Jump to content

CIC Issues summons on File Notings


sidmis

Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...
  • Super Moderator
karira

As reported on in.news.yahoo.com on 31 March 2008:

 

CIC lets off 2 officials after tough talk - Yahoo! India News

 

CIC lets off 2 officials after tough talk

 

The Central Information Commission has let off the hook senior officials at the Rashtrapati Bhavan against whom it had contemplated launching prosecution just three months ago. The commission had threatened the two officials with proceedings under the Indian Penal Code in January this year when it transpired that they had referred a directive from the commission to the Department of Personnel and Training for an opinion.

 

Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah had taken offence at the move though the Right to Information Act made it clear that its proceedings were judicial proceedings and its decisions binding on government departments. The commission softened its stand after a deputy secretary at the presidential palace, R.S. Rana, owned up his error in referring the commission's order to DoPT.

 

"The President's Secretariat is advised to exercise greater caution in implementing the RTI Act 2005, both in letter and spirit," Habibullah said.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator
karira

As reported by Siddhartha Sarma on livemint.com on 07 April 2008:

President?s office gets CIC rap for denial of information - livemint

President’s office gets CIC rap for denial of information

 

The RTI overseer has also asked the Union government’s department of personnel and training, or DoPT, to remove “whimsical entries” from its website

 

New Delhi: India’s Central Information Commission, or CIC, has rapped the President’s Secretariat, asking it to be more careful in implementing the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

 

The RTI overseer has also asked the Union government’s department of personnel and training, or DoPT, to remove “whimsical entries” from its website and other places in the public domain about documents available under the Act.

 

“The President’s Secretariat is advised to exercise greater caution in implementing the RTI Act,” CIC said in a recent ruling while hearing an appeal by S.S. Bhamra, an employee at the secretariat.

 

Bhamra, currently an assistant grade employee, was promoted to the post in 2006 from the post of a lower division clerk, or LDC. He says five of his LDC colleagues were given out-of-turn promotions in 2004 through a relaxation in the rules, prompting him to file two RTI applications.

 

He sought information from his office regarding the official instructions, which had relaxed the conditions for the promotions.

 

Among other documents, Bhamra had also asked for a copy of the recruitment rules under which an LDC can be promoted as an assistant at the secretariat.

 

The RTI applications were filed with central public information officer Nitin Wakankar in March and August 2006.

 

While Bhamra was given a copy of the recruitment rules and the names of five employees who had been promoted, Wakankar refused to provide documents relating to discussions among senior officials on the basis of which the promotions were decided upon.

 

Bhamra appealed to CIC, which strongly disapproved of the way the President’s Secretariat provided information to it and to Bhamra.

 

“There had been deliberate violation of orders by this Commission. The President’s Secretariat has been persistently claiming incomplete information as complete. It is a case of mala fide denial of information,” CIC said in a ruling in January this year.

 

CIC rapped both the secretariat, for denying information even after appearing before it, and the DoPT, for devising its own definition of which documents could be provided under the RTI Act.

 

The overseer asked whether DOPT also had “quasi-judicial authority” like CIC to interpret the RTI Act and suggest action on its own.

 

CIC has also warned top functionaries of both offices that they could face serious criminal charges for not giving information to a public servant and obstructing the functioning of a public servant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
Dr.R.K.D.Goel

12.06.2008

Mr.R.N.Das IAS, SGCIC SHOULD ALSO ISSUE SUCH ORDERS TO THE GUJARAT GOVERNMENT OFFICERS / PA / PIOs / AAs THOSE REFUSE TO GIVE FILE NOTINGS TO AN RTI Act 2005 APPLICANT. THE VADODARA MUNICIPAL COPRPORATION VADODARA PUBLIC AUTHORITY IS NOT GIVING ME FILE NOTINGS FROM OCTOBER, 2005 DESPITE SGCIC ORDERS.

Dr. R.K.D.Goel, VADODARA

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator
karira
12.06.2008

Mr.R.N.Das IAS, SGCIC SHOULD ALSO ISSUE SUCH ORDERS TO THE GUJARAT GOVERNMENT OFFICERS / PA / PIOs / AAs THOSE REFUSE TO GIVE FILE NOTINGS TO AN RTI Act 2005 APPLICANT. THE VADODARA MUNICIPAL COPRPORATION VADODARA PUBLIC AUTHORITY IS NOT GIVING ME FILE NOTINGS FROM OCTOBER, 2005 DESPITE SGCIC ORDERS.

Dr. R.K.D.Goel, VADODARA

 

Make another Complaint to SIC.

"Pray" for some of the above IPC provisions to be applied to the PIO for not obeying the SIC's orders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Tell a friend

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

    • yash6688
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      119,662
    • Total Posts
      427,822
  • 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