Karnataka expands offline RTI services through Sakala, Gram One centres

Business Line: Bengaluru: Monday, 19^th October 2026.
The facility is aimed at helping people who lack access to computers or are unfamiliar with using the internet.

Representative image | Photo Credit: HANDOUT

The Karnataka government on Sunday said that it has introduced two measures to make the RTI process more accessible to people and improve transparency, with the approval of Chief Minister D K Shivakumar.
Under the first measure, public authorities receiving physical RTI applications submitted by post or in person must register them on the Right to Information online portal within two days of receipt.
The registration of physical RTI applications has been notified as a guaranteed service under the Karnataka Sakala Services Act, 2011, according to an official statement.
The move will ensure that every applicant receives an online registration number and can track the status of the application at any time. It is also expected to reduce the possibility of applications being lost or overlooked
If an application is not registered on the portal within the stipulated two days, the applicant will be eligible for compensatory relief under the Sakala Act, and the concerned official will be held accountable, the statement said.
In another measure, the government has extended the facility to file RTI applications online through all Bengaluru One, Karnataka One and Gram One centres across the state.
The facility is aimed at helping people who lack access to computers or are unfamiliar with using the internet. Applicants can visit their nearest service centre and submit applications with the assistance of staff by paying the prescribed RTI fee and a nominal service charge. They will receive an online acknowledgement at the centre itself.
The extension of the service to Gram One centres at the gram panchayat level will make online RTI filing accessible to rural residents as well.
The measures will bring physical applications, online submissions and applications filed through service centres onto a common platform, facilitating monitoring of compliance with the timelines prescribed under the RTI Act, 2005.
They will also help identify delays by information officers more quickly and provide people with a reliable record of their applications, the statement said.
The measures were announced in a statement by Harsha Gupta, Principal Secretary, Department of Public Services.
The statement urged people to make use of the facility either through the online portal or through their nearest Bengaluru One, Karnataka One or Gram One centre.

Karnataka extends online RTI filing to all Bengaluru One, Karnataka One and Grama One centres

The Hindu: Bengaluru: Monday, 19^th October 2026.
Under the new provisions of the Sakala Services Act, 2011, public authorities receiving RTI applications by post or in person must register them on the RTI online portal within two days

The Karnataka government has brought the registration of physical Right to Information (RTI) applications under the Sakala Services Act, 2011, and extended online RTI filing facilities to all Bengaluru One, Karnataka One and Grama One centres to make the process more accessible and transparent.
Under the new provisions, public authorities receiving RTI applications by post or in person must register them on the RTI online portal within two days. The service has been notified as a guaranteed service under the Sakala Act, ensuring that applicants receive an online registration number and can track the status of their applications.
If an application is not uploaded within the stipulated two days, the applicant would be eligible for compensation under the Sakala Act, and the officer concerned would be held responsible, according to a statement issued by Harsh Gupta, Principal Secretary, Praja Seva Department.
Through service centres
The government has also extended online RTI filing through service centres to help people who do not have access to the internet or are unfamiliar with computers. Applicants can visit their nearest Bengaluru One, Karnataka One or Grama One centre and seek assistance from staff to submit an application.
Applicants will have to pay the prescribed RTI fee and a nominal service charge levied by the centre. An online acknowledgement will be issued at the centre itself. The extension to Grama One centres is intended to make online RTI filing accessible to people in rural areas through facilities at the gram panchayat level.
A Government Order (GO) issued in this regard said the measures would bring physical applications, direct online submissions and applications filed through service centres onto a common platform. This is expected to make it easier to monitor compliance with the timelines prescribed under the Right to Information Act, 2005, and identify delays by information officers.
Timelines for disposing appeals
The guidelines also prescribe timelines for the disposal of appeals under the RTI process. First appeals must be decided by the competent appellate authority within seven working days. Second appeals must also be disposed of within seven working days by the appellate authority concerned, identified in the GO as the Secretary of the department concerned.
The GO also provides for cases in which the Public Information Officer (PIO) concerned is not registered on the RTI online portal. In such instances, the application must be forwarded to the district- or department-level nodal officer, who will be responsible for ensuring that the PIO is registered on the portal without delay.
Earlier, applications submitted physically could face delays before being entered into the online system. Bringing their registration under the Sakala framework makes the two-working-day deadline mandatory and is expected to help applicants monitor the status of their applications online, the statement said.
Govt. staff services
The State government has also issued a notification bringing a wide array of personnel and service-related requests of government employees under the ambit of the Karnataka Sakala Services Act, 2011.
Under the notification, the disbursement of salary and the issuance of salary certificates must be completed within three working days, while Form 16 issuance is set at five working days. A seven-working-day deadline applies to higher study permissions, festival advances, permission to draw first salary, and the routing of applications for KGID, GIS and GPF. Sanctioning leave, charge allowances, and issuing No Objection Certificates for passports must be settled within 10 working days.

