Jump to content

Unhealthy trend in decisions of Gujarat Information Commission


Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

I have addressed following letter to Gujarat Info. Com as a feed back and suggestion. Members comments are invited:

_________________________________________________________

 

 

Date: 12-10-2010 by email

 

To,

State Chief Information Commissioner,

Gujarat Information Commission,

Bureau of Eco and Statistics Bldg, 1st floor

Sector 18, Gandhinagar, Gujarat 382018

Email: gscic@gujarat.gov.in

 

Hon’ble Sir,

 

Subject: Remanding Appeals / Complaints--Suggestion

 

On perusal of recent decisions of the Hon’ble Commission I have witnessed a trend in large number of cases, where by second appeals or complaints are remanded back to First Appellate Authorities [FAAs], even when appellants had filed first appeals and waited for at least 30 or 45 days + 10 days [both side postal time], before preferring second appeals or complaints. While remanding, explanation of FAAs is not sought for not having decided first appeal within stipulated time. Some of the recent decisions are:

 

1. Appeal No. 1098/2010-11 decided on 15-07-2010

2. Appeal No. 1181/2010-11 decided on 20-07-2010

3. Appeal No. 1240/2008-09 decided on 16-08-2010

4. Appeal No. 1284/2010-11 decided on 30-07-2010

 

 

Under such circumstances, FAAs will be encouraged not to decide on first appeal and thus compel appellants to file second appeals or complaints, since FAAs know that Hon’ble Commission will at the most remand back to FAAs only, after 3 to 6 months, without fixing accountability for not performing their duties under the Act. In addition to this, appellants are put to inconvenience, expenses, visits, frustration and wastage of time and money in approaching Hon’ble Commission and again to FAAs. This style pampers ego of FAAs and dignity of common men is lowered down in a democratic country. Appellants will once again be required to approach Hon’ble Commission if they are not satisfied with decisions of FAAs. This amounts to merry-go-round [pillar to post] bureaucratic procedure well known in India, which is antithetical to letter and spirit of RTI. This procedure not only delays supply of information and causes hardship to appellants, it also increases avoidable work load of already overburdened Hon’ble Commission.

 

I am aware that decisions of CIC are not legally bound on SICs, but can act as a guide and may lead to best practices worth emulation by SICs. I therefore append below details of few recent decisions of CIC against non-performing FAAs:

 

1. No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001352/8407 dated 05-07-2010

2. No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000085/6895Adjunct dated 05-07-2010

3. No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00290 dated 17-07-2008

4. No.CIC/AD/A/2010/000952 dated August 18, 2010

 

While I respect decisions of Hon’ble GIC, which has to its credit many landmark and path breaking decisions in the past, I humbly suggest that time has come when at least FAAs’ explanation should be sought for dereliction of duties enjoined under RTI Act, while remanding appeals/complaints as is being followed by CIC. Hon’ble Commission may recommend disciplinary action in cases of bluntant transgression of RTI Act by FAAs. Two-three sentences in decision order will make FAAs responsible. This will have positive and cascading effect on attitude of FAAs, who must be studying trend in decisions of Hon’ble Commission. This will reduce congestion at GIC, reduce time and cost for appellants and will infuse sense of accountability in FAAs, at least for RTI.

 

I am sure yourgoodselves will take my suggestion in a positive manner for the benefit of information seekers of this State.

 

Yours faithfully,

J. P. Shah

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sir, referring the second appeal/complaint to FAA instead of decision/direction to FAA, will definitely give more pain and strain to the RTI Applicant.

I invite and accept your genuine representation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
changethechangers

While hearing the second appeals or complaints the Central or State Information Commissions have to act as per Section 19 or Section 18 respectively. I could not find any provision in these two sections, whereby the case could be remanded back to FAA. The action on the part of Information Commissions appears to be arbitrary and beyond the provisions of the Act.

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

I have not got the require RTI information from the PIO and i have sent the papers to Gujarat CIC,but the hearing will take lot of time nearly 8/9 months and by that time the wrong practices done by the department will be wiped out.

