seeking help Topics
  • UN-DO CORRUPTION's UN-DO CORRUPTION Topics
  • RTI Corporate's RTI Corporate Topics
  • Electrical group's Electrical group Topics
  • V4LRights's V4LRights Topics
  • Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool's Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool Topics
  • Gaming's Gaming Topics
  • WE Born to help's WE Born to help Topics
  • help the elderly citizen's help the elderly citizen Topics
  • NATIONAL ISSUE's NATIONAL ISSUE Topics
  • Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association's Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association Topics
  • Corruption free Country's Corruption free Country Topics
  • surajyam's surajyam Topics
  • kanpurvictims's kanpurvictims Topics
  • Railway Group A Services's Railway Group A Services Topics
  • RTI BALLIA's RTI BALLIA Topics
  • Encroachment of public property by private giants's Encroachment of public property by private giants Topics
  • Case Status - Anti Corruption's Case Status - Anti Corruption Topics
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT Topics
  • Aam Aadmi (The Common Man)'s Aam Aadmi (The Common Man) Topics
  • Court Marriage in Punjab's Court Marriage in Punjab Topics
  • ALL's ALL Topics
  • Youth India Social Group (YISG)'s Youth India Social Group (YISG) Topics
  • ye kya fandda h's ye kya fandda h Topics
  • mindset's mindset Topics
  • anti corruption's anti corruption Topics
  • activism's activism Topics
  • common's common Topics
  • state group's state group Topics
  • social help group's social help group Topics
  • landlords of uttar pradesh's landlords of uttar pradesh Topics
  • Concern Citizens Forum for India's Concern Citizens Forum for India Topics
  • edusystem's edusystem Topics
  • Ratna Jyoti's Ratna Jyoti Topics
  • development in indian village's development in indian village Topics
  • technovision's technovision Topics
  • Mighty India's Mighty India Topics
  • Against Corporate Fraud's Against Corporate Fraud Topics
  • Stop crime's Stop crime Topics
  • PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION.'s PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION. Topics
  • NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti's NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Topics
  • Authenticated Public Plateform's Authenticated Public Plateform Topics
  • shalin's shalin Topics
  • terminater's terminater Topics
  • RTI Wind Energy's RTI Wind Energy Topics
  • AMICE (INDIA)'s AMICE (INDIA) Topics
  • HELPING HAND !'s HELPING HAND ! Topics
  • Go..................?'s Go..................? Topics
  • Co-Op Housing Society's Co-Op Housing Society Topics
  • we are equal's we are equal Topics
  • Phoenix Deals's Phoenix Deals Topics
  • AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS's AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS Topics
  • Theft Cases in chandigarh's Theft Cases in chandigarh Topics
  • Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits's Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits Topics
  • Solar Systems's Solar Systems Topics
  • Get aware about ur Education and related rights's Get aware about ur Education and related rights Topics
  • Save Mumbai's Save Mumbai Topics
  • Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board's Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board Topics
  • ashayen's ashayen Topics
  • unemployment's unemployment Topics
  • Employee Solution's Employee Solution Topics
  • is kanpur university against sc/st's is kanpur university against sc/st Topics
  • URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL's URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL Topics
  • RTI HELP INDIA's RTI HELP INDIA Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics

