Times of India: Mumbai: Friday, January 03, 2025.
Pune and Aurangabad Information Commissioner Makrand Ranade dismissed nearly 3,400 second appeals filed by Beed-resident Keshav Nimbalkar under the Right to Information Act (RTI). He stated that filing such large number of applications was a gross abuse of the landmark legislation and was being used as a tool to harass govt agencies. In a series of orders posted on the website of the information commission, Ranade, a former IPS officer, concluded that the applicant, who filed thousands of applications followed by first and second appeals, appeared to be misusing the law
and holding govt agencies to ransom. "In my opinion, the entire administration will come to a grinding halt since each application has to be carefully studied and processed before providing information to the applicant. In the present case, the applicant submitted an unlimited number of applications, resulting in mounting pressure on the administration," Ranade said in his order.
Further, Ranade pointed out that since most of the staff is deployed for providing information sought under the RTI Act, it has an adverse impact on other services. "From the information sought by the applicant, no public purpose will be served. In fact, it is not expected under the RTI Act, which was enacted for providing basic information to the poor and needy people," he said. In his separate orders, Ranade quoted extensively from the landmark orders delivered by the Supreme Court, High Courts, and Chief Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi.
The Andhra Pradesh high court observed that the act is an effective device, which, if utilized judiciously and properly, would help citizens become more informed. However, indiscriminate efforts to secure information just for the sake of it and without there being any useful purpose to serve would only put enormous pressure on the limited human resources.
In the present case, the applicant not only filed thousands of applications but also sought widespread information, which will not serve any purpose. He sought information on service records of employees of several departments from 1950, along with certified copies of documents. Significantly, in the second appeal filed by him, he did not submit the outcome of the first appeal. It is estimated that filing a second appeal costs nearly Rs 3 lakh. As such, he must have spent a huge amount filing 3,500 second appeals. In one of his orders, Shailesh Gandhi observed that while seeking information is a fundamental right, it cannot be used indiscriminately to fulfil the demand of one individual.