Please help me and what should be my next step so that i can get the information as soon as possible so that the wrong doings of the officers is exposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

There is no way but to wait. It was with the efforts and writ petitions of late Shri Amit Jethava [killed on 20-07-2010 near High Court, Ahmedabad] Gujarat Govt posted two additional ICs at GIC in Mar 2010. Still there is waiting for more than 15-18 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...
jetley
I have addressed following letter to Gujarat Info. Com as a feed back and suggestion. Members comments are invited:

_________________________________________________________

 

 

Date: 12-10-2010 by email

 

To,

State Chief Information Commissioner,

Gujarat Information Commission,

Bureau of Eco and Statistics Bldg, 1st floor

Sector 18, Gandhinagar, Gujarat 382018

Email: gscic@gujarat.gov.in

 

Hon’ble Sir,

 

Subject: Remanding Appeals / Complaints--Suggestion

 

On perusal of recent decisions of the Hon’ble Commission I have witnessed a trend in large number of cases, where by second appeals or complaints are remanded back to First Appellate Authorities [FAAs], even when appellants had filed first appeals and waited for at least 30 or 45 days + 10 days [both side postal time], before preferring second appeals or complaints. While remanding, explanation of FAAs is not sought for not having decided first appeal within stipulated time. Some of the recent decisions are:

 

1. Appeal No. 1098/2010-11 decided on 15-07-2010

2. Appeal No. 1181/2010-11 decided on 20-07-2010

3. Appeal No. 1240/2008-09 decided on 16-08-2010

4. Appeal No. 1284/2010-11 decided on 30-07-2010

 

 

Under such circumstances, FAAs will be encouraged not to decide on first appeal and thus compel appellants to file second appeals or complaints, since FAAs know that Hon’ble Commission will at the most remand back to FAAs only, after 3 to 6 months, without fixing accountability for not performing their duties under the Act. In addition to this, appellants are put to inconvenience, expenses, visits, frustration and wastage of time and money in approaching Hon’ble Commission and again to FAAs. This style pampers ego of FAAs and dignity of common men is lowered down in a democratic country. Appellants will once again be required to approach Hon’ble Commission if they are not satisfied with decisions of FAAs. This amounts to merry-go-round [pillar to post] bureaucratic procedure well known in India, which is antithetical to letter and spirit of RTI. This procedure not only delays supply of information and causes hardship to appellants, it also increases avoidable work load of already overburdened Hon’ble Commission.

 

I am aware that decisions of CIC are not legally bound on SICs, but can act as a guide and may lead to best practices worth emulation by SICs. I therefore append below details of few recent decisions of CIC against non-performing FAAs:

 

1. No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001352/8407 dated 05-07-2010

2. No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000085/6895Adjunct dated 05-07-2010

3. No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00290 dated 17-07-2008

4. No.CIC/AD/A/2010/000952 dated August 18, 2010

 

While I respect decisions of Hon’ble GIC, which has to its credit many landmark and path breaking decisions in the past, I humbly suggest that time has come when at least FAAs’ explanation should be sought for dereliction of duties enjoined under RTI Act, while remanding appeals/complaints as is being followed by CIC. Hon’ble Commission may recommend disciplinary action in cases of bluntant transgression of RTI Act by FAAs. Two-three sentences in decision order will make FAAs responsible. This will have positive and cascading effect on attitude of FAAs, who must be studying trend in decisions of Hon’ble Commission. This will reduce congestion at GIC, reduce time and cost for appellants and will infuse sense of accountability in FAAs, at least for RTI.

 

I am sure yourgoodselves will take my suggestion in a positive manner for the benefit of information seekers of this State.

 

Yours faithfully,

J. P. Shah

 

Sir, did u get any reply from GIC? If so, please share it on this portal

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

Same here in Punjab, the SIC and not paying heed inspite of open agitataion of RTI Activits as "Demostration before the SIC Office". The biggest mockey is, every one say others to mend them, but they do mend theirselves. No body want to sweep before its own door. A great pity of Great India

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
      119,610
    • Total Posts
      427,658
  • 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