Categories

  • Uncategorized
  • Section 18 (1)
  • Section 11
  • For Common Man
  • Section 16
  • Section 2(h)
  • Section 8 (1)(j)
  • Simplified RTI
  • Government Employee and RTI
  • RTI Act 2005
  • Success Stories
  • Exempt Organisation
  • DG IT
  • Section 8 (1) (e)
  • Section 2 (h) (d) (i)
  • Supreme Court Decisions
  • Section 2 (j) (i)
  • Section 2
  • Section 8
  • Section 20
  • Section 19
  • SIC Punjab
  • High Court Decisions
  • Section 9
  • Section 24
  • DoPT
  • RTI Awareness
  • Section 6 (3)
  • Section 6
  • Section 2 (f)
  • Opinion
  • Department of Posts
  • Ministry of Railways
  • Departments
  • Ministry of Home Affairs
  • Ministry of Corporate Affairs
  • Ministry of Law & Justice
  • Government of NCT of Delhi
  • Delhi Police
  • Ministry of Human Resource Development
  • Staff Selection Commission
  • Court Decisions
  • CIC Decisions
  • Activism
  • Section 25
  • University
  • Section 7
  • Ministry of Agriculture
  • Section 3
  • RTI Discussions
  • Section 19 (8) (b)
  • BSNL & MTNL
  • Section (1) (d)
  • Section 8 (1) (d)
  • DIrectorate of Education
  • Govt of NCT of Delhi
  • Cooperative Housing Society
  • RTI for School
  • Member RTI
  • Municipal Corporation
  • Ministry of Defence

Categories

  • RTI Directory
  • Important RTI Decisions
  • Other Important Court Decisions
  • Sample RTI
  • Acts & Circulars

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 119 results

  1. deepakgupta66

    Hello

    Hello everybody on RTI forum. Its very good platform to join all like minded people. Its my Ist blog in this forum. I want to say Hello to everybody
  2. The Government of Karnataka has issued a amendment to the RTI Rules: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT IS REPRODUCED BELOW: GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA NO.DPAR;14:RTI: 2008 Karnataka Government Secretariat DPAR (Janaspandana Cell) 3rd Floor. Podium Block, V V Towers BANGALORE DT.17.3.2008. NOTIFICATION In exercise of the Powers conferred by Sub-Section (1) and (2) of Section 27 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Central Act 22 of 2005), The Government of Karnataka hereby makes the following rules further to amend the Karnataka Right to Information Rules, 2005, namely: Title and Commencement: (1) These rules may be called the Karnataka Right to Information (Amendment) Rules, 2008. (2) They shall come into force from the date of their publication in Official Gazette. Insertion of new rule 14: In the Karnataka Right to Information Rules, 2005, after rule 13, the following shall be inserted, namely: “14. Request relate only to single subject matter: A request in writing for information under section 6 of the Act shall relate to one subject matter and it shall not ordinarily exceed one hundred and fifty words. If an applicant wishes to seek information on more than one subject matter, he shall make separate applications; Provided that in case, the request made relates to more than one subject matter, the Public Information Officer may respond to the request relating to the first subject matter only and may advise the applicant to make separate application for each of the other subject matters.” By Order and in the name of the President of India Sd/- ( B. SHIVARUDRA SWAMY) Under Secretary to Government, I/C DPAR (JANASPANDANA CELL –RTI)
  3. chintan

