IMPROVING RTI IMPLEMENTATION BY CIC

Date: 21-04-2014                                                                By email & post

To,

Director – RTI

Department of Personnel and Training,

Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions,

Govt of India, New Delhi

Email: dirrti-dopt@nic.in

Dear Sir,

Subject: Improving RTI implementation by Central Information Commission

Kindly refer to my letter dated 03-02-2014 addressed to you on the captioned subject. This letter was marked to CIC and US [IR], DoPT on     14-02-2014. CPIO & Secretary, CIC has thankfully replied to my said letter vide his letter No. CIC/CPIO/13/2007 dated 18-03-2014 [copy of which is attached herewith].  Being interested in making RTI effective, I submit rejoinder as under to CIC averment:

1. Non-compliance of CIC orders: I thank CIC for having taken note and hope that matter would be placed before appropriate forum of CIC for operationalising suggestion on the ground without much delay. You will kindly concur with me that lack of effective implementation and good intention are two vital fields due to which pro-citizen policies of Govt. and political parties remain in books only. I hope DoPT will contribute in proper implementation at CIC level by persuasion and follow up.

2. Penalty for non-compliance of CIC order: I thank CIC for having taken note of this suggestion and I hope that matter will be taken up with ICs in their meetings to arrive at a uniform decision to at least seek explanation of defaulting CPIOs for non-compliance without exception and then penalizing on case to case basis. I hope Learned ICs would uphold sanctity of their own orders along with fundamental right of common citizens and not allow CPIOs to throw CIC orders in dust bin. Each decision of CIC costs nearly Rs.15-20000/- to the public money.

3. E-filing of Appeals and Complaints to CIC: It appears that rule 8 has been interpreted in a manner which cause harassment to common appellant/complainant. There is no reason why signed scanned copy of appeal or complaint in pdf format cannot be treated as duly verified and authenticated as required in rule 8. Even otherwise also CIC does not check veracity of signatures on complaints or appeals or establishes identity of appellant/complainant before processing appeals/complaints sent in hard copies.  In addition to this, as stated in my earlier letter dated 03-02-2014, even when signed copies are repeatedly sent by speed or registered post to CIC after e-filing, it takes months for CIC to register appeals/complaints. I request you to kindly persuade CIC in this matter from your end to ease e-filing of appeals/complaints. CIC does not appear to be interested in avoiding delay, irritation and expense to common citizens by justifying  “signed copy awaited” reason to not regiser.

4. Recovery of Penalties by CIC: On this point I humbly state that CIC is trying to find alibi for not recovering penalties effectively. My suggestion to mail copy of penalty order to salary disbursing officer or head of public authority of CPIO will have very positive effect and it does not require any amendment to law or rule. A simple cost effective procedure will ensure that penalty is recovered promptly, unless CPIO is well connected administratively or politically. I know mental position of law/rule breaking officer, the moment he knows that matter is being brought to the knowledge of highest officer of the public authority. In case there is pending litigation, at least CIC will be informed by public authority about stay order etc. I humbly solicit effective intervention of DoPT in this issue also. In fact CIC is encouraging non-payment of penalties by having soft corner towards defaulting CPIOs by resorting to untenable technicalities.

5. Audio Hearing: Though connected extensively with RTI since 2005 on all India level, I have not heard of use of mobile or landline for audio hearing by CIC. An RTI to CIC may reveal number of such audio hearings undertaken by CIC since 2006, but I apprehend that record may not be separately available with CIC. If audio hearing is preferred [ with choice left to appellants/complainants], appellants/complainants living in villages or taluka places may not be required to visit district head quarters incurring time and cost for 4-5 minutes of say at video conferencing.

6. Attending e-mails by CIC: The contention of CIC that it is autonomous under section 12.4 of RTI Act and hence rules/guidelines made by Govt. of  India in the matter of emails are not applicable to CIC. This then means that CIC can function in any manner it chooses, even by violating laws, rules, regulations, policies or guidelines of Govt. of India. I think CPIO & Secretary CIC is over-stretching section 12.4 to have absolute unbridled freedom. You will kindly agree that in a democratic set-up and rule of law, no authority can claim to be above law or function in arbitrary manner without accountability to none, more so CIC which is guardian of RTI of aam admi of India and his fundamental right under article 19.1.a. If CIC has administrative difficulties [ like shortage of staff etc] in attending large number of emails of citizens, then the solution would be to ensure that mechanism is put in place to ensure that emails are attended, rather than not attending emails at all. It shows negative approach of CIC to common citizens who use emails for saving on time and cost on postages. I will try to dig out by RTI record of CIC which lead to such anti-citizen bizarre decision. This issue also requires serious persuasive intervention of DoPT.

Yours faithfully,

J P Shah

Encl: as above

Copies to:

Mrs. Sushma Singh

Chief Information Commissioner,

Central Information Commission,

August Kranti Bhavan, Bhikaji Cama Place,

New Delhi - 110 066

Email: sushmas@nic.in

2. Shri Rahul Gandhi,

Vice President, Indian National Congress, New Delhi

Email: rahulgandhi@hotmail.com

--this is ground reality of your flag-ship enactment.