The News Now: Srinagar: Wednesday, 31 July 2024.
The Central Information
Commission (CIC) recently adjudicated three RTI appeals, shedding light on
significant procedural delays and non-compliance issues within various
departments in Jammu and Kashmir.
Following this, the CIC has sought an explanation from the Chief education officer, Pulwama (PIO), PIO, O/o the Commissioner, Secretary, Education Department and -PIO/Secretary, Srinagar Municipal Corporation for non-attendance, procedure delays during proceedings
In the first case, Zahoor Ali Bhat filed an RTI application on February 3, 2022, seeking information regarding the selection of three teachers from 2003 to 2009 in the village of Sirnoo. Despite filing a first appeal on March 28, 2022, Bhat did not receive any information from the Public Information Officer (PIO). Aggrieved, he filed a second appeal with the CIC on July 29, 2022.
During the hearing on July 25, 2024, both parties were absent. The CIC, led by Chief Information Commissioner Heeralal Samariya, noted that the PIO had failed to comply with the First Appellate Authority's (FAA) order to provide the requested information within five days.
The CIC directed the Chief Education Officer of Pulwama to comply with the FAA's order and furnish the relevant information to the appellant within 15 days, also requiring a compliance report to be submitted to the Commission. Additionally, the PIO was instructed to provide a written explanation for their conduct, failing which action under Sections 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act would be initiated.
In the second case, Neelofar Begum's RTI application, filed on September 5, 2022, sought detailed information about the appointment of Mubeena under SRO 43 of 1994. Receiving no response, Begum filed a first appeal on December 1, 2022, and subsequently a second appeal on February 20, 2023.
The hearing on July 26, 2024, revealed that the requested information pertained to a third party and was exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. However, the CIC criticized the PIO, O/o the Commissioner, Secretary, Education Department, UT of J&K, for not responding to the RTI application or appearing at the hearing. The PIO was directed to provide a suitable explanation for their absence and non-compliance, with a compliance report to be submitted within three weeks.
In the third case, Mohammad Rafiq sought information regarding specific administrative actions taken by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation. His RTI application, filed on an unspecified date, was not addressed, leading to a second appeal.
During the hearing on July 26, 2024, it was found that the PIO had again failed to respond or appear. The CIC directed the Respondent-PIO/Secretary, Srinagar Municipal Corporation to provide the requested information within the stipulated timeframe and submit an explanation for their conduct. Non-compliance would result in penal action.
Following this, the CIC has sought an explanation from the Chief education officer, Pulwama (PIO), PIO, O/o the Commissioner, Secretary, Education Department and -PIO/Secretary, Srinagar Municipal Corporation for non-attendance, procedure delays during proceedings
In the first case, Zahoor Ali Bhat filed an RTI application on February 3, 2022, seeking information regarding the selection of three teachers from 2003 to 2009 in the village of Sirnoo. Despite filing a first appeal on March 28, 2022, Bhat did not receive any information from the Public Information Officer (PIO). Aggrieved, he filed a second appeal with the CIC on July 29, 2022.
During the hearing on July 25, 2024, both parties were absent. The CIC, led by Chief Information Commissioner Heeralal Samariya, noted that the PIO had failed to comply with the First Appellate Authority's (FAA) order to provide the requested information within five days.
The CIC directed the Chief Education Officer of Pulwama to comply with the FAA's order and furnish the relevant information to the appellant within 15 days, also requiring a compliance report to be submitted to the Commission. Additionally, the PIO was instructed to provide a written explanation for their conduct, failing which action under Sections 20(1) and 20(2) of the RTI Act would be initiated.
In the second case, Neelofar Begum's RTI application, filed on September 5, 2022, sought detailed information about the appointment of Mubeena under SRO 43 of 1994. Receiving no response, Begum filed a first appeal on December 1, 2022, and subsequently a second appeal on February 20, 2023.
The hearing on July 26, 2024, revealed that the requested information pertained to a third party and was exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. However, the CIC criticized the PIO, O/o the Commissioner, Secretary, Education Department, UT of J&K, for not responding to the RTI application or appearing at the hearing. The PIO was directed to provide a suitable explanation for their absence and non-compliance, with a compliance report to be submitted within three weeks.
In the third case, Mohammad Rafiq sought information regarding specific administrative actions taken by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation. His RTI application, filed on an unspecified date, was not addressed, leading to a second appeal.
During the hearing on July 26, 2024, it was found that the PIO had again failed to respond or appear. The CIC directed the Respondent-PIO/Secretary, Srinagar Municipal Corporation to provide the requested information within the stipulated timeframe and submit an explanation for their conduct. Non-compliance would result in penal action.
.JPG)
.JPG)