    RTI In maharashtra

    hiiiii i m from mumbai n i want 2 know that if society committee members r not arranging any meeting n no account audit is done for past 2 yrs as a society member what right we get to suit them. how we can use that right. Committee members r not cooperating n not giving proper answer of question what we can do can we ask i writing what to do for giving application in writing N pls tell me about any NGO or organization support this activity.
  4. 'Information is Power', especially in the context of rural India. Our development experience of more than 20 years in rural India has repeatedly demonstrated to us that people who are able to access information, process them effectively and use it to their own benefit are the ones who are more easily able to get out of poverty; the others are condemned to merely cope with poverty. The last few years have also shown us that Right to Information (RTI) Act and processes like Social Audit can be very effective and powerful tools in reducing corruption and forcing good governance practices on public service delivery institutions. With this in mind, a group of people from SVYM (Swami vivekananda Youth Movement ,An NGO from Mysore HD kote taluk)(led by Dr.R.Balasubramaniam) is on a padayaathre (walk) from Saragur (in H.D.Kote Taluk) to Bangalore - a distance of about 350 km, walking through more than 100 villages, over 30 days. They will interact with atleast 200,000 people along the way and talk about the RTI Act, Social Audit and schemes like NREGA. The walk also aims to create an environment of positivity wherein people will get to believe in the power and goodness of communities and take on the responsibility of cleansing the system instead of merely complaining against it. The walk started on the 4th of September, 2008 and will end on the 2nd of October, 2008 (on Gandhi Jayanthi day), traversing through Beerwal, Yediyala, Begur, Gundlupet, Tarakanambi, Chamarajanagar, Yelandur, Kollegal, Malavalli and Kanakapura. For more information visit vivekamysore.blogspot.com Thanks Dr. Brajesh Raj merta Swami vivekananda Youth Movement
  5. It has now become a fashion for the SIC/ICs to allege on RTI Activists that they are misusing the RTI Act. Almost all the Press Conferences and public speeches of these "Wise Men" end up with a sermon to that effect as if 'mis use of ' RTI Act is the greatest obstacle in the way of implementing the RTI Act. I fail to understand as to how an Activist can mis-use the Act. He can only request for an information and that too by paying Rs.10/- and other administrative expenses including speed post/registred post charges. If he is not entitled to get it as per the Act, the PIO, AA and the SIC have all the powers to deny it declaring that he is not entitled for that information quotting provisions of the Act. They are unable to do it because there is no such provision. All they want to convey to the public is that they are trying their best to implement the Act but the RTI Activists are not allowing them to do so. The most interesting part is that these " Wise Men" leave the hall immediately after their sermons giving no opportunity to the public to seek their clarification. Of cource our Media do their service by promptly publishing it though the Media is not aware of wisdom/opinion or existance of a tribe called RTI Activists. Recently I had come across another term used by the "Wise Men" - "VEXATIOUS " least realising that every criminal laws are boud to be vexatious to the delinquent and an honest, law-abiding public servant does not get annoyed in disclosing the truth.
  6. srinivas2k8

    hello members

    I am newly registered this site. I already study the article so, I have some knowledge about RTI act. Any one free to feel and discuss any matter about RTI act.
  7. Does a First Appeal to the AA under Section 19(1) Bar a Complaint to SIC under Section 18(1)© ? To me, it does'nt. When a PIO does not reply, he shall be deemed to have refused the request. As per the RTI Act nothing bars an appellant from making a complaint to the CIC/SIC. If one resort to this the Commission will unnecessarily be flooded especially when it takes many months or even year for the Commission to respond. But it is felt to be better to report the above inaction of the PIO to his superior viz., his Appellate Authority. The only way to do is a First Appeal under Section19(1).It is likely that the problem could easily be solved within a month. At least a reply from PIO might be forthcoming. In case no reply is forthcoming from the AA also there is no solution other than making a complaint to SIC. I do not advice preferring a second appeal when both the PIO and AA do not reply. In case they were forced to reply on orders of theCommission subsequently and the reply so furnished turn out to be an unsatisfactory one, there will be requirement of filing Second appeal. If one use up the Second Appeal provision for not getting the reply one will be left with no chance to make a second appeal. But certain SIC has considered that a First appeal under 19(1) bar a complaint. The exact wording used by the SIC is that " The appellant himself had availed of an opportunity u/s 19(1) of theRTI Act, preferring a first appeal before the AA against the PIO. Having availed of a legal remedy u/s 19(1) the scheme of the RTI Act does not pemit one to prefer a complaint u/s 18(1) before the SIC" . The CIC also appears agreeing with me. The CIC in his Order No.CIC/WB/A/2007/00362 dated 24-12-2007 has ordered that " Appellant has pleaded no ground for making a direct complaint to us u/s 18 - Remanded -Free to move afresh second appeal before us u/s 19(3)" The CIC in his orders on CIC/WB/A/2007/00442 dated 21-12-2007 also sates that "....because appallant has pleaded no ground for making a direct complaint to us u/s 18...." The CIC is seen not appreciating a direct Complaint under section 18 before making a first appeal under 19(1). This categorically establish the requirement of prefering a first appeal under 19(1) before making a complaint. The orders of the SIC given above is therefore felt absolutely unlawful. A First Appeal under Section 19(1) does not bar a Complaint under Section 18(1) before the Commission. Any comments on the contra ?
  8. The CIC has made an exemplary judgement when the PIO/AA disobeys its orders. In an undisputed terms the CIC has ruled that it amount to an offence under Indian Penal Code. But what happen when the PIO/AA even after promissing to obey the orders directly to the SIC during the hearing, blatantly refuse to obey ? As per the RTI Act the appellant prefer a complaint under Section 18(1). But what to do when AA abstain and sent some one else in his place ? The PIO was not even summoned .Of cource in this case I have preferred a Second appeal as I have not availed the Second Appeal so far. Whatever I had filed earlier was only complaints under 18(1)© as the PIO and AA have not been replying. Any better cource of action ?
  9. colnrkurup