Raj info panel fines Jaisalmer DIET principal for RTI violations

Times of India: Jaisalmer: Monday, 19^th October 2026.

Rajasthan State Information Commission (RSIC) imposed a fine of Rs 5,000 on the principal-cum-Public Information Officer (PIO) of the District Institute of Education and Training (DIET), Jaisalmer, for failing to provide information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act and repeatedly remaining absent from hearings.
Information commissioner Tikaram Sharma passed the order on a complaint by Satyanarayan Chhangani, a resident of Goydani Pada in Jaisalmer.
According to the complaint, Chhangani filed an RTI application on May 8, 2025, seeking information from DIET, Jaisalmer. On not getting information within the stipulated period, he filed a first appeal but received no relief. He subsequently approached RSIC.
On Oct 28, 2025, RSIC directed the authorities to provide the requested information available in the office records free of cost within 30 days. However, the information was still not provided, prompting Chhangani to file another complaint.
The principal reportedly stated that the requested information comprised more than 5,000 pages, making its compilation and supply a lengthy process. The applicant was also asked to inspect the records.
The Commission subsequently scheduled hearings on June 16, Aug 27 and Oct 6, 2026. However, the concerned officer remained absent on all three occasions.
Taking serious note of the repeated absence, failure to submit a response and non-compliance with its earlier directions.

RTI’s Growing Backlog

Daily Excelsior: National: Monday, 19^th October 2026.

The RTI Act has just come of age, and its birthday brings little cause for celebration. As of 30 June 2026, some 3.85 lakh appeals and complaints were pending across 28 information commissions. In Tripura, the estimated wait for disposal stretches to nearly twenty years; in Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh it is only marginally shorter. A law meant to deliver information in thirty days now delivers a delay measured in decades. That is denial by another name. The CIC offers no comfort. Its pendency rose by 9,378 between January and October this year, despite a full complement of eleven commissioners. Nor is the picture improved by the practice of returning appeals without orders: nine commissions sent back 37,701 cases in a single year, the CIC alone returning 14,603 of the 31,179 registered. Earlier data suggest that most such appeals are never re-filed. Rejection on technical grounds quietly shrinks the backlog while shrinking the citizen's right with it.
The instinctive remedy is to add commissioners or benches. That may bring temporary relief only. Appeals multiply because first-stage responses fail; every unanswered or evasive reply from a public authority becomes another file on a commission's desk. However, additional offices, staff and premises carry recurring costs, and no exchequer can fund a queue that grows faster than capacity. The solution lies upstream, with the departments themselves. After twenty-one years, the Government holds ample data to identify which offices generate the most appeals, which routinely ignore deadlines and which withhold information without justification. It should act on it. Every department should be required to publish a monthly report. Such returns would expose poor performers at once and make good practice visible.
Accountability must then follow. The head of each department should answer for non-response, unjustified refusal and concealment. The Act already provides for penalties, yet commissions seldom impose them, and recovery is rarer still. When officials know that delay costs them personally, compliance will improve faster than any new bench could manage. Commissions, for their part, must stop treating procedure as a gatekeeper. Appeals from poor and marginalised citizens, who often proceed without legal help, should not founder on formatting. If the basic material is present, the case should be heard. None of this requires fresh legislation or large budgets, only political will. Left unaddressed, rising pendency will hollow out the Act from within, leaving a statute that promises transparency and delivers opacity.

CIC orders probe into alleged plot allotment fraud in Panipat

The Tribune: Chandigarh: Sunday, October 18, 2026.
The Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) has directed the Estate Officer (EO), Panipat, of the Haryana Shahari Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP) to conduct an inquiry into an alleged fraud in the allotment of a plot in Sector 11 in the city.

PP Kapoor, an RTI activist, sought information regarding a plot in Sector 11 from the HSVP Estate Office in Panipat under the Right to Information (RTI) Act on July 17 last year. iStock photo

PP Kapoor, an RTI activist, sought information regarding a plot in Sector 11 from the HSVP Estate Office in Panipat under the Right to Information (RTI) Act on July 17 last year. However, the Public Information Officer (PIO) and the Estate Officer refused to provide the information, stating that it was third-party information.
Following this, Kapoor filed an appeal with the State Information Commission.
During the hearing, Kapoor presented his submissions before the commission, alleging that a major fraud had taken place in the allotment of the plot. He further alleged that the Estate Officer was deliberately withholding the information to conceal the alleged fraud.
Kapoor said he had sought information on several aspects of the plot, including whether it had been registered by an authorised person in 1997 and whether the person's identity had been properly established and verified.
He also sought to know whether the transfer of the plot in 1997 had been carried out in accordance with the rules of HSVP, then known as the Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA).
He further questioned how the building plan approval letter and the Building Occupation Certificate (OC) were issued in 2012 in the name of an authorised person when the plot had not been transferred in HSVP's records at the time. He also sought clarification on whether the signatures on the relevant applications belonged to authorised persons.
During the hearing on October 9, Chief Information Commissioner TVSN Prasad directed the Estate Officer, HSVP, Panipat, to conduct a detailed inquiry into the alleged fraud in the allotment of the plot and submit an inquiry report to the commission by October 22.

