Prafulla Marpakwar, TNN, Jun 3, 2010, 04.29am IST
MUMBAI: Ever since the landmark Right To Information (RTI) Act came into force five years ago, nearly 750 babus have paid a fine of around Rs 80 lakh for their failure to provide documents as per the provisions of law.
The performance of information officers and the misuse of the Act prominently figured in a high-level meeting between chief minister Ashok Chavan and chief information commissioner Suresh Joshi. “No doubt, on occasions the RTI Act is misused.
However, the performance of our information commissioners is excellent. A total of 98% cases were disposed of and that too, in a time-bound period. We will consider an amendment of the RTI Act to stop its misuse,’’ Chavan said.
Maharashtra was among the first states to enact the RTI Act after anti-corruption crusaders launched a statewide agitation for right to information. After the legislation was introduced in the state, the Centre enacted a new central legislation. Between 2005 and 2009, a total of 12.98lakh applications were filed before the competent authorities for securing information. “They were either original applications, first or second appeals before the competent authorities. Largest number of applications—4.4 lakh—were filed in 2009,’’ a senior official said.
About the fine imposed on erring babus, the official said, “A total fine of nearly Rs 80 lakh was imposed on 750 babus during the last four years. The maximum fine was imposed by non-IAS commissioners—Vilas Patil (Nagpur), Vijay Kuvalekar (Pune) and T S Borge (Aurangabad). It was mainly for failure to provide information within the stipulated period or misleading the applicants. The fine has already been recovered from the salaries of the erring babus.’’
RTI activists alleged that even after five years of the enactment of the legislation, several information officers still had an indifferent attitude. “Several of them refused to part with basic information and preferred to pay the fine,’’ an RTI activist said.
The activist said the appointment of retired IAS officers was the main hurdle. “The commitment of the officers is towards the government, as a result, whenever appeals pertaining to sensitive information are filed, they are either sent back to the information officers or no order is passed on such appeals,’’ he said.