    Review By First Aa

    A doubt has arisen as to whether the First Appellate Authority can review its orders. Myself in person maintain that power to review its own orders is inherent in any judicial proceedings The Officer holding the powers of AA by virtue of the powers otherwise delegated to him may not have power to review his orders. But when he is excercising the powers of AA, in RTI he is a quasi-judicial authority having the powers of court to some extend. Eventhough while issuing other orders he become a functus officio, in the case of RTI Act when he excersie the powers of AA , to me he does not become functus officio and he can review his own orders. The LAETST Supreme Court orders (Civil Appeal Nos.5097-5099 of 2004 decided on 07-3-2007 in the case of AV Papayya Sastry & Ors Vs Govt of AP & Ors) it was held that "No Court or tribunal can be regarded as powerless to recall its own order if it is convinced that the order was wangled through fraud or misrepresentation of such a dimension as would affect the very basis of the claim" In case my contention is correct or tend to be correct this explanation can have far reaching effect in the time-frame of RTI Act. May I request my learned friends for their views ?
  10. colnrkurup

    Glory Of The Rti Act

    Despite all the impediments caused by the public authorities and the SICs in effective implementation of the RTI Act, there is no doubt that the RTI Act has done mirracles which we especially the Activists fail to see. What was the cituation before the Act ? The public authorities were unapproachable. Even if we file complaint petitions before the highest democratic authorities, they used to be ignored. They used to reply that 'We will let you know " . That was the en. But now we have gained a right to question. We can statutorily ask the public authorities their "Action taken report". No public authority has the guts to say that "No action taken". Don't you think it is an achievement ?
  11. colnrkurup

    What Is The Way Out ?