RTI panel issues bailable warrants against Ludhiana SHO for skipping three hearings: By Hillary Victor

Hindustan Times: Chandigarh: Sunday, October 18, 2026.
The commission also noted that a show-cause notice had been issued to the PIO under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act on June 17, 2026, but the officer had failed to submit a reply despite being given an opportunity to do so

Punjab State Information Commission has issued bailable warrants against Jitender Kumar, station house officer (SHO) of Daba police station in Ludhiana, for repeatedly skipping hearings in an appeal over the non-disclosure of information sought under the transparency law.
The commission, presided over by State Information Commissioner Harpreet Singh Sandhu, took the action after noting that the public information officer (PIO) had remained absent during three consecutive hearings on December 22, 2025, March 10, 2026, and June 17, 2026, despite notices being sent through registered post.
The commission observed that the officer’s repeated non-appearance had hampered the proceedings, delayed the disposal of the appeal and reflected disregard for the authority of the statutory body. It noted that such conduct undermined the effective implementation of the RTI Act, 2005, which is intended to promote transparency and accountability in public administration.
The warrants were issued in appeal, filed by Balwinderjeet Kaur Mann against the public information officer attached to Daba police station and the first appellate authority in the office of the Ludhiana commissioner of police.
The case took a further turn after the appellant’s daughter, Rattan Kaur Mann, appeared before the commission and informed it that her mother had died. She requested permission to pursue the appeal on her deceased mother’s behalf to obtain the requisite information. The commission directed her to produce a legal heir certificate and an authorisation letter.
The commission also noted that a show-cause notice had been issued to the PIO under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act on June 17, 2026, but the officer had failed to submit a reply despite being given an opportunity to do so.
Exercising its powers under Section 18(3)(a) of the Act, the commission directed Ludhiana Commissioner of Police Swapan Sharma to ensure service of the bailable warrants and secure the SHO’s presence, along with the information sought in the RTI application dated June 11, 2025.
The commission further warned that if the SHO failed to appear at the next hearing, an appropriate recommendation would be sent to the Punjab director general of police in accordance with the law.
The matter is scheduled for further hearing on November 25, 2026.

An active Information Commission is vital to democracy: Dr Shamsul Bari and Ruhi Naz

The Daily Star: Bangladesh: Sunday, October 18, 2026.

