Whispers Forum

The appellant sought information about whether a ration card holder can be given ration if his fingerprint or iris authentication on the POS machine fails. He sought for the procedure in this regard seeking copy of the relevant circulars. He further sought information about the procedure to provide ration to a disabled ration card holder. There was a delay in providing the information. The PIO submitted that the RTI application was filed on 26/4/2023 and the reply was prepared by the Policy Branch but it could not be dispatched due to a fire incident occurred in May, 2023 and the file was bundled up with the other files. The reply was provided to the RTI applicant on 02/05/2024 and also, a Memo was issued to the erring official i.e. MTS of the branch on 02/05/2024 with the direction to submit his reply within three days as to why the RTI reply was not dispatched within time. It was submitted before the CIC that a lenient view may kindly be taken in the matter keeping in view the circumstances in which the error occurred and the official has already been warned to be careful in future. The CIC was not convinced with the reasons mentioned for delay in reply provided by the Respondent because no documents or FIR copy has been annexed with the written submission to substantiate the explanation claiming occurrence of fire incident at the relevant time. The PIO was directed to file a revised updated written submission detailing the reason for delay in replying to the Complainant beyond stipulated time. In the spirit of the RTI Act, an advisory under Section 25(5) of the RTI Act was issued to the Respondent Public Authority for upfront disclosure of information as sought in this RTI application and related Rules, Circulars, Office Orders, Bye Laws, etc. under Section 4 of the RTI Act in public domain
Comments
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Kishan Chand Jain v. UOI & Ors. WP (C) No. 990 of 2021 adviced to disclose to the beneficiaries of the Public Distribution System particularly PwD beneficiaries regarding the provision for facilitating ration distribution to them through other members of the family or through authorized representative. Such information should be displayed at all the Fair Price Shops and the same will also relieve the Public Authority of the burden of RTI Applications.
Citation: Ashok Kumar v. Food, Supply and Consumers Affairs, CIC/FSACA/C/2024/129241; Date of Decision: 21.05.2025
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Vishakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books PIO’s Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. Her weekly article is being published since 2008 on this site. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and third party audit to individuals / organisations. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation at the link https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com

At least five people lost their lives and several others were injured after falling from an overcrowded moving local train near Mumbai. This tragic incident shows how serious the safety problems are in our railway system. It is shocking that such accidents keep happening and yet the authorities fail to take proper action. While we are building new infrastructure and launching luxury trains for the rich and elite, the basic safety of regular passengers is being ignored. People travelling in general compartments also face similar dangers every day. It is high time the government and railway officials focus on the needs and safety of the common people, not just on fancy projects for a few.
Ritika Malviya

The appellant sought for the GPF Final payment, Interest, reasons of pending of GPF final payment etc. but did not receive any reply from the PIO. During the hearing before the CIC, the PIO remained absent despite of having received the prior notice for the hearing. The CIC directed the PIO to revisit the RTI application and provide the information sought by the Appellant, except which is exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the CIC took grave exception to the delay caused by the PIO in not providing any reply to the Appellant within the stipulated time frame and also for the unexplained absence during the hearing. Observing that such casual conduct of the PIO causes unwarranted obstruction to the Appellant's right to information and is in grave violation to the provisions of RTI Act, the CIC directed the PIO to file a written submission detailing the reason for not providing any reply within the time bound manner and for the unexplained absence during the hearing before the Commission.
Comments
It is unfortunate to see that the PIO’s fail to reply within the prescribed time limit and do not attend the hearing physically / online before the CIC. These actions invite unpleasant action and undermine the authority of the RTI Act, 2005.
Citation: Shri Arup Sengupta v. Border Security Force, CIC/BDRSF/A/2024/108310; Date of Decision: 07.05.2025
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Vishakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books PIO’s Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. Her weekly article is being published since 2008 on this site. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and third party audit to individuals / organisations. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation at the link https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com

Only a matter of “true to salt” Mahatma Gandhi shook the foundations of the mighty British Empire by the Salt Satyagraha. Can manipulation of salt quality and prices harm the government? Big companies were not allowed in the salt business till the Tata’s proposal to recover salt as a by-product was approved. Edible salt or table salt used to be sold at very cheap rates. During monsoon prices would shoot up, especially in the NE states and Bangladesh to up to 200 a kg. Sambhar salt was the best but quantity constraints made sea salt popular. The other variety was rock salt from the Mandi salt mines in HP, but it’s quantity too was limited. In order to meet the shortage, the British had built Gola Howrah to maintain stocks. Now Tata rock salt(sendha, though the then Salt Commissioner had once clarified that rock salt is different from sendha namak) is sold @120/kg. Do the consumers take it to be rock salt? There is no Fssai certification also on the pack. Chances of adulteration with red sandstone dust exist due to enormous profit. Besides, it is produced or packed in West Bengal and it is here that hackles are raised. In Pakistan consumers use only rock salt because there are most of the mines. Is rock salt from Pakistan getting sold in India? It can be the biggest health hazard if quality is compromised or weaponised by Pakistan. Government may like to clarify in the public interest!
M L Gupta