Updated Guidelines on RTI Act

Date: 03-12-2013                                                      by email

To,

Shri Sandeep Jain. Director,

Dept of Personnel and Training,

North Block, New Delhi

Email: osdrti-dopt@nic.in

Dear Sir,

Subject: Updated Guidelines on RTI Act

          I thank you for having issued updated guidelines on RTI Act vide OM No. 1/32/2013-IR dated 28-11-2013. Information Commissioners at CIC/SICs are the sole interpreters of provisions of RTI Act, other than Higher Judiciary. I therefore feel that there are following discrepancies / omissions which may be corrected if deemed necessary to avoid complications to information seekers:

1. Para 16 of Part I of OM – Associations etc:

What is stated in OM is not in tune with CIC decision No. CIC/WB/C/2007/00104 & 105 dated 17-05-2007 of Chief Information Commissioner, CIC.

2. Para 16 to 18 of part II of OM – Transfer of application:

I think guidelines are not in consonance with CIC decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000278/SG/12906 dated 16-06-2011.

3. It should have been expressly emphasized that PIO should give cogent justification for reasons to reject request, u/s 8.1 [ a to j] or 9. Majority of PIOs  and First Appellate Authorities do not mention justification. I quote as under:

A] “Through this Order the Commission now wants to send the message loud and clear that quoting provisions of Section 8 of the RTI Act ad libitum to deny the information requested for, by CPIOs/Appellate Authorities without giving any justification or grounds as to how these provisions are applicable is simply unacceptable and clearly amounts to malafide denial of legitimate information attracting penalties under section 20(1) of the Act.”CIC/OK/A/2006/00163 dated 7 July, 2006.

B] “The PIO has to give the reasons for rejection of the request for information as required under Section 7(8)(i). Merely quoting the bare clause of the Act does not imply that the reasons have been given. The PIO should have intimated as to how he had come to the conclusion that rule 8(1)(j) was applicable in this case.”CIC/OK/C/2006/00010 dated 7 July, 2006.

C] Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in its judgement dated 15-12-2010 in  W.P.(C) 12428/2009 & CM APPL 12874/2009 has pronounced as:

“6. This Court is inclined to concur with the view expressed by the CIC that in order to deny the information under the RTI Act the authority concerned would have to show a justification with reference to one of the specific clauses under Section 8 (1) of the RTI Act. In the instant ………….”

I hope guidelines will be reviewed in view of foregoing by yourgoodselves.

Yours faithfully,

J P Shah