The Right to Information (RTI) is widely regarded as a tool for promoting transparency and exposing corruption. But its democratic significance goes far beyond that. It enables citizens to question arbitrary decisions, challenge unfair treatment, scrutinise public expenditure, and determine whether public institutions are fulfilling their responsibilities. RTI is not simply about obtaining documents; it also ensures that those exercising public power remain accountable to the people.
Recent experiences in India and Sri Lanka illustrate these wider possibilities. They also offer important lessons for Bangladesh, where the RTI Act provides citizens with similar legal rights. Unfortunately, the law’s effectiveness has been seriously undermined by the prolonged absence of the three information commissioners for over two years.
An instructive example comes from India, where RTI applications have examined whether the Election Commission of India (ECI) and government departments have complied with Supreme Court directives to revise electoral rolls, a subject that has roiled the nation recently.
In an article published in The Wire on October 9, 2026, prominent RTI activist Venkatesh Nayak described how he sought information from the ECI and the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) regarding action taken following the court’s directives concerning individuals whose citizenship had been questioned during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
The Supreme Court distinguished between determining eligibility for voter registration and formally deciding citizenship. It directed the ECI to refer relevant cases to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act for adjudication. The distinction is crucial: exclusion from an electoral roll does not automatically determine a person’s citizenship.
Nayak sought details of cases referred for adjudication, the authorities responsible, and communications exchanged between the ECI and the government. The responses raised troubling questions. The ECI initially said it did not hold the requested information, but later transferred the applications between departments. Responses also exceeded the statutory 30-day deadline.
The fundamental question is straightforward: how can citizens determine whether judicial directives are being implemented when responsible authorities cannot provide clear information about the action taken?
This case’s significance extends beyond India’s electoral system. Nayak used RTI to seek documentary evidence of compliance with a legal obligation, rather than relying on official assurances. Although the responses don’t conclusively establish that the directives were ignored, they expose weaknesses in administrative accountability.
This illustrates an essential democratic function of RTI: enabling citizens to compare what the law requires with what public authorities actually do.
Sri Lanka offers another example of RTI’s importance in protecting individual rights. In one case, its Right to Information Commission directed its health ministry to disclose two complaint letters a doctor facing disciplinary proceedings had sought. The ministry refused disclosure, arguing that an investigation was in progress. The commission found that the ministry had failed to show how releasing the letters would prejudice the investigation.
The principle is important. A person facing disciplinary proceedings must have a fair opportunity to know and respond to the allegations. An ongoing investigation cannot automatically justify withholding relevant information. Access to documents may be indispensable to securing a fair hearing.
Sri Lankan citizens have also used RTI to establish whether police acted on complaints and to obtain records explaining administrative decisions. Such cases demonstrate how access to information can help identify official failures, challenge arbitrary decisions, and seek remedies. They also reinforce the principle that secrecy must be justified under specific legal exemptions rather than treated as the normal practice of government.
India’s experience highlights another obstacle: delay. In Shailesh Gandhi vs Maharashtra State Information Commission (2025), the Bombay High Court emphasised that second appeals, equivalent to Bangladesh’s complaint mechanism, should be decided expeditiously, even where the law prescribes no specific deadline. The lesson applies equally to Bangladesh. A right that takes years to enforce may become meaningless to someone seeking information to challenge an injustice.
These examples show that RTI can protect individual rights, expose administrative shortcomings, and help determine whether public authorities are complying with their legal responsibilities. Access to information by itself does not guarantee justice, but it provides the evidence citizens need to pursue accountability through administrative or judicial channels.
For Bangladesh, these lessons are particularly relevant. Citizens can use the RTI Act to scrutinise public procurement, development expenditure, recruitment, delivery of essential services, and implementation of government policies. Journalists and civil society organisations can use it to verify official claims, trace public expenditure, and examine whether promised measures have actually been implemented.
RTI can also transform individual grievances into matters of wider public concern. Information on a delayed development project, an unexplained recruitment decision, or the failure to deliver public services can provide the factual basis for public debate and corrective action.
However, these rights depend on a functioning enforcement mechanism. The Information Commission in Bangladesh has remained without its three commissioners for over two years, depriving citizens of the statutory body responsible for adjudicating complaints and enforcing compliance. This institutional paralysis threatens to undermine the law’s very purpose.
The government must, therefore, act without further delay to restore the commission to full functionality. Citizens must also be encouraged to exercise their rights, while public authorities must recognise that providing information is a legal obligation, not an administrative favour.
Democracy cannot be sustained by elections alone. Citizens must be able to examine how decisions are made, how public money is spent, and whether those entrusted with authority are performing their duties.
India’s experience demonstrates how RTI can test compliance with judicial directions. Sri Lanka’s experience shows its value in protecting individual rights and challenging unjustified secrecy. Both underline a fundamental truth: democracy requires not just the right to vote but also the continuing right to question those who govern.
Ultimately, RTI enables citizens to move from suspicion to evidence, from unanswered questions to documented facts, and from passive acceptance to informed participation. Its true democratic value emerges when citizens can use information to demand accountability and seek remedies. Hence, for Bangladesh, restoring a fully functioning Information Commission is a test of the government’s commitment to democratic accountability and the people’s right to know.

---

Dr Shamsul Bari and Ruhi Naz are, respectively, chairman and deputy director (RTI) at Research Initiatives, Bangladesh (RIB). They can be reached at rib@citech-bd.com.

---

Views expressed in this article are the author's own. 

HC directs CIC to dispose of prof’s query on controller appointment in 2 months

Times of India: Puducherry: Sunday, October 18, 2026.

Madras high court has directed the Central Information Commission (CIC), New Delhi, to consider and dispose of a second appeal filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, by a teaching faculty member at a govt arts and science college in Puducherry within a period of eight weeks.
Justice Hemant Chandangoudar passed the order while disposing of a petition filed by assistant professor and head of the department of botany at Tagore Government Arts and Science College (TAC), Puducherry S Ramakrishnan.
He had had initially filed an RTI application on Feb 20, 2026, seeking information relating to the appointment of the controller of examinations and deputy controllers of examinations in TAC.
Dissatisfied with the response provided by the PIO, he filed a first appeal on March 24, 2026, before the First Appellate Authority (principal in-charge) of the college. As the outcome of the first appeal remained unsatisfactory, the professor preferred a second appeal before the CIC on May 23, 2026.
Aggrieved by the delay in the disposal of his second appeal by the CIC, he then approached the Madras high court in Sept. During the proceedings, Puducherry govt advocate Ramaswamy Meyyappan assured the court that the second appeal would be disposed of at the earliest in accordance with the law.
Recording the submission, the high court disposed of the petition with a specific directive on Oct 1 to the Registrar of the CIC to decide on the second appeal on its own merits and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

