Business world: New Delhi: Friday, June 09, 2017.
Thwarting the
very purpose of the Right to Information law such as transparency and
accountability in government offices, India’s Intellectual Property Office has
formally restrained its officials from seeking departmental information through
this provision.
The office of
Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks, which functions under
the Department of Industrial Policies and Promotion (DIPP) of Commerce Ministry
of India, issued an internal circular cautioning its officers to desist from
taking their personal grievances on other platforms like Ministry, grievance
cell or using any other tool like RTI etc.
The IPO
circular has, thereby, strictly restricts the officials from accessing
information from apex authorities through RTI citing non-access to such
information, without availing proper administrative remedy within the
office.
Right to
Information Act, which was passed by the Parliament in 2005, is an act to
provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for
citizens to secure access to information under the control of public
authorities. The key purpose of this Act is to promote transparency and
accountability in the working of every public authority.
“It has come
to the notice of undersigned that few officials in this office are trying to
bypass the administrative channel available to them in order to resolve their
grievance and acquire information (which is otherwise accessible to the public)
relating to general office procedures and facilities available to them, etc .
Any personal grievance / incidence of non-access of information (not being
exhaustive and frequent), shall be brought into the notice of immediate higher
authority and Head of Office through proper channel, wherever required....”
stated the office circular dated 18th May.
The IPO
circular added that in case the matter is not resolved, same may be brought to
the notice of undersigned (the Controller General of Patents, Designs and
Trademarks). It has also warned that act of any official indulged in by-pass of
proper channel/frivolous queries in a frequent manner, causing unnecessarily
disproportionate diversion of the public resources of the office, shall be
considered as an act in a discourteous manner, thereby, rendering him or her a
candidate of unbecoming a government servant under Rule 3 (1) (iii) of the
Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 and liable for disciplinary
action.
Government
employees typically resort to RTI or such channels to access information,
especially matters related to their grievances, complaints and other
administration issues when these are denied by senior officers or superior
offices within the department.
RTI Act 2005,
which is for setting out the practical regime of right to information for
citizens and replaces the erstwhile Freedom of information Act, 2002. Under the
provisions of the Act, any citizen of India may request information from a
"public authority" (a body of Government or "instrumentality of
State") which is required to reply expeditiously or within thirty days.
The Act also requires every public authority to computerise their records for
wide dissemination and to proactively certain categories of information so that
the citizens need minimum recourse to request for information formally.
Although
there could be reasons for IPO chief to stop misuse of the provision by its
officials, a blanket ban, however, sets a bad precedent, say experts.
"This is
a delicate issue that requires some balancing of competing concerns. No doubt,
the CG may have had good reasons to initiate such a directive to all employees.
And sometimes employees have been known to use redressal mechanisms to settle
personal scores,” said Shamnad Basheer, former IP chair at National School of
Juridical Sciences, Kolkata and founder of SpicyIP, one of the most read IP
blogs, which first brought out the contents of this circular to its readers.
He added that
“At other times, however, an RTI option might be the only realistic option for
an employee to secure justice. And this should never be thwarted at any cost.
The middle ground would be in ensuring that RTI access is not thwarted, but
that once it comes to light that an employee has availed of this mechanism with
a spurious intent (backed up by evidence etc), appropriate disciplinary
measures can be taken."
O P Gupta,
Controller General of Patents. Designs and Trade Marks, could not be contacted
immediately for his comments on this potentially controversial circular.
.JPG)
.JPG)
