The
Indian Express: Chandigarh: Tuesday, 01 September 2015.
The Haryana
State Information Commissioner cautioned the First Appellate Authority (FAA)
and a State Public Information Officer (SPIO) to be very particular, specific
and practical in approach while passing orders in first appeals and also while
handling the RTI applications as per the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
An RTI
application at the Forest Department was filed by a Morni resident, Krishan
Kaushik on January 27, following which the then SPIO, S Narayan, who is
presently posted as MD, NRHM, Sector 2 had sought a document fee of Rs 12,660
for 6,330 pages. Kaushik claimed that he never received the letters, so the
document fee was not deposited.
He then
approached the FAA. Despite the circumstances the M L Sharma, the FAA, in his
orders dated April 17, had directed the SPIO to furnish complete information
running into 6330 pages free of cost as the time limit for supplying the
information had lapsed. Following this, Kaushik was supplied with the 1000
pages of information.
Not satisfied
with the response, Kaushik approached the state information commissioner. The
State Information Commissioner, Hemat Atri held that these directions were
ridiculous and without any application of mind.
He stated
that the Commission is really concerned that if such huge number of pages are
provided to the appellant without depositing the document fee sought well within
the time limit, it will set a very bad precedent.
“The same
should have never been done and instead of directing the SPIO to furnish such
huge number of pages, the FAA should have directed the appellant to deposit the
fee sought well within the time limits. He could have also opted for furnishing
the information by means of inspection of records, the provision for which is
very well placed in the RTI Act, 2005. The same has not been done,” held the
State Information Commissioner.
Terming the
FAA as “irresponsible”, the State Information commissioner Hemant Atri ,stated
that the FAA, being a senior officer, should not have passed such an
impractical order. He held that it is sheer misinterpretation of the Act on the
part of both SPIO and FAA.
However, he
held that there was no ill intention on the part of the then SPIO as he had
sought document fee well within the prescribed time lime and also tried to
implement the FAA’s orders, however partially.
Also, as
Kaushik has already admitted to be satisfied with the information provided to
him, the appeal was dismissed.
.JPG)
.JPG)