    With the hesitation of the SICs to implement penal provisions of the Act, the PIOs and AAs have gained courage to ignore the orders of theSIC. Afterhering the second appeal and the orders issued by theCommission is not given any weightage. When their orders are not obeyed the SIC does not consider it as an insult to the system. This cituation has resulted in the PIOs repeating their initial misleading and false information window-dressing it in a more confusing wording even after the Commission order to provide the information. Though SIC has declared such an action as criminal acts and has even taken action, the SIC, Kerala ignore it and does not bother even to acknowledge a complaint from the Appellant. Of cource one cannot get any relief from the Public Authorities. Can anyone suggest a method to overcome such a cituation. Complaints to the Governor or even the President of India does not make any difference.
  12. We often quote the Central Information Commission's Orders in support of certain pleas the same way Supreme Court/High Court Orders are quoted. We fail to realise that the CIC/SICs are not Court of Records and reference to their previous orders are not legally sustainable. Even the CIC/SICs themselves may not accept any of their previous orders as an authority in confirmation of our plea. Of course there appears nothing wrong in using such orders only as a guideline in support of any of our pleas. Any comments on the contra ?
  13. The Right to Information Act is a unique legislation unparallel to any other enactments. Naturally one is bound to come across conflicting views on its interpretation. Some of the fetures like shifting of onus to prove from the Appellant to Respondent has already been discussed in this forum. There are many other similar features which need an open discussion in forums like this. To start with, let us consider Interdependence if any of CIC and SICs. One is bound to consider that the CIC being under the Central Government and the SICs under the State, the CIC is an authority superior to SIC. Of cource, by virtue of vast jurisdiction the CIC is given higher status as per protocall but defenity not a superior authority having any jurisdiction over SICs. The cituation has been worsened by the CIC himself when he held a Conference of Information Commissioners on 17-10-2007 in the guise of "Information Commissioner's Conference." The CIC/SICs themselves appeared ignorant of existence of separate Chapters and Sections in the RTI Act which stipulate their independent functions. Section 12, 13 & 14 deals with the Central Information Commission and Section 15, 16 and 17 on State Information Commission. No where these sections lays down any interdependence of these two functionaries. When theCIC's conference was organised, I myself had appraised this aspect directly to the CIC. As part of the correspondence the CIC has made an attempt to establish his supramacy quotting an extract from Section 12(4) of the Act out of context pleading that the Act states "..... the Chief Information Commissioner who shall be assisted by the Information Commissioner and may exercise all such powrs and do all such acts et., etc., ....." thereby claiming that all Information Commissioners are required to assist the CIC and naturally all the Information Commissioners (including the State Information Commissioners) are under the CIC. Of cource he should neither deny nofr withstand when it was projected that these provisions pertains to Section 12,13 and 14 delaing with CIC only and not the Information Commissioners covered in Section 15, 16 and 17. Anyway the CIC could not press the issue further and it stand as such. However I l maintain that these two are not interdependent and one's orders are not binding on other. Any opinion on the contra ?
  14. colnrkurup

