Jump to content

IS RTI applicant a consumer as defined under Consumer Protection Act - See the details in this post.


munirathnam
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 477
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • karira

    39

  • skmishra1970

    104

  • munirathnam

    46

  • Prasad GLN

    69

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Super Moderator
What is the lastest position of S.C. and National Commission regarding RTI applicant is a Consumer or not?

 

Your post has been merged with another thread on the same subject.

Please read the full thread above as well as the links given in each post.

 

​(There are several pages !)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have filed Complaint in Bangalore Urban DCDRF against denial of information by PIO and also for making false statement before the State information commission.

 

My complaint is in now last stage, DCDRF as adjourned case to 14jun2012 for final hearing. I have submitted my written arguments in this case to DCDRF. I have attached the same here, members here can give there opinion and guide me for further oral arguments or any other point if it is required in this case.

RTI Compensation Arguments.pdf

DCDRF RTI Objection.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YES, I have faced the question of jurisdiction of forum in RTI matters at the time of admission of my complaint. After several minutes of discussion in the forum, DCDRF ordered for notice to respondent.

 

I think recent NCDRC judgment in case of T Pundalika Vs Govt. of Karnataka has been suspended by NCDRC in view of Review petition filed before it. It has been displayed in NCDRC website. I think this judgment wont be a hurdle in my case.

 

Regarding compensation, I am not sure how to convince the forum and how to substantiate the claim made in. I have given my claim as per my knowledge. PIO has made false statements before SIC and SIC has believed the submission made by them without giving any opportunity to me and PIO has violated the orders given by Govt. of Karnataka also. I hope, all this things may be accounted by DCDRF. Hoping for best to happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are sure and can prove that PIO has made a false submission / filed false affidavit before IC , then you may look at s.340 CrPC - invoking s.195 CrPC .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Sunil Srivastav, your thread has been merged with another main discussion thread on the same subject. Please go through all the discussions here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Kiran,

 

Could you help me how to find the information reg suspension of NCDRC order on the website of NCDRC? Could you please give me your contact details so that I can discuss with you directly reg my cases pending for admission in A.P. State Commission. my email id is xxx@yyy.zzz - Deleted email id - posting against forum rules

 

 

 

ARK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is very sad to hear that the National commission has dismissed even the review petition filed by mr Pundalika vs. Govt. of karnataka (RA/26/2012) an appeal for reviewing earlier judgment of NCDRC holding RTI applicant is not a consumer as defined under CPA 1986.

 

A ray hope which has seen through this review application also got subsided.

 

now, the only option left to all RTI seekers to go to Apex court about this issue and to get declared that RTI applicant is a consumer as per CPA 1986. of course approach should be made toApex court through Mr. Pundalika itsself.

 

but, this will require lot of legal knowledge and strength.

 

Member's should explore about this possibility and out future action in tackling this issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear All,

 

If anybody files false affidavit or gives false information before IC then its amount to offence under various sections of IPC and a criminal complaint may be preferred agains he flase information supplier. and while matter is in pending one can file application before IC invoking the section 340 read with 195 of CrPC.

 

But if PIO/PA had already supplied false infromation that amounts to offence under various sections of IPC and a criminal complaint may be filed before the police.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NATIONAL CON ST]M ER D ISPUTES REPS.ESSAL COM M IS SION : ! ,r.rn

NEW DELTII 1'

REVISION PETITION NO. 4061 OF 2010

(Against the Order dated l4l}gfl}rc in Appeal No. I rc1n6rc ofttre State Corrrnission Karnataka)

l. T. PUNDALIKA !. !r

H.No. 406, Ward No.9, Padrna SriNilaya, Panduranga Cobny, '

Ananthashayana Gudi, Hospet,

Bellary (Karnataka)

Versus

1. REVENUE DEPARTMENT (SERVICE DTVISION),

GOVERNMENTOF KARNATAKA.tamilnadu state consumercommission impliment date.judgement .25-6-2012.please contact chennai.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
It is very sad to hear that the National commission has dismissed even the review petition filed by mr Pundalika vs. Govt. of karnataka (RA/26/2012) an appeal for reviewing earlier judgment of NCDRC holding RTI applicant is not a consumer as defined under CPA 1986.

 

A ray hope which has seen through this review application also got subsided.