CIC urges surprise inspections of CBSE schools to curb dummy admissions

India Today: New Delhi: Friday, 16^th October 2026.
The CIC recommended surprise inspections of CBSE-affiliated schools over alleged dummy admissions. The move seeks stricter enforcement of attendance requirements for board examinations.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has recommended surprise inspections of schools affiliated with the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to check alleged dummy admissions and ensure compliance with mandatory attendance rules, news agency Press Trust of India (PTI) reported.
Information Commissioner Sudha Rani Relangi made the recommendation in a recent order after a complaint alleged that schools were issuing dummy certificates to students who did not attend classes.
Invoking Section 25(5) of the Right to Information Act, the commission said surprise inspections would help ensure checks and balances at affiliated schools.
“The Commission, considering the gravity of the issue flagged by the complainant seeking information regarding issuance of dummy certificates by schools to students not attending classes, deems it fit to recommend the CBSE under Section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005 to exercise the power of conducting a surprise inspection,” the order said.
COMPLAINT FILED THROUGH AN RTI
According to PTI, the complaint was filed by an RTI applicant seeking information about attendance requirements at private missionary schools in Bhopal, as well as the board's rules on subject selection and prescribed textbooks.
The complainant told the commission that the application was filed to expose alleged dummy admissions, under which students obtain examination results without attending classes.
The CBSE's central public information officer initially returned the application, citing an error in the Indian Postal Order submitted as the application fee. The applicant was asked to provide a valid payment instrument payable to the CBSE secretary in Bhopal.
During the hearing, the commission said rejecting the application on technical grounds was not in keeping with the spirit of the RTI Act. “Denial of information on technicality is not in the spirit of the RTI Act, 2005,” it said, adding that the officer was expected to help provide a point-wise response.
The officer apologised and agreed to provide the information. The CBSE later submitted a point-wise reply, which was taken on record, PTI reported.
In its response, the board cited its Affiliation Bye-Laws, 2018, which bar affiliated schools from presenting students for board examinations if they have not attended classes regularly or do not meet the prescribed minimum attendance requirement.
The commission's recommendation seeks to ensure that CBSE-affiliated schools follow attendance rules and do not allow students who have not regularly attended classes to appear for board examinations.

RTI Appeals Must Be Decided Within 8 Weeks, High Court Orders

Urban Acres: Chennai: Friday, 16^th October 2026.

The Madras High Court has directed the Central Information Commission to decide two pending second appeals under the Right to Information Act within eight weeks of receiving the court order, addressing delays in a process intended to provide citizens access to public records.
The direction was issued in a petition filed by Ramakrishnan, head of the Botany Department at Puducherry’s Tagore Government Arts and Science College. The case arose after information sought under the RTI Act from the officer holding charge as the college principal was not considered satisfactory by the petitioner.
After the information supplied by the college authorities failed to resolve his concerns, Ramakrishnan filed an appeal under the RTI process. He remained dissatisfied with the response at that stage as well and subsequently filed two second appeals before the Central Information Commission.
Those appeals remained pending for a prolonged period, prompting Ramakrishnan to approach the High Court. The petition challenged the delay in taking decisions on the second appeals and sought action on the matters that had already moved through the earlier stages of the information-access process.
In its order, the High Court directed the Central Information Commission to examine the two pending appeals on their merits and issue appropriate orders in accordance with the law. Justice Hemant Chandangoudar specified that the action should be completed within eight weeks from the date on which the commission receives a copy of the court order.
The direction places a clear time limit on the disposal of the two appeals, but it does not predetermine the outcome of the information dispute. The commission is required to assess the substance of the appeals and pass orders according to the applicable legal provisions.
The case highlights the procedural stages through which an RTI request can move when the initial response is considered inadequate: a request to the relevant public authority, an appeal against the response, and a second appeal before the information commission. In this matter, the petitioner’s grievance was that the final appellate stage had remained undecided for an extended period.
For applicants seeking records from public institutions, delays at the second-appeal stage can leave a dispute unresolved even after the original request and subsequent appeal have been processed. The High Court’s order now sets a specific deadline for the Central Information Commission to act on the two appeals linked to the Puducherry college.
The commission must complete its consideration and issue the legally appropriate orders within eight weeks after receiving the court order copy.

बिहार में RTI एक्टिविस्ट होना इतना जोखिम भरा क्यों? घोटालों का पर्दाफाश करने वाले शिव प्रकाश राय की कहानी उन्हीं की जुबानी

ETV Bharat: Patna: Friday, 16^th October 2026.
करोड़ों के घोटाले उजागर करने वाले आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट शिव प्रकाश राय ने राजनीति के बड़े ऑफर्स ठुकरा कर सिर्फ सच का साथ चुना. रिपोर्ट-रंजीत कुमार

पटना में RTI एक्टिविस्ट शिव प्रकाश राय (ETV Bharat)

'मैं सिर्फ 17 साल का था, लेकिन ब्लॉक सर्किल ऑफिसर के ऑफिस में भागा, जो एक गांव वाले को चीनी का परमिट नहीं दे रहे थे, मेरी बहस शुरू हो गई और मुझे ड्यूटी पर मौजूद एक सरकारी कर्मचारी को परेशान करने के लिए गिरफ्तार करके जेल भेज दिया गया..''ये शब्द हैं बिहार के 70 वर्षीय आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट शिव प्रकाश राय के.
कई घोटालों का पर्दाफाश
आरटीआई के जरिए बिहार की जड़ें हिलाने वाले शिव प्रकाश राय ने इसी 'सूचना के अधिकार' की मदद से कई घोटालों का पर्दाफाश किया. भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ लड़ाई कमजोर न पड़ें इसके लिए राजनीति में आने का ऑफर भी ठुकरा दिया.

