- 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 vs cpa'.
Found 1 result
IS RTI applicant a consumer as defined under Consumer Protection Act - See the details in this post.
munirathnam posted a topic in Discussions on RTIHi All, NCDRC, in case of REVISION PETITION NO. 4061 OF 2010 (Against the Order dated 14/09/2010 in Appeal No. 1163/2010 of the State Commission Karnataka) Held that: "Petitioner, in order to sort out the controversy with respect to his pensionary benefits, filed an application under Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the RTI Act, 2005’) in the office of Opposite party No.4. Opposite party No.4 failed to provide the information. Petitioner then filed the complaint before the District Forum, which was allowed and a direction was issued to opposite party No.4 to furnish the required information. Respondent, being aggrieved, filed an appeal before the State Commission, which has been allowed by observing thus : “At the outset it is not in dispute that complainant had filed an application u/s 6 & 7 of the Right to Information Act to the OP No.4. But complainant cannot be considered as a consumer as defined under the C.P. Act since there is a remedy available for the complainant to approach the appellate authority u/s 19 of the RTI Act, 2005.” We agree with the view taken by the fora below. Petitioner cannot be claimed to be a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. There is a remedy available for him to approach the Appellate Authority under Section 19 of the RTI Act, 2005. Dismissed. What we can we say now....? I did not find the judgement of Karnataka State Commission in Appeal No. 1163/2010. Not sure why only this appeal judgment is not available along with the judgments. I would say people shall continue to file consumer complaints against the PIO/PA by invoking the section 3, 2(1)(d)(ii) and 2(1)(g) of CP Act. Let the NCDRC finalise the issue. Wish you gud luck. Dear Malhotra Sir, Do you say that the citation mentioned in this post can not be reproduced and no need to believe this Order. Do you advice the RTI applicants to proceed refering earier decisions to relief from CPA. What is the meaning of your post above that say: [bNo, we do not indulge in witch hunt. There is no reason to believe anything that can not be reproduced . [/b] But it was referred in NCDRC while arguments and also the citation reference is part of the NCDRC Order. It does not matter whether the RTI applicant argued in the State Commission or not. In the natural justice point of NCDRC may consider the CP Act and pass orders. Dear Dr.Malhotra Sir, I have sme quiries as below: 1.Which provision of the RTI Act say that it is special Act, similarly which provision of CP Act say that it is general law. 2. If compensation calim is more than Rs.25,000/- then definitely RTI Act alone wont serve the purpose, am I correct. 3.If compensation claim is less than Rs.25,000/- and if the RTI applicant is already got order on second appeal or complaint before the Information Commission, then certainly the complaint before CP Act is not maintainable, am I correct? 4. If complaint under CP Act and also the complaint under RTI Act both are pending for claim more than Rs.25,000/-, then both the Information Commission and Consumer Forum shall hear the case till end to decide the replief, am I correct?