Jump to content

CIC issues s'Show cause notice" to DoPT officers and threatens action under Sec 166, 187 188 of IPC


Recommended Posts

CIC WB had initiated similar process against PIO and AA of President's Secretariat more than an year ago.

 

The issue with President's secretariat was also non compliance of CIC orders on file notings due to DoPT guidelines.

 

The CIC had contended that whatever be the guidelines of DoPT the Secretariat must obey the directions of CIC as judicial (or quasi judicial orders) must be obeyed despite contrary administrative orders.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In President's Secretariat's case I mentioned in post # 2 above the secretariat obeyed the orders of CIC and matter was closed without imposition of penalty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
sngupta

Why it is needed to go such a harder step if CIC want transparency a penalty may be imposed on every officer not providing information under RTI Act 2005. The CIC may use the powers under RTI Act 2005 but same is not being used by CIC and execusing every officer not providng information. In my one appeal the CPIO replied the file missed and information is not possible. Ok file missed then pay penalty of Rs. 25000/- but this was not done by CIC and decided that information not availble may not be provided. In this way every PIO will get execuse of non availability of information.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator
karira

Members will recall that these controversial file notings on the DoPT website are from the beginning itself.

 

Since then, 2 DoPT Secretaries have become IC's in the CIC. Even they have not been able to influence DoPT to remove that statement.

 

In fact, some of the CIC orders asking DoPT to remove that statement were when the the 2 IC's were them selves the secretaries in DoPT.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bimal Kumar Khemani

The CPIO Mr. Harish Chander, Under Secretary at DOPT has written me in his letter dated 12-1-2008 posted on 14-01-09 aagainst my RTI application BK/244/RTI/08 dated 04-12-08 regarding appointment of CIC's, has also written me

The disclosure of file notings under RTIAct is under consideration of Government

I made 1st appeal on 02-02-09 against this before the FAA Mrs. Anuradha S.Chagati, who has not responded, but through her juniors invited telephonically to meet her for presenting my views

My appeal before CIC has been filed on 07-03-09, still pending with CIC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
kadalirao

At last by use of force, DOPT vide OM No. No.1/20/2009-IR dated 23-06-2009 clarified that file noting can be disclosed except file noting containing information exempt from disclosure under section 8 of the Act. (OM in the ATTACHMENT)

 

http://persmin.gov.in/WriteData/CircularNotification/ScanDocument/RTI/1_20_2009_IR_1.pdf

Disclosure of 'file noting' under the RTI Act, 2005 1_20_2009_IR_1.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator
karira

As reported in zeenews.com on 01 July 2009:

CIC says no penalty on DoPT officers in `file notings` issue

 

CIC says no penalty on DoPT officers in "file notings"

 

New Delhi, June 30: The CIC on Tuesday decided not to impose any penalties on two officers of the department of personnel and training who were issued showcause notices for "knowingly violating and disobeying" orders of the Commission related to disclosure of "file notings" under the RTI Act.

 

The decision comes a week after DoPT agreed that file notings can be made public under the RTI Act.

 

The notices were issued to Dr S K Sarkar, Joint Secretary and Deputy Secretary Anuradha Chagti of DoPT for violating and disobeying Commission's order for removal of controversial entry on the department's website which said "file notings" were not to be disclosed under the RTI Act.

 

The Commission has asked both the officers to explain why they should not be prosecuted under sections 166 (public servant disobeying law with intent to cause injury to any person), 187 (omission to assist a public servant when bound by law to give assistance) and 188 (disobedience to order duly promulgated by a public servant) of the Indian Penal Code.

 

In the hearing today, both the officers submitted that decisions to modify the RTI portal could be taken by the Central government with the approval of the Prime Minister.

 

The officials who were represented by counsel Satyendra Kumar Dubey mentioned during the hearing that they had forwarded the matter to the Minister of State for Personnel who then directed the matter to be placed before the Committee of secretaries for detailed examination.

 

The Committee of Secretaries decided that secretary of the department would put up a draft for amending the information given on its website by introducing the exemption clauses available under the RTI Act

 

"The draft will be examined and vetted by the department of legal affairs and submitted for Cabinet Secretary's approval," the counsel informed the Commission.

 

He argued that observation of the Commission that both the officers and the department violated and disobeyed the orders passed by it was not "factually correct" and that the noticees were not competent to take decisions on the direction of the Chief Information Commissioner.

 

Accepting the arguments put forth by the counsel, Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said that there would be no penalty on these officers but since there were several issues that emerged during hearing which may have bearings on the implementation of RTI Act, the matter may be referred to the full bench.

 

The case relates to RTI application of activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal who sought criterion for declaring birthdays of departed leaders as gazetted holidays and if leaders like Subhash Chandra Bose and Jawaharlal Nehru did not fulfill the criteria.

 

He demanded the file notings in the matter which were refused by the DoPT, which said these were not covered under the Act.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 9 months later...
advocate rajesh

applicability of the ABOVE IPC section can be tried by filing a complaint in the court . Thanks to all the esteemed members .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

There is CIC Shailesh Gandhi sir's order to PIO to lodge FIR with Police for missing file / documents from govt. office & give one copy to RTI-applicant, if you want this order copy, Pls, let me inform i will upload it.

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

  • Tell a friend

    Love RTI INDIA- Online RTI? Tell a friend!
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      119,464
    • Total Posts
      427,115
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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