RTI Corner

Copies of records relating to receipt & disposal of RTI applications for a particular period were sought. The Appellant claimed that as the information is in the nature of suo motu disclosure, the provisions of Section 7(9) cannot be invoked. The respondent agreed in principle to so motu disclose the sought for information viz. status of RTI application/first appeal received in their office, first appellate authority order etc. on their website. However, he sought for some time to arrange adequate training to all the concerned officers of Air India Ltd. The CIC allowed 4 months time to impart required training to the employees & for updating the software. The Air India was directed to put the information in public domain within 4 months from the date of receipt of this order.
Comments
Information relating to disposal of RTI application is liable to be disclosed on the website of the public authority in compliance with Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act read with DoPT circular dated 15.04.2013 vide O.M. No. 1/6/2011-IR.
Citation: : Mr. R.K. Jain v. Air India Limited in Complaint No. CIC/AIRIN/C/2016/299172, Dated of Decision: 02.01.2018
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is the co-author of the books: RIGHT TO INFORMATION – LAW AND PRACTICand PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at - http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/

The appellant sought the names of all beneficiaries including pregnant and lactating women at Anganwadi Centre situated at a particular village but did not get any response from the public authority. The CIC directed the PIO of Ministry of WCD to issue necessary guidelines for voluntary disclosures as per the mandate under Section 4 of RTI Act for the guidance of all Child Development Project Officers, ICDS Project to provide complete information voluntarily on their websites, which would eventually benefit the appellant also. The CIC directed that all CDPOs of ICDS project all over the country to voluntarily publish the month-wise expenditure incurred for functioning and maintenance of Anganwadi centres, names of the beneficiaries, details of benefits regularly on their website and display the printed copies conspicuously on notice board.
Comments
Though the State Governments directly monitor and supervise the functioning of Anganwadi centres, this massive programme receives around 50% of the funds (Rs. 16,000 crores approximately) from the Central Government. Section 4(1)(b) of RTI Act, clause (xii) mandates voluntary disclosure of the manner of execution of subsidy programs, including the amounts allocated and the details of beneficiaries of such programs; and under clause (xiii) the particulars of recipients of concessions, permits or authorizations granted by it. Therefore, it is the mandatory duty of the every public authority to disclose complete details of money spent on subsidy program like that of the ICDS on Anganwadies including the details of each individual beneficiary of this program.
Citation: : Myathari Janardhan v. PIO, MOWCD in CIC/MOWCD/A/2017/166012 Date of Decision – 10.07.2018
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is the co-author of the books: RIGHT TO INFORMATION – LAW AND PRACTICand PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at - http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/

The appellant asked information regarding the procedure of inquiry against a bank official of Central Bank of India and other details etc from the PIO, Reserve Bank of India. On appeal , the FAA advised the appellant to file a fresh RTI application to the Central Bank of India. Before the CIC, the RBI stated that since the information pertaining to the procedure of inquiry against a bank official of Central Bank of India and other details of a particular bank employee was sought, the information ought to be available with the Central Bank of India. However, inadvertently the RTI application was not transferred to the PIO, Central Bank of India. The respondent tendered his unconditional apology for this lapse and requested the Commission to condone the same. The CIC counselled the PIO to be more careful in future, so that such lapses do not recur. The CIC also directed the PIO to transfer the RTI application along with a copy of the Commission’s decision to the PIO, Central Bank of India within a period of two weeks under intimation to the appellant.
Comments
As per Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, where an application is made to a public authority but the subject matter of the RTI application pertains to another public authority, the PIO of the public authority receiving the RTI application has to transfer the same to the public authority concerned.
Citation: : Riaz Ahmed vs. Reserve Bank of India in Decision No. CIC/RBIND/A/2017/195214, dated 18.06.2018
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is the co-author of the books: RIGHT TO INFORMATION – LAW AND PRACTICand PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at - http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/

The appellant claimed that misleading response has been given by the PIO in respect of his application pertaining to demonetization stating that the information sought is not specific. The Bank submitted that there are a number of cases where customers come to the Bank to exchange their old notes with the new notes. Hence, the PIO presumed that the appellant had sought details of the old notes which are still in circulation and accepted as legal tender. The respondent further stated that no record is available with the Bank regarding the same. Hence, the appellant was informed that the information sought by him is not specific. The CIC observed that the PIO should have inferred that the information sought pertain to the demonetized currency notes. Nonetheless, if he felt that the information sought for was not clear, he should have sought clarification from the appellant. The Commission took a serious view of this lapse and counseled the PIO to be more careful in future so that such lapses do not recur. The CIC directed to provide the information within a period of four weeks.
Comments
In case of doubt about the query, it would be appropriate on the part of the PIO to seek necessary clarifications from the applicant.
Citation: : Pramod Kumar vs. State Bank of India in Decision No. CIC/SBBAJ/A/2017/122397 Dated 29.06.2018
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is the co-author of the books: RIGHT TO INFORMATION – LAW AND PRACTICand PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at - http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/