    Training the Commissions

    We have often been discussing the issue of imparting training to the cityzens on RTI Act presuming that the CIC/SICs cannot err and are beyond the need for any training. But experience show that the cityzens generally possess the functional knowledge and some of our Hon'ble Commissions lack even the basic knowledge on RTI Act. Here is a typical extract from a State Information Commissions Orders No.AP.375/2007/SIC dated 12 November 2007: 1. ".......was the appellant, and it was for him to state his case, prosecute the same before the Commission " 2. "There was no public interests involved in the ever so many petitions, requests, complaints and appeals received from ......." (Here, the orders imply that only public interests cases will be enterined by thecommission) 3." The appellant ...... was summoned to appear before the Commission to substantiate his case". (The learned Hon'ble State Information Commission could not understand the main difference of RTI Act from other enactment is its Section 19(5) which state that "In any appeal proceedings, the onus to prove that a denial of a request was justified shall be on the PIO who denied the request" and the appellant does not have to substantiate his request for information. 4. "The appellant himself had availed of an opportunity u/s 19(1) of the RTI Act preferring a first appeal before the appellate authority viz.,Principal Secretary,Revenue. Having availed of a legal remedy u/s 19(1) , the scheme of the RTI Act does not permit one to prefer a complaint u/s 18(1)© before the SIC. Therefore thecommission with its inherent power had entertained the complaint as the Second appeal." Here, following lack any legal backing: (a) When the PIO does not furnish a reply, it is deemed to have refused the request in terms of Section 7(2). Though one is at liberty to prefer a complaint under Section 18(1)© to the SIC, is it better to report this to the PIO's superior authority viz., his AA. The only means is to file a first appeal under Section 19(1). When the AA also deemed to have refused the request does the appellant is considered as availed of all the legal remedy ? Does the case become Resjudicata ? Is there any provision in RTI Act that forbid an appellant from making a complaint underSection 18(1)© to the SIC when he does not received any reply from the PIO and AA after making a request followed by first appeal ? (b) Hs theSIC has any inhewrant power to try a case in a different clause than one petetioned. ie., Has the SIC any inherant power to convr suo motu unlawfully a complaint under 18(1)© into a Second appeal under 19(3) ? © Does a first appeal bar a complaint under 18(1)© ? 5."The remarks of the PIO was called for. A detailed report of the actions taken were furnished by the PIO (only to the SIC)." The complaint was that the appellant had asked for the information of "Action taken on a particular report". The PIO having furnished the information asked by the appellant to the SIC, what stop the SIC from either providing this to the appellant or order the PIO to provide its copy to the appellant also and close the case. Instead, the SIC suppressess the information provided to him by the PIO and does the above somersault and dismissess the complaint without providing the information. How can the SIC with hold the information and ensure that the appellant does not get the information under RTI Act by dismissing the complaint ? Of cource the reason is that the information if disclosed will expose corruption and cause loss of land worth Rs.15 crores to cedrtain vested interest causing the above loss to government. The PI, AA and SIC was well aware of it. Any suggestion to improve this cituation ?
  15. When no reply is received from a PIO he is to be deemed refuced the information. One school of thought is to prefer a complaint to CIC/SIC u/s 18(1)©. Such refusal often might not be intentional. May be due to ignorance or due to non-realisation of the gravity of RTI Act. A practical way is to report this to his superior officer viz., AA.If the appellant start prefering complaint to CIC/SIC whenever the PIOs deemed refuced, the Commission will be over-burdened. I personally feel that one should approach the Commission only when all the courses available under the Act is elaped. After all when a public servant ignore the provisions of the Act his superior authority need appraisal. The only legal way is to prefer first appeal. In majority of cases the AA is likely to direct the PIO to provide the reply. It might not be the information sought; but the appellant thereby led to second appeal if the information provided is false or misleading. But what is the solution if the AA also does not reply? One cannot prefer a second appeal u/s 19(3) as no decision what so ever has been received from PIO or AA. Section 19(3) is too specific that a second appeal shall lie only against the decision on first appeal. Hence the question arise as to what is the course of action when the PIO and AA deemed refusced the information. Is it a Complaint u/s 18(1)© or Second appeal u/s 19(3) ?
  16. Please suggest some effective methods etc for the appeal. . One Govt. officer had to conduct some work as per the High Court’s orders provided time to time from different benches of the Calcutta High Court. During his course of action he did not follow certain specific directions of the Court and number of occasions he submitted false statements to the court on affidavit. . He conducted an election in a Co operative violating specific direction by the Court. It was pointed out in the High Court’s Division Bench and the Hon’ble Division Bench was pleased to direct the petitioner to go to the Registrar of Co op Societies of the state Govt for adjudication in the matter during March, 2004. The Registrar did not yet take proper action and the dispute case is still pending. Some RTI applications were submitted to the State Public Information Officer of the office of that Registrar of Co operative Societies , in which department that corrupt Government officer was employed till July, 2007.The information sought for was related with the sub section 1(d) of section 4 of the RTI Act 2005. As per sub section 1(d) of sec 4 of the RTI Act. 05, --- Every public authority shall provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons. For example few queries along with ‘information’ provided are appended below : Did the RCS consider that this was an illegal and/or unethical activity on the part of Govt officer ? What action was taken against him by the Govt. authority for this type of corrupt activities ? If not taken , when it will be taken? What was the reason of not taking proper action against him? The information provided by the Registrar & sent by the SPIO , in all cases as below. The Officer had conducted his duty as per the order of the Calcutta High Court and submitted compliance report to the Calcutta High Court and the this Department has nothing to comment. 