मुसीबतों का सामना
RTI एक्टिविस्ट शिव प्रकाश राय ने बिहार में कई घोटालों का पर्दाफाश किया है, चाहे वह 2013 में 100 करोड़ रुपये का सोलर लैंप खरीद घोटाला हो या 4,000 करोड़ रुपये का धान घोटाला. भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ इस कठिन लड़ाई के लिए उन्हें कई मुसीबतों का सामना करना पड़ा, कई झंझावात झेले, 29 दिन जेल की सजा भी भुगतनी पड़ी, पर इनका सफर आज भी जारी है.
भ्रष्टाचार के मामले में दूसरे स्थान पर बिहार
भ्रष्टाचार के मामले में बिहार राष्ट्रीय स्तर पर दूसरे स्थान पर है, और राज्य में कई लोग भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ लंबे समय से लड़ाई भी लड़ रहे हैं. बिहार में आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट होना इतना आसान भी नहीं हैं. शिव प्रकाश राय बताते कि बिहार में अब तक 20 से 25 आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट्स की हत्या हो चुकी है.
उत्पीड़न के झूठे मामले दर्ज
शिव प्रकाश के मुताबिक इसके अलावा 250 से 300 आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट्स के खिलाफ उत्पीड़न के झूठे मामले दर्ज किए गए हैं. कई बार उन्हें डराया धमकाया भी जाता है. उन्होंने बताया कि मैं आज तक ना तो किसी से डरा हूं ना ही प्रलोभन के झांसे में आया हूं.

पुणे में दर्ज हुई थी पहली आरटीआई
अपने इस सफर के बारे में बात करते हुए शिव प्रकाश कहते हैं कि फर्जी मुकदमे में जेल जाने के बाद भी हमारा अभियान थमा नहीं है और अनवरत जारी है. उन्होंने बताया कि भारत में सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम (RTI Act 2005) के तहत दायर की जाने वाली पहली आरटीआई (RTI) पुणे के एक पुलिस स्टेशन में शाहिद रज़ा बर्नी (Shahid Raza Burney) द्वारा दायर की गई थी.
17 साल की उम्र में गए जेल
शिव प्रकाश एक घटना का जिक्र करते हुए कहते हैं कि मैंने तब भी जानकारी के लिए बहुत कोशिश की. तब मैं सिर्फ 17 साल का था, लेकिन ब्लॉक सर्किल ऑफिसर के ऑफिस में भागा, जो एक गांव वाले को चीनी का परमिट नहीं दे रहे थे, मेरी बहस शुरू हो गई और मुझे ड्यूटी पर मौजूद एक सरकारी कर्मचारी को परेशान करने के लिए गिरफ्तार करके जेल भेज दिया गया.

आरटीआई: भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ हथियार
शिव प्रकाश राय पिछले 25 साल से हर रोज बक्सर से पटना आते हैं और भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ लड़ाई को धार देने में लग जाते हैं. उन्होंने आरटीआई को भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ लड़ाई का हथियार बनाया है. इसी की मदद से कई बड़े घोटाले का पर्दाफाश भी किया है और यह सिलसिला आज भी अनवरत जारी है.
फर्जी मुकदमे में 29 दिनों तक जेल
शिव प्रकाश राय धान खरीद घोटाला, शिक्षक नियुक्ति घोटाला, बालू घोटाला, अलकतरा घोटाला, पेंशन, भूमि और बॉडीगार्ड नियुक्ति सहित कई मामलों को पटल पर लेकर आए. वहीं इस संघर्ष की कीमत भी उन्हें चुकानी पड़ी, एक झूठे मुकदमे में 29 दिनों तक जेल में भी रहना पड़ा, हालांकि बाद में जांच के दौरान केस असत्य पाया गया.
जब सवाल पूछना बन गया अपराध
दरअसल साल 2008 में तत्कालीन बक्सर जिलाधिकारी विष्णुदेव प्रसाद सिंह ने शिवप्रकाश राय पर आरोप लगाया कि वे डीएम के कक्ष में घुसकर हर महीने 25 हजार रुपये रंगदारी मांग रहे थे, शिव प्रकाश राय के खिलाफ प्राथमिक की भी दर्ज कराई गई. मामले में उन्हें जेल भेजा गया और वे 29 दिन जेल में बंद रहे. बाद में पुलिस अधीक्षक ने यह मामला असत्य पाया, जिसके बाद उन्हें रोप मुक्त करार दिया गया.
"जब भ्रष्टाचार उजागर होता है, तो प्रशासनिक अधिकारी दबाव और झूठे केस जैसे अवैध तरीकों का सहारा लेते है. यह घटना मेरे जीवन का निर्णायक मोड़ बनी और मैने आरटीआई कार्यकर्ताओं पर हो रहे उत्पीड़न को बड़े पैमाने पर उठाना शुरू किया." -शिव प्रकाश राय, आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट

