RTI Corner

The appellant filed a complaint against a JNU Registrar and wanted the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to take action against him. The PIO informed the appellant about the fact that the averred complaint filed by him was filed in their records without action as it did not concern the role and functions of CAT. The CIC upheld the stand of the PIO observing that the Appellant appears to be harbouring a grievance against the action/inaction on his complaint against a JNU professor filed by him with various authorities like PMO, MHRD etc. as he believes that the forwarding of the said complaint to the concerned JNU professor by these authorities is a travesty of justice against which he complained to CAT thereafter.
Comments
An appellant should restrict his RTI Application to seeking information as it is beyond the powers of the Information Commission to decide any other matter. The Apex Court in the matter of Union of India v Namit Sharma (Review Petition [C] No.2309 of 2012) observed that while deciding whether a citizen should or should not get a particular information “which is held by or under the control of any public authority”, the Information Commission does not decide a dispute between two or more parties concerning their legal rights other than their right to get information in possession of a public authority. The High Court of Delhi in the case of Hansi Rawat and Anr. v Punjab National Bank and Ors. (LPA No.785/2012) held that the proceedings under the RTI Act cannot be converted into proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information furnished.
Citation: Chitresh Kumar Banjare v Central Administrative Tribunal in File No : CIC/CADMT/A/2021/114543, Date of Decision: 16/06/2022
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

During the appeal before the CIC, the Ministry of Home Affairs submitted that the tamra-patras were issued by the central government in 1972 only and thereafter by the respective state governments. Hence, the information could not be provided in the form it was requested by the Appellant. It was added that the first appeal pertaining to a different RTI application was annexed by the Appellant in the Second Appeal filed by the Appellant before the CIC. The CIC observed that the reply provided by the PIO was not exhaustive and the reasons provided during the hearing should have been mentioned therein. The CIC directed the PIO to re-examine the RTI application and provide a revised reply to the Appellant offering him an inspection of available records on a mutually convenient date and time and giving the reasons why complete information cannot be provided. The Appellant was also cautioned to ensure that correct documents pertaining to the specific case are chronologically attached with the Second Appeals/ Complaints filed before the CIC henceforth.
Comments
The PIO must ensure that the reply sent by him is complete and is self-explanatory. Incomplete or non-specific replies may end in an appeal wasting precious time of the CIC, the appellant, and the public authority.
Citation: Shri Rohit Sabharwal v. Ministry of Home Affairs in Second Appeal No. CIC/MHOME/A/2020/140086, Date of Decision: 26.04.2022
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

Copy of a Cabinet Note on the basis of which the decision was taken and certain OM regarding rate of dearness allowance was issued was denied claiming that the noting in the file/Cabinet Note in respect of revision of rate of DA is a secret document. The CIC observed that the PIO has not bothered to invoke any exemption clause of the RTI Act to deny the information or mentioned any reasoning which corresponds to any of the prescribed exemptions. Further, since the averred Cabinet Decision was final and matter was complete, the information could not have been withheld by the PIO. A show notice was issued to the PIO why penalty as prescribed under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act should not be imposed on him. During the hearing, the PIO was persistently depending upon his Section Officer to speak on his behalf and remained flustered throughout the course of the hearing but pleaded that his omission may be condoned this time. The CIC observed that the Cabinet note requested for by the Complainant does not even exist, which makes the question of ‘secrecy’ or applicability of Section 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act redundant. The CIC further observed that apparently, the CPIO has absolutely no knowledge about the provisions of the RTI Act as he denied the information by citing it as a ‘secret document’. The CIC severely admonished the PIO and issued a strict warning to ensure that he first acquaints himself well with the provisions of the RTI Act and secondly, he has to own up to his actions and be accountable for his replies under the RTI Act without having to rely on a subordinate officer to even speak on his behalf during a show-cause hearing.
Comments
Even after seventeen years of coming in force of the RTI Act, there are many officers who do not possess even rudimentary knowledge of the Act. Unless a PIO keeps himself abreast with the provisions of the RTI Act, errors may creep in resulting into imposition of penalty.
Citation: R. Rajasekharan v. Department of Expenditure in File No : CIC/DOEXP/C/2020/138545, Date of Final decision: 28.03.2022
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