- 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 'section 6 (3)'.
Found 4 results
In on the decision Appellate Authority of Central Information Commission has decided that a citizen is obliged to make an application under the RTI Act only before the CPIO of the concerned Public Authority. The provision under Section 6(3) has to be read in the context of Section 6(1) of the RTI Act. In other words, Section 6(1) lays down a rule while Section 6(3) is an exception. If every applicant is allowed to submit all petitions concerning various Public Authorities to one single Public Authority, then virtually every Public Authority would be rendered into a Post Office, whose only task would be to transfer a RTI application to the concerned CPIOs. This will put the whole system unworkable. This could not have been the intention of the Legislature while enacting Section 6(3) that each and every person can submit applications seeking information wherever he likes. It was stated that "If a harmonious construction is attempted of the two provisions, a citizen is obliged to make an application under the RTI Act only before the CPIO of the concerned Public Authority. There may be situations where a citizen may not be able to ascertain as to who would be the appropriate CPIO/Public Authority who has the information. Only in such exceptional cases, he should file an application before some other Public Authority. Some other Public Authority also cannot be each and every Public Authority, it has to be in some way or the other related to the subject-matter of the request for information". A right not available under a law cannot be made available through an appeal. The decision can be read and downloaded from our website here! FAAD_25052009_01
rtiindia posted a post in CIC DecisionsThe Commission finds no merit in the complaint filed by Shri Sudhir Goyal on CPIO contention that there are over 75 ministries/departments and as per the decision of a three-member Bench of the Commission in the case of Shri Ketan Kantilal Modi Vs CBEC, dt 22.9.2009, CPIO is not under obligation to transfer RTIs to multiple organisations. (If you want to file RTI Online visit our guide here) Vide RTI, addressed to the PMO, Complainant had sought information on 7 points relating to details of various programmes started by the Central government on completion of four years of UPA government , decisions taken by the government in relation to the programmes, amount spent on these programmes, budget allocated for the same and related issues. The CPIO told to the applicant that the information pertains to various Ministries and the Complainant was advised to file separate RTI applications to each ministry with regard to the remaining information. Transfer RTIs to multiple organizations The Complainant has filed a complaint u/s 18 on the grounds of not transferring the RTI application u/s 6(3) DECISION The Commission finds no merit in the complaint filed by Shri Sudhir Goyal and the same is disposed of. Citation Details: File No.CIC/SM/C/2013/000573/RM dated 17.07.2014. You can discuss this decision at our forum here! This is an extract of the decision available on the CIC public website, and is meant for generating interest in our readers only. For the true detailed and authentic copy you must download the decision from the CIC website!
[caption id=attachment_2823" align="alignright" width="400] RTI caught in Passing the Parcel Game[/caption] RTI Applicant had to finally get all the officials present before Central Information Commission by his second appeal and get the directions from CIC to ensure that PIO (Deptt. Of Urban Development), Delhi collects the information from all the concerned PIOs and provide reply. CIC directed that all the PIOs should look into the RTI application without making a claim that ‘they are not concerned with’, etc. and provide the information regarding their role with regard to the area mentioned in the RTI application. The Public Information Officers took the shelter of Section 6(3) of RTI Act in transferring the RTI application to one another. Do you also face the indiscriminate use of this section by PIO in transferring the applications? Please share with us at our forum here! If you have any questions our experts shall be glad to help you. RTI caught in Passing the Parcel Game Earlier, an RTI Applicant who sought information regarding the Unauthorised Regularised colonies relating to major consumer markets, malls, multiplexes, hotels, district centres, community centres and retail shopping centers etc. and facilities and services provided by the Government of NCT of Delhi of a particular area, went into tizzy as PIO went on passing the RTI application and each PIO stating that 'they are not concerned with RTI'. The Commission directed the concerned PIO, to show cause, why penalty cannot be imposed on them for transferring the RTI application without proper application of mind and not providing answers to the RTI applicant. The full case can be read and downloaded from here! Citation: Mr.K.Chand Vs. Dept.of Urban Development, GNCTD Date of decision 30-06-2014 This is an extract of the decision available on the CIC public website, and is meant for generating interest in our readers only. For the true detailed and authentic copy you must read and download the decision from the CIC website
If the Public Authority has not transferred the RTI application to another public authority who is holding information under the RTI Act, they are themselves responsible to collect the information from the said departments and furnish the same. As per Section 6 (3) Where an application is made to a public authority requesting for an information, which is held by another public authority; or the subject matter of which is more closely connected with the functions of another public authority, the public authority, to which such application is made, shall transfer the application or such part of it as may be appropriate to that other public authority and inform the applicant immediately about such transfer. For any queries on RTI, kindly post at our forum here! To know about the basics of RTI, go ahead and read our Guide segment which contain all the answers relating to RTI. Transfer or Reply - You cannot ignore RTI While hearing appeal, CIC recorded that: "The respondent authority claimed that the questions Nos. 6 to 9 are pertaining to Electrical and Horticultural Departments. As they have not transferred the same to those departments under section 6(3) of the RTI Act, they are responsible to collect the information from the said departments and furnish the same to the appellant within 20 days." If you want to know more about transfer of RTI Application, please follow this blog by @abhi987 here: Transfer of a RTI Application - Sec. 5(4) + 5(5) OR Sec. 6(3). Citation details: Dr. Vijay Kr. Mittal Vs. Public Works Dept, GNCTD File No.CIC/AD/A/2013/001265SA dated 18-06-2014 The article has been taken from the CIC decision available on the public website and post here is only meant for RTI awareness.