बक्सर के तत्कालीन डीएम हुए बेनकाब
शिव प्रकाश राय बताते हैं कि बक्सर के किसानों को सरकार की ओर से बोरिंग और ट्यूबेल लगाने के लिए राशि भेजी गई थी जिसमें 80% सब्सिडी थी. किसानों के खेतों तक बोरिंग तो नहीं पहुंचे लेकिन पैसों की बंदरबांट जरूर हो गई. मामले का खुलासा उनके आरटीआई के जरिए हुआ था. जिस दुकान से खरीद की बात कही गई थी वह दुकान बक्सर में था ही नहीं. बाद में कई अधिकारी बाद में सस्पेंड हुए.
धान खरीद घोटाले का भी हुआ पर्दाफाश
शिव प्रकाश राय का सबसे बड़ा योगदान बिहार के अन्दर धान खरीद घोटाले को उजागर करने में रहा है. अगस्त 2012 में उन्होंने मुख्यमंत्री जनशिकायत प्रकोष्ठ को पत्र लिखकर आरोप लगाया कि सरकारी धान को मिलों द्वारा खुले बाजार में बेचा जा रहा था और मीलिंग के नाम पर बड़े पैमाने पर गड़बड़ी हो रही थी.
उचित जांच और कार्रवाई नहीं
शिव प्रकाश बताते हैं कि उन्होंने इस मामले की जानकारी खाद्य एवं उपभोक्ता संरक्षण विभाग और सतर्कता विभाग के प्रमुख सचिवों को भी भेजी. अक्टूबर 2012 में सतर्कता विभाग के संयुक्त सचिव ने खाद्य विभाग को कार्रवाई के लिए पत्र भेजा, लेकिन राय का आरोप रहा कि मामले में उचित जांच और कार्रवाई नहीं की गई.
3000 करोड़ से अधिक का धान खरीद घोटाला
ये मामला इतना बड़ा बना कि बाद में पटना हाईकोर्ट तक पहुंच गया. राय ने धान घोटाले पर याचिका दायर की और आरोप लगाया कि केंद्र व राज्य सरकारें आरोपियों को बचाने में जुटी हैं. राज्य में इस घोटाले का अनुमान 3,000 करोड़ रुपये से अधिक का बताया गया था, हालांकि बाद में मामले को आर्थिक अपराध अधिकारी को दिया गया और आरोपियों से कुछ हद तक रिकवरी भी हुई.
बॉडीगार्ड नियुक्ति घोटाला में 100 करोड़ का नुकसान
धान खरीद के अलावा शिव प्रकाश राय ने कई अन्य मामलों में सूचना मांगकर भ्रष्टाचार की परतें खोलीं और उन मामलों को उजागर किया. उनकी आरटीआई से बॉडीगार्ड नियुक्ति घोटाला सामने आया. बॉडीगार्ड नियुक्ति घोटाला में कैग की रिपोर्ट के मुताबिक राज्य को 100 करोड़ रुपये से अधिक का राजस्व नुकसान हुआ था.
सूचना के बदले अधिकारियों ने मांगे 1 करोड़ से अधिक
शिव प्रकाश अपने साथ हुई एक दिलचस्प घटना का जिक्र करते हुए कहते हैं कि जब बेगूसराय में भू-माफिया की गतिविधियों की जांच के लिए भूमि रजिस्ट्रेशन से जुड़े दस्तावेज देखने की मांग की गई, तो इसके बदले अधिकारियों ने उनसे 1.34 करोड़ रुपये की फीस मांग ली. शिव प्रकाश ने इसे आरटीआई के इस्तेमाल को रोकने की कोशिश करार दिया.
आरटीआई कार्यकर्ताओं पर हमले
शिव प्रकाश राय बताते हैं कि बिहार में एक दशक में आरटीआई कार्यकर्ताओं के खिलाफ हिंसा और उत्पीड़न के 213 मामले दर्ज हुए, लेकिन जिम्मेदार अधिकारियों या व्यक्तियों पर कार्रवाई की जानकारी नहीं दी गई. इनमें से अधिकतर मामले पंचायत योजनाओं, पैक्स द्वारा धान खरीद, मनरेगा और शिक्षक भर्ती से जुड़े थे.उनके मुताबिक जानकारी मांगने वालों की हत्या, धमकी और झूठे मामलों में फंसाना आम बात बन गई है.
शिक्षा विभाग में नियुक्ति घोटाले का पर्दाफाश
बिहार के शिक्षा विभाग में हुए नियुक्ति और वेतन घोटालों में मुख्य रूप से फर्जी डिग्रियों, फर्जी दस्तावेजों और कागजों पर मौजूद, लेकिन अनुपस्थित शिक्षकों (घोस्ट टीचर्स) के नाम पर सरकारी खजाने से अवैध रूप से वेतन निकासी का मामला शामिल रहा है.
मामले को उच्च न्यायालय तक पहुंचाया
