Central Information Commissioner Slams PIO and FAA of His Own Commission over Efficiency
A series of right to information (RTI) applications by an applicant addressed to the central public information officer (CPIO) and the first appellate authority (FAA) of the central information commission (CIC), Delhi, has earned the wrath of the central information commissioner for the delay and casual attitude of these officers in her own office itself.
 
Expressing “concern at the apparent lack of checks and balances within the RTI machinery of CIC,” CIC Anandi Ramalingam, who heard the second appeal last week, ordered that “To avoid the instances of such blatant violation of the RTI Act provisions caused by its CPIOs,” the FAA particularly change his approach towards RTI applications.
 
CIC Ramalingam expressed her “grave displeasure at the delay caused by R K Rao, the then CPIO in most of these cases in replying to the RTI application(s) and it is also advised for future to ensure that the office of the FAA assumes a substantial role than that of passing cursory directions on first appeal(s) that are filed particularly on the grounds of not having received any reply from the CPIOs.”
 
RTI applicant C Raju had filed a series of RTI applications with the CPIO of the CIC after several of his RTI requests were unanswered by the CPIO of the Andaman & Nicobar office. Thus, he filed an RTI application with the central information commission as follows, as he sent a series of RTI applications to the CIC and did not receive any response:
“(i) Kindly provide my RTI application date 
(ii) Name and designation of those responsible for obtaining information from the PIO
(iii) Copy of disciplinary action taken by the commission against the officer for not obtaining information
(iv) Name of the officer from whom I should get the information.”
 
In reply, the CPIO stated that the responsibility of giving this information lies with the PIO of another public authority and that the requested information was not available on record with her. 
 
Aggrieved by the lack of response to his queries, RTI applicant Mr Raju filed a second appeal with the CIC itself which is the tallest public authority in the country. 
 
The CPIO, in advance, submitted a written reply to the CIC, stating that he had written to Raju that “no submissions prior to the hearing of the cases are available in the e-book of the case.” However, as per the e-book available in the Appscom software of the commission, two replies are found. The FAA upheld the reply of the CPIO so Mr Raju filed a second appeal. 
 
RTI applicant Raju, during the second appeal hearing, stated that he was dissatisfied with the Andaman & Nicobar public authority where he had initially filed his RTIs. CIC Ramalingam reprimanded him and asked him to confine himself to the CIC’s information officers, as that was his content in his second appeal. She observed in her order that Mr Raju should take up the negligence in providing information with the UT of Andaman & Nicobar and not treat the CIC as “proceedings for adjudication of disputes as to the correctness of the information furnished.”
 
She further noted that “The CIC has been constituted under section 12 of the Act and the powers of CIC are delineated under the Act. The CIC being a statutory body has to act strictly within the confines of the Act and is neither required to nor has the jurisdiction to examine any other controversy or disputes.”
 
Quoting the apex court in the matter of Union of India vs Namit Sharma (Review Petition [C] No.2309 of 2012) dated 3 September 2013 observed as under: “20. …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….”
 
Thus, CIC Ramalingam pulled up the RTI applicant as well as the CPIOs and FAAs in the central information commission.
 
(Vinita Deshmukh is consulting editor of Moneylife. She is also the convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting, which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain Award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book "To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte" with Vinita Kamte and is the author of "The Mighty Fall".)
Comments
Free Helpline
Legal Credit
Feedback