RTI Corner

The Appellant contended that his First Appeal was not adjudicated, consequently he had to file this Second Appeal. He further pointed out that the written submission dated 12.08.2021, had not been sent to the Appellant, which is against the spirit of natural justice. The CIC expressed agreement with the Appellant’s contention that non adjudication of the First Appeal led to filing of this Second Appeal. Likewise, it was also noted that the written submissions dated 12.08.2021 submitted by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to the CIC were not marked to the Appellant. The said submissions are self-explanatory and the Respondent has even explained the cause of non-adjudication of the First Appeal to corruption of the hard disc drive. The CIC directed the PIO to send a complete set of written submissions dated 12.08.2021 to the Appellant. The CIC remarked that all parties shall, as a matter of practice, always serve an advance copy of submissions to the opposite party, in future, for a fair and effective hearing.
Comments
The submission of an advance copy of submissions to the opposite party would help in early disposal of appeals.
Citation: Love Gogia V/s National Human Rights Commission in Second Appeal No. CIC/NHRCM/A/2019/647382, Date of Decision: 17.08.2021
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an expert on RTI matters and has co-authored the books RIGHT TO INFORMATION - LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Apart from her weekly article here, her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link: www.rtifoundationofindia.com

CCTV footage of court hall of Presiding Officer, DRT, Pune was denied. Applicant argued that the purpose of the CCTV was public safety as well as transparency of judicial process and the respondent was under an obligation to disclose the CCTV footage. The PIO referred to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pradyuman Bhisht v. Union of India [WP No. 99/2015] wherein it was observed that the footage of the CCTV Camera will not be available under the RTI and will not be supplied to anyone without permission of the concerned High Court. The CIC held that the Disclosure of the CCTV footage might endanger the physical safety of individuals whose movement was covered on that footage. In the absence of any larger public interest, there appears to be no infirmity with the stand taken by the respondent..
Comments
With the Covid pandemic, a large number of hearings are taking place virtually. Perhaps, the law should evolve to set a procedure for the obtaining the recordings of CCTV and the Court proceedings..
Citation: Adv Mahadeo Avhad v. Debts Recovery Tribunal in Second Appeal No. CIC/DRTPU/A/2019/645775, Date: 29.12.2021
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an expert on RTI matters and has co-authored the books RIGHT TO INFORMATION - LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Apart from her weekly article here, her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link: www.rtifoundationofindia.com