 

now, the only option left to all RTI seekers to go to Apex court about this issue and to get declared that RTI applicant is a consumer as per CPA 1986. of course approach should be made to Apex court through Mr. Pundalika itsself.

 

but, this will require lot of legal knowledge and strength.

 

Member's should explore about this possibility and out future action in tackling this issue.

 

Yes Mr. Kiran Kumar is right, I don't know what is thinking Mr. T. Pundalika on his defeat in NCDRC but this is the defeat of our community (RTI Activist), if they want we all should contribute to file a revision petetion in Apex Court. One another case is on the same way, Case No. CC/411/2011 dismissed by DCDRF-1 Chandigarh now appeal filled at SCDRC Chandigarh (as FA/201/2012 and FA/191/2012), hope this will go to NCDRC and till Supreme Court because, Complainant will take it till defeciency proved, and OP will take it on the issue of Jurisdiction of Consumer Forum over RTI Case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Kindly refer (Post # 143 above) my appeal No. FA/201/2012 to State Consumer Commission Chandigarh against the order of District Forum-1 dated 4-5-2012. Hon'ble State Commission has disposed off my appeal stating - Consumer Forum is a "Court" and in view of Section 23 of RTI Act 2005, Consumer Forum have no jurisdiction to decide complaint arise out of RTI Matter and thus findings of District Forum-1 Chandigarh that RTI Applicant is a Consumer, is set aside vide order dated 16-7-2012. Copy of order enclosed.

 

Final order of SCDRC Chandigarh dt. 16-7-2012.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dear Mishra ji ,

the Order of SCDRC is well researched Order and does not leave much scope for RTI Users .

So think of other ways to strengthen RTI Act .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

In reference to post No. 144 supra I append extract from judgment of SC:

 

Extracted from

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPEAL NO.868 OF 2003

C. Venkatachalam …V…..Ajitkumar C. Shah and others

 

Date of judgement 29-08-2011

 

75. In Laxmi Engineering Works v. P.S.G. Industrial

Institute (1995) 3 SCC 583 this Court observed thus:

 

“10. A review of the provisions of the Act discloses that the quasi-judicial bodies/authorities/agencies created by the Act known as District Forums, State Commissions and the National Commission are not courts though invested with some of the powers of a civil court. They are quasi-judicial tribunals brought into existence to render inexpensive and speedy remedies to consumers. It is equally clear that these forums/commissions were not supposed to supplant but supplement the existing judicial system. The idea was to provide an additional forum providing inexpensive and speedy resolution of disputes arising between consumers and suppliers of goods and services. The forum so created is uninhibited by the requirement of court fee or the formal procedures of a court. Any consumer can go and file a complaint. Complaint need not necessarily be filed by the complainant himself; any recognized consumers' association can espouse his cause. Where a large number of consumers have a similar complaint, one or more can file a complaint on behalf of all…………” [emphasis added]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reference to post No. 144 supra I append extract from judgment of SC:

 

Extracted from

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPEAL NO.868 OF 2003

C. Venkatachalam …V…..Ajitkumar C. Shah and others

 

Date of judgement 29-08-2011

 

75. In Laxmi Engineering Works v. P.S.G. Industrial

Institute (1995) 3 SCC 583 this Court observed thus:

 

“10. A review of the provisions of the Act discloses that the quasi-judicial bodies/authorities/agencies created by the Act known as District Forums, State Commissions and the National Commission are not courts though invested with some of the powers of a civil court. They are quasi-judicial tribunals brought into existence to render inexpensive and speedy remedies to consumers. It is equally clear that these forums/commissions were not supposed to supplant but supplement the existing judicial system. The idea was to provide an additional forum providing inexpensive and speedy resolution of disputes arising between consumers and suppliers of goods and services. The forum so created is uninhibited by the requirement of court fee or the formal procedures of a court. Any consumer can go and file a complaint. Complaint need not necessarily be filed by the complainant himself; any recognized consumers' association can espouse his cause. Where a large number of consumers have a similar complaint, one or more can file a complaint on behalf of all…………” [emphasis added]

 

 

 

J.P. Sir, thanks for your citations above, but see Hon'ble supreme courts Judgement dated 15-9-2011 in Civil appeal No. 1909 of 2004. This is the latest judgement of SC.

Link to comment
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.

 Share


  • Tell a friend

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

    No members to show

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      119.9k
    • Total Posts
      428.6k
  • 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