Make applicant’s address proof a must: Corporator wants RTI rules amended : BJP corporator from Borivli claims 'fake' applications waste time, finds opposition in former CIC Shailesh Gandhi.

Mumbai Mirror: Mumbai: Wednesday, 30 April 2014.

RTI applicants must submit proof of residence, reasons for filing the application and reasons for withdrawing it. These amendments in the RTI rules have been proposed by BJP corporator from Borivli, Manisha Chaudhary, and are scheduled to come up for discussion in the BMC's general body meeting scheduled for May 5, where they are listed as Item No 93.

"The RTI Act is good. When genuine applications are filed, even we get to know about many violations," says Chaudhary. Her grouse is against those who withdraw their applications within a few days and often file them again.

"It takes a long time to provide information; you should follow the process to the end if you are genuine. If you can nail one builder for violating FSI rules, other builders too will learn a lesson,'' she added.

Citing the case of an application withdrawn in her ward, Chaudhary says she went in search of the applicant but found his address was fake. "Why should a person living in Vikhroli file an application about something in Borivli? Such applicants must be punished for wasting the time of the BMC. But how can we punish them if we can't find them?'' she asks. Chaudhary, however, says she doesn't know the number of applications that are withdrawn.

Shailesh Gandhi, ex-Central Information Commissioner, told Mumbai Mirror the amendments sought were illegal as they violate the RTI Act. "The Right to Information is a fundamental right as much as the right to expression. Giving reasons for filing an RTI application is like having to give reasons for writing an article or for singing! You can't curb it by any rule made by any municipal corporation. This is an Act passed by Parliament,'' he said.

Gandhi says applicants often do not provide their own address because they are scared of being attacked. "The requirement is that the applicant must give a complete address, whether residential or not is irrelevant,'' he points out.

However, he acknowledges that there could be applicants who withdraw their applications after reaching some "settlement'' with the person about whom they have sought information.

"Withdrawal of an application is not permitted under the Act. If someone says I want to withdraw the application, s/he should be refused. Ideally, all applications and replies should be displayed on the website of every government body. This should at least be done in the case of those who withdraw their application. That would shame them,'' Gandhi adds.

Gandhi has written to Chaudhary, BJP corporator Ashish Shelar as well as BJP Rajya Sabha MP Piyush Goyal, explaining that these amendments would be illegal. Activists such as G R Vora have also written protest letters to Municipal Commissioner Sitaram Kunte, urging him to reject these amendments. Kunte was not available for comment.

"If the amendments are passed, we can move court and get them struck down. The RTI has exposed everyone, from judges to corporators. Hence, 90 per cent of those in power are against it. Even if they are honest, the feudal arrogance remains - how can an ordinary citizen, who ordinarily wouldn't be allowed inside these officers' chambers, ask for information? That arrogance will take time to go,'' Gandhi says.