हाल ही में हजारों फर्जी शिक्षकों की बर्खास्तगी और वेतन वसूली की कार्रवाई की गई है. शिव प्रकाश राय ने ही मामले को उच्च न्यायालय तक पहुंचाया. इनके प्रयास से बड़े पैमाने पर शिक्षा विभाग में भ्रष्टाचार के मामले सामने आए.
सुशील मोदी ने दिया था न्यौता
शिव प्रकाश राय ने ईटीवी भारत से बातचीत में बताया कि वे अटल बिहारी वाजपेई को बेहद पसंद करते थे. उन्होंने कहा कि सुशील मोदी ने कई बार मुझसे मिलने की कोशिश की दो बार न्योता भी दिया, शायद वह मुझे राजनीति में लाना चाहते थे मैं इसलिए राजनीति में नहीं गया क्योंकि मेरी लड़ाई कमजोर हो सकती थी. कुल मिलाकर शिवप्रकाश राय के संघर्ष और घोटालों के पर्दाफाश ने बिहार की सियासत में भी गूंज पैदा की.
"सुशील मोदी ने कई बार मुझसे मिलने की कोशिश की दो बार न्योता भी दिया, शायद वह मुझे राजनीति में लाना चाहते थे मैं इसलिए राजनीति में नहीं गया क्योंकि मेरी लड़ाई कमजोर हो सकती थी. मुझे लोग राजनीतिक चश्मे से देखने लगते."- शिव प्रकाश राय, आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट
66 जनहित याचिका दायर की
69 साल उम्र पूरी कर चुके शिव प्रकाश राय अब तक 66 जनित याचिका दायर कर चुके हैं. बिहार में भ्रष्टाचार के मामलों को लगातार सामने ला रहे हैं. शिव प्रकाश राय कहते हैं कि शुरुआत के 10 साल तो आरटीआई एक मजबूत हथियार था लेकिन बाद के दिनों में सरकार ने आरटीआई के धार को कुंद किया और आयोग में आरोग्य अधिकारियों की तैनाती की गई.
"हम वीर कुंवर सिंह की धरती के हैं. 80 साल में उन्होंने अंग्रेजों के खिलाफ तलवार उठाई थी हम भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ लड़ाई से ना तो थके हैं ना ही रुकने वाले हैं. भ्रष्टाचार के खिलाफ मेरी यह लड़ाई जारी रहेगी चाहे इसके लिए मुझे जान की कीमत क्यों न चुकानी पड़े."- शिव प्रकाश राय, आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट
क्या है आरटीआई कानून ?
गौरतलब है कि सूचना का अधिकार अधिनियम (RTI Act 2005) भारत सरकार और सरकारी विभागों में पारदर्शिता और जवाबदेही लाने वाला एक बेहद मजबूत कानून है. यह अधिनियम 15 जून 2005 को संसद से पारित हुआ और 12 अक्टूबर 2005 से पूरे देश में पूरी तरह लागू हो गया.
आवेदन की फीस
इस कानून के तहत कोई भी आम नागरिक सरकारी कामकाज की जानकारी मांग सकता है, जिसके लिए सामान्य तौर पर सिर्फ ₹10 का आवेदन शुल्क तय किया गया है. हालांकि, गरीबी रेखा से नीचे (BPL) आने वाले नागरिकों को इस फीस से पूरी छूट दी गई है.
जवाब मिलने की तय समय-सीमा
आरटीआई के तहत जानकारी देने के लिए सरकार ने सख्त समय-सीमा तय की है। किसी भी सामान्य मामले में लोक सूचना अधिकारी को आवेदन मिलने के 30 दिनों के भीतर जवाब देना है. वहीं, अगर मामला किसी व्यक्ति के जीवन या उसकी व्यक्तिगत स्वतंत्रता से जुड़ा हो, तो प्रशासन को मात्र 48 घंटों के भीतर जानकारी देनी पड़ती है. इसके अलावा, यदि मांगी गई जानकारी किसी तीसरी पार्टी से संबंधित हो, तो इसके लिए 40 दिन का समय निर्धारित है.
लापरवाही बरतने पर भारी जुर्माना
यदि कोई लोक सूचना अधिकारी तय समय में जानकारी नहीं देता या जानबूझकर लापरवाही बरतता है, तो कानून में कड़े जुर्माने का प्रावधान है. देर की स्थिति में दोषी अधिकारी पर ₹250 प्रतिदिन के हिसाब से जुर्माना लगाया जाता है. यह जुर्माना राशि अधिकतम ₹25,000 तक हो सकती है, जो सीधे अधिकारी की सैलरी से कटती है.