Getting info even in RTI era is not easy

Times of India: Nagpur: Wednesday, 02 September 2015.

Despite a mandate to provide information under Right to Informaton (RTI) Act within 30 days, an activist is awaiting reply to his plea for last 38 months. The activist could not get the complete information even after the State Information Commission (SIC) passed orders 13 months ago. Now, the SIC has considered it as violation of RTI and issued a show cause notice to the concerned department.

The Court of Wards, Collector office, is the department that violated the RTI by-laws. RTI activist TH Naidu had sought information about Sonegaon Lake's ownership and auction process along with details of the matter sub-judice in the High Court. Naidu had to file a second appeal before the SIC seeking complete information and action against the department.

Naidu received the SIC order on second appeal on August 24. State information commissioner Vasant Patil directed Court of Wards to provide the information within 15 days of receiving of the order. "The collector should personally ensure information is provided to the applicant in 15 days. Public information officer should submit reply to the commission as to why penal action should not be taken against him within 30 days," he said.

Naidu told TOI that government departments delayed or refused to give information under RTI Act when any controversy or irregularities were involved in the cases. "I had filed application seeking information on June 2, 2012. The information was not provided stating that the Court of Wards do not come under the RTI ambit. The department falls under the jurisdiction of the collector. First appellate authority had passed orders saying Court of Wards come under the RTI ambit. Yet, the information was not provided," he said.

Naidu added SIC's orders came as big relief. "SIC passed orders on July 3, 2014 stating RTI was applicable to Court of Wards. Directives were given to provide information within 45 days. Though information was provided, only five of the six points were answered that too on December 23, 2014. I followed up the matter with the department, but in vain. Now, I hope the department will provide the information with SIC's second orders," he said.

Naidu said he had a similar experience with ULC department in another case. "SIC directed the first appellate authority to conduct inquiry and submit report on delay in providing information. Also, notice was issued asking why penal action should not be taken against the public information officer," he said.

"It is unfortunate that we have to go for several appeals and up to SIC to get information from government departments. Strict action must be taken against government departments for delays that also put activists and citizens to inconvenience," Naidu said.