Hindustan Times: New Delhi: Monday, September 23, 2013.
There can be a new independent entrant to track
missing coal files transparency watchdog, the Central Information Commission
(CIC).
The Delhi High Court has upheld the powers of the
commission to conduct an inquiry by itself or ask the concerned department to
track the missing files under the Right To Information Act. Or, fix the
responsibility of the officers responsible for the files that go missing.
The order can have a wider ramifications in light
of the government claiming files on controversial issues often going missing
including in the recent coal scam.
“It is not uncommon in the government departments
to evade disclosure of the information taking the standard plea that the
information sought by the applicant was not available,” the court said, while
describing the RTI Act as a “progressive” legislation with an intent to give
maximum possible information to people with certain safeguards and exemptions.
The court said that in cases where the information
sought could not be traced, appropriate departmental action should be taken
against the officials responsible and accountability should be fixed. “Unless
such a course is adopted, it would be possible for any department to deny
information which otherwise is not exempted from disclosure,” the court said.
The court made these observations while dismissing
the tourism ministry’s plea against the CIC order asking the ministry to
conduct an inquiry into missing files.
The ministry had gone to the High Court claiming
that the CIC had no powers under the RTI Act to direct the government to
conduct an inquiry.
Rejecting the claim, the court said since the
commission has powers to direct disclosure of information it would also have
jurisdiction to direct an inquiry into the matter wherever the public
information officer claims that the file was untraceable.
“Even in a case where the information officer
claims that the information was never available with the government the
commission can direct an officer in the
department to look into the matter again,” the court said.