Live Law: New Delhi: Friday, October 09, 2015.
In a
representation made to Delhi High Court Chief Justice G. Rohini, four law
students Aastha Sharma, Ishwin Mehta, Paras Jain and Kumar Shanu have highlighted
the inconsistency of the Delhi High Court’s RTI rules with the Right to
Information Act, 2005. The students have claimed that the discrepancies and
incompatibility have worked against the purported objective of the Right to
Information Act, denying access to information and affecting Fundamental Rights
of citizens.
Rule 10 of
the High Court Rules prescribes Rs. 50 as the application fee and Rs. 5 per
page for the physical or photocopies. This is despite the fact that the Rule 3
and 4 of the RTI Act provide for Rs. 10 as the application fee and Rs. 2 per
page for copies. Rule 3 further prescribes that for each piece of information
sought, a separate application should be made. No such provision exists under
the RTI Act. The Representation hence says, “This is creating unnecessary
financial loss in terms of extra paper, extra application fee, extra delivery
charges as well as a more time-consuming process for both applicants and the
public information officer.”
Section 7(5)
of the RTI Act lays down that no fee would be charged for providing information
to persons below poverty line. However, the Rules do not contain a provision
for supply of information free of cost to the citizens falling under the Below
Poverty Line category. The representation hence requests an intervention by the
Chief Justice of the High Court, with an objective of bringing the HC Rules
with the central legislation.
The
Representation brings to the Chief Justice’s attention that the Department of
Personnel and Training, Minister of Personnel, PG and Pension, Government of
India had also requested Chief Secretaries of all State, the Registrars of all
High Courts and the Registrar of the Supreme Court to harmonize their RTI Rules
with the Central Legislation. The letter dated July 10, 2015 reasoned that such
provisions should not become a disincentive for using the Right to Information
on the basis of the 2nd Administrative Reforms Commission.
.JPG)
.JPG)