2 & 3. This Dept. has nothing to comment as per above. My question is if a person did any illegal activity as a Govt. officer under certain Court’s directives and he violated all the directives , but as he submitted “ compliance report” to the High Court , the Govt . Department would not take any action against that corrupt officer on that plea ? Is it approved by the conduct rules of the Govt. Dept The High court did never approved the illegal activities of that corrupt officer. With the help of the RTI applications previously submitted , written statements had been received which proved beyond doubt, that the said officer violated Court’s orders and submitted false statements to the Court. The Court directed Registrar to finalize it. But Registrar did not adjudicate. Once again the petitioner approached to the Court and Court directed to complete the case within a period of 9 months. But till then Registrar did not hear a single day in 8 months. Now the petitioners may once again go to the Court, but my question is why no administrative action will not be taken for this gross illegalities committed by that corrupt officer ? And always the Registrar will provide the same “excuse” as above ( Compliance report submitted to the High Court . Nothing to comment ) In the last occasion information was sought for as per 4 (1d) , even then the Registrar & SPIO did not bother at all. To make a long story a short one, I don’t know whether I could explain it explain it properly. But as one of our members would appear an hearing of the appeal arranged in the next week , I would request the experienced RTI activists to suggest the points to be raised and specific questions might be suggested for the second appeal.. At last, I would like to mention that previously I mentioned it also in a thread --- Corrupt officer escapes punishment. This may also be considered for the suggestion to be provided. Thanking all the members and expecting some good suggestions---- Abhijeet
  17. Can an SIC convert a complaint under Section 18(1)© to a Second appeal suo motu ? To me, there is no provision. Section 19(3) is categorical. A second appeal can be made only against the decision under Section 19(1). If there is no decision from the PIO or AA ie., if there is no response from them what is to be appealed against? In such cases one has no choice other than preferring a complaint under Section 18(1)©. It is nothing but common sense that in case the PIO does not reply, it is better to drag in theAA by making a first Appeal. In case there is no response from the AA also, there cannot be any other alternative. But that is not the way according to the SIC, Kerala (of couse the same SIC who has ordered the RDO, Palghat not to abide by Section 5(2) of the Act)Following is the extract of SIC Kerala's Orders in No.AP/375/2007/SIC dated12-11-2007 (six full pages) "This is an unusual appeal entertained u/s 19(3) of theRTI Act. Though the request of the appellant was to entertain this matter as a complaint u/s 18(1) of the RTI Act, on a close scrutiny, it was brought out that the appellant himself had availed of an opportunity u/s 19(1) of theRTI Act, preferring a first appeal before the AA viz., the Principal Secretary,Revenue, Govt. of Kerala against the SPIO, Revenue Department,GovtSecretariat, Trivadnrum. Having availed of a legal remedy u/s 19(1) , the scheme of the RTI Act does not permit one to prefer a complaint u/s 18(1) before the SIC agaist both the AA and PIO. Therefore, the commission with its inherent power had entertained this complaint u/s 19(3) of the RTI Act as the second appeal" The appellant had asked the PIO " Action taken on a particular complaint forwarded to the Revenue Department by the Hon'ble Minister". Since no response from PIO, a first appeal under 19(!) preferred. When no response from AA also, a Complaint was made to SIC. Neither the PIO nor AA nor SIC plead that the above is not the information falling under defenition nor pleaded as not held. Only problem was that the information if given will expose corruption of officials. The SIC has suo motu converted the complaint into second appeal and dismissed with 6 full page judgement justifying the actions of officials by dragging in the history of the case etc.The order doesnot say that information fall under any of the exceptions.
  18. As per Section 19 of the Act a Second Appeal shall lie only on decision on First Appeal. But in the case of Complaints, it is incumbant on the CIC/SIC to receive and inquire into a complaint on conditions stipulated in sub-section (a) to (f). As per Section 18(f), the CIC/SIC has to receive complaints in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act. I could not find out any provision which stipulate first appeal as a precondition or making first appeal indumbent before prefering Complaint before CIC/SICs. I suggest that this aspect may please be discussed.
  19. Kindly find here the online Search able Right to Information Act 2005, a part of RTI India. Right to Information Act 2005 Some Important Links: Visit Here for Frequently Asked Questions regarding the ACT and it's implementation: https://www.rtiindia.org/forum/frequently-asked-questions.html To get to some Practical answers visit here: RTI Support - Ask for RTI Query at rtiindia.org
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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