Wednesday, August 21, 2013

Jurisdiction of GIC over Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat under RTI Act

Date: 21-08-2013                                                      By email

To,    
State Chief Information Commissioner,
Gujarat Information Commission,
Sector 18,  Gandhinagar,  Gujarat  382018
gscic@gujarat.gov.in and commi1-gic@gujarat.gov.in

Hon’ble Sir,

Subject: Jurisdiction of GIC over Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat under RTI Act

As part of social audit of decisions of Information Commissioners and thereby strengthening RTI, I happened to come across enclosed GIC decision dated 05-06-2013 in appeal No.        A-1891/2010-11 against PIO of High Court of Gujarat

I also attach copy of decision No. CIC/AT/A/2008/01137 dated 13-03-2009 of    2-IC bench of Central Information Commission [CIC], New Delhi, wherein it is decided that CIC has jurisdiction over appeals against High Courts. Decision is duly reasoned out. There cannot be parallel jurisdictions in the same matter.

I humbly draw your kind attention to judgement dated 01-06-12 of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) 11271/2009-REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES & ORS v/s DHARMENDRA KUMAR GARG & ANR in the matter of principle of precedence in deciding appeals under RTI.

I hope yourgoodselves will take into consideration above submissions and do the needful for future decisions.

Yours faithfully,

J P Shah

Monday, August 12, 2013

Mode of Payment of Application Filing Fee and Other Charges under RTI Act 2005 of High Court of Gujarat

Date: 11-08-2013                                                      By post and email

To,
Registrar General,
High Court of Gujarat,
Sola, Ahmedabad - 380060
e-mail: rg-hc-guj@nic.in

Respected Sir,

Subject: Mode of Payment of Application Filing Fee and Other Charges under RTI Act 2005.

Hon’ble High Court has notified Gujarat High Court (Right to Information) Rules, 2005. However, I could not find mode of payment [like cash, Indian postal order, court fee stamps, non-judicial stamps or bank DD/banker cheque etc] in the said rules; except that in case of e-filed applications, cash has to be deposited with authorized person. This is giving rise to confusion in the minds of RTI applicants.

I humbly suggest that a supplementary notification be issued clearly mentioning mode of payment of filing fee and other charges, as has been done by Govt of Gujarat under Gujarat RTI Rules 2010. Different modes may be included to facilitate payment without visiting High Court, especially for those residing outside Ahmedabad and in villages where only post offices are available. Bank charges for demand draft/banker cheques are prohibitive. Exact designation of  payee of Indian postal order or demand draft/banker cheques may kindly be also included in notification.

However, if such mode of payment is already notified and posted on website, I shall be thankful to receive appropriate link.

I hope needful will be done by yourgoodselves. I wish you happy Independence Day.

Yours faithfully,


Friday, August 09, 2013

Complaints of non-compliance of CIC decisions - suggestion

Date: 09-08-2013                                                      By email


To,
Chief Information Commissioner
Central Information Commission,
August Kranti Bhavan, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi - 110 066

Hon’ble Sir,

Subject: Complaints of non-compliance of CIC decisions - suggestion

It is witnessed that large number of PIOs and FAAs do not comply with orders of CIC and appellants are required to file complaints u/s 18 for getting decisions operationalised, after having gone through long process of getting decision from CIC and waiting for one to three years.

CIC does not give priority to such complaints of non-compliance and are queued with other complaints/appeals, which again entail delay of one to three years. Thus by the time some action is taken there is horrible delay of nearly 5-7 years from filing RTI application. Mostly ICs beg of PIO/FAA to comply with its orders and hardly any penalty is imposed or disciplinary action recommended. This leads to mockery of ICs and their orders.

I suggest that at least, CIC should decide to give such complaints of non-compliance priority and should be decided in maximum three months of its receipt. Such complaints are different from normal first-time complaints or appeals, since appellant has already gone through entire process of obtaining decision of IC. Such complaints deserve to be separately lined up.

Secondly, ICs must impose penalty and recommend disciplinary action in case of non-compliance. This will give some credibility and weightage to ICs’ orders.

I appreciate your very balanced, well reasoned decisions and some of them are landmarks in the history of RTI. I am sure you would consider my above suggestion positively in the interest of RTI.

Yours faithfully,

J P Shah