Times of India: Aurangabad: Monday,
October 17, 2016.
The Bombay
high court (HC) recently ruled that the state chief information commissioner
has the power to transfer the state information commissioner from one region to
the other to ensure that the commission functions in a smooth manner.
The HC rules
that the state chief information commissioner can do so under section 15 (4) of
the RTI Act.
"If
there is any curb on his authority, the very aim and object of having the State
Information Commission will be rendered nugatory and be defeated," the
court observed while dismissing a PIL.
Filed by RTI
activist Vijay Kumbhar in 2014, the PIL had challenged a transfer order issued
by state chief information commissioner Ratnakar Gaikwad in the same year.
While the RTI
Act itself is silent on the powers of transfer per se, the latest judicial
intervention is said to have a far-reaching effect on such a transfer process
in future, the RTI community said.
Pralhad
Kachare, deputy commissioner (revenue) for Aurangabad, who was also the head of
the RTI cell at Pune-based Yashwantrao Chavan Academy of Development
Administration (YASHADA), said, "The court has interpreted that the state
chief information commissioner is justified in controlling and co-ordinating
functioning of the commission to uphold the regime of transparency and
accountability. For the first time, a judicial ruling has been made on section
15 (4) and the scope of powers of superintendence vested with the chief
information commissioner."
Section 15(4)
of RTI Act reads, "The general superintendence, direction and management
of the affairs of the state information commission shall vest in the state
chief information commissioner. He/she shall be assisted by state information
commissioners and may exercise all such powers and do such acts.things which
may be exercised or done by the State Information Commission autonomously
without being subjected to directions by any other authority."
Ravindra Jadhav,
who was appointed as the state information commissioner for Amravati division,
was transferred by the state chief information commissioner on July 2, 2014.
While Jadhav did not challenge the transfer order, Kumbhar filed a PIL
questioning the authority of the state chief information commissioner in
issuing it.
The
petitioner argued that such power of transfer was not vested with the state
chief information commissioner under section 15 (4), but on the governor and
the committee constituted under section 15(1) for appointing these persons in
particular regions.
Kumbhar also
said that transfer could be done only by seeking permission of the specially
constituted committee and seeking approval of the governor thereafter.
The judgments
delivered by Bombay HC itself as well the Delhi HC on the matter related to the
Central Information Commission were also relied upon by the petitioner.
Upon hearing
the petitioner and respondents, including principal secretary of the general
administration department, the HC bench comprising justices V M Kanade and
Swapna Joshi ruled that the functioning and management of the State Information
Commission was not expected to be tinkered or interfered with by the committee
which appointed it.
"The
state chief information commissioner is expected to act in an independent
manner. Therefore, the power is vested on him to have general superintendence
over the functioning of the state information commission," the court said,
adding that the state chief information commissioner has power of transfers
under section 15 (4) of the RTI Act.
.JPG)
.JPG)
