Hindustan Times: Chandigarh: Monday, March 31, 2025.
Chief information commissioner Vijai Vardhan and an information commissioner, Satyaveer Singh Phulia, retired on March 24, An activist has called the situation “unprecedented” and blamed the Haryana government for leaving the commission ‘lawaaris’ (orphaned).
.jpg)
Even as over 7,000 appeals
and complaints under the Right to Information (RTI) Act remain pending, the
post of chief information commissioner and as many as seven of the ten
sanctioned posts of information commissioners in the State Information
Commission, Haryana, are lying vacant.
The number of vacant posts rose last week after chief information commissioner Vijai Vardhan, former chief secretary of Haryana and retired IAS, and Satyaveer Singh Phulia, also a retired IAS and one of the information commissioners, completed their three years of tenure on March 24. They took their posts on March 25, 2022, under the then chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar.
According to the commission, currently there are three information commissioners — Jagbir Singh, Pradeep Kumar Shekhawat, and Kulbir Chhikara.
Earlier, another information commissioner, Jyoti Arora, a former IAS officer, retired from the panel in January this year.
According to an RTI reply received on February 11, Panipat-based activist, PP Kapoor, found that 8,340 appeal cases were pending before the commission including the chief information commissioner, in January last year. By December end, the number came down to 7,216. Kapoor claimed that it may take nearly eight years to resolve the pending cases and said, “This is clear sign that the BJP government aims to dilute the RTI act through back door.”
Another RTI activist, Bhupinder Kumar from Yamunanagar, called the situation “unprecedented” and blamed the state government for leaving the commission “lawaaris” (orphaned).
“The backlog of appeals and complaints regarding non-disclosure of information by state government departments is continuously growing. In some cases, even after nearly a year of filing an appeal, a hearing date has not been assigned. In cases where a hearing notice has been issued, only a new bench is mentioned instead of the name of the information commissioner,” he said.
He also questioned how the commission was left “headless” for a week, despite prior knowledge that the chief would step down on March 24.
“The government has neither appointed a new chief information commissioner nor gave additional charge to any existing information commissioner, despite a letter by the secretary of the information commission,” he said.
According to the said reminder letter dated March 24, 2025, (accessed by HT) sent to the chief secretary, “The general superintendence, direction, and management of the State Information Commission rest with the state chief information commissioner.”
In the absence of a chief, the secretary said that commission faces a crisis.
Given the delays in appointing a new chief, it has been requested that the charge be assigned to senior information commissioner Pardeep Kumar Shekhawat, says the letter.
Activist Kumar said that no action has been taken so far. “In the past, during similar crises, the responsibility of the chief information commissioner was assigned to senior information commissioners, such as Urvashi Gulati and JS Kundu. At present, the appointment of a new chief information commissioner or other information commissioners seems unlikely as the selection committee must include a leader of the Opposition. Currently, the Congress, the largest opposition party, is yet to elect its legislative party leader,” he added.
However, the non-appointment of leader of largest opposition group in the state assembly delaying the appointments in the commission has been settled by the Supreme Court in January this year. Regarding a case of Jharkhand, a bench headed by Justice Surya Kant had directed that the largest opposition group in the assembly would nominate one of its elected members as a member of the selection committee for limited purpose of selection to both the posts in the commission.
A former state information commissioner, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that the ongoing situation would lead to prolonged delays for litigants and hinder justice. “In fact, each appointment could take nearly three months to complete. I believe this is the first time that such a situation has arisen, with no chief information commissioner in place and seven other posts lying vacant,” he added.
Chief information commissioner Vijai Vardhan and an information commissioner, Satyaveer Singh Phulia, retired on March 24, An activist has called the situation “unprecedented” and blamed the Haryana government for leaving the commission ‘lawaaris’ (orphaned).
.jpg)
The number of vacant posts rose last week after chief information commissioner Vijai Vardhan, former chief secretary of Haryana and retired IAS, and Satyaveer Singh Phulia, also a retired IAS and one of the information commissioners, completed their three years of tenure on March 24. They took their posts on March 25, 2022, under the then chief minister Manohar Lal Khattar.
According to the commission, currently there are three information commissioners — Jagbir Singh, Pradeep Kumar Shekhawat, and Kulbir Chhikara.
Earlier, another information commissioner, Jyoti Arora, a former IAS officer, retired from the panel in January this year.
According to an RTI reply received on February 11, Panipat-based activist, PP Kapoor, found that 8,340 appeal cases were pending before the commission including the chief information commissioner, in January last year. By December end, the number came down to 7,216. Kapoor claimed that it may take nearly eight years to resolve the pending cases and said, “This is clear sign that the BJP government aims to dilute the RTI act through back door.”
Another RTI activist, Bhupinder Kumar from Yamunanagar, called the situation “unprecedented” and blamed the state government for leaving the commission “lawaaris” (orphaned).
“The backlog of appeals and complaints regarding non-disclosure of information by state government departments is continuously growing. In some cases, even after nearly a year of filing an appeal, a hearing date has not been assigned. In cases where a hearing notice has been issued, only a new bench is mentioned instead of the name of the information commissioner,” he said.
He also questioned how the commission was left “headless” for a week, despite prior knowledge that the chief would step down on March 24.
“The government has neither appointed a new chief information commissioner nor gave additional charge to any existing information commissioner, despite a letter by the secretary of the information commission,” he said.
According to the said reminder letter dated March 24, 2025, (accessed by HT) sent to the chief secretary, “The general superintendence, direction, and management of the State Information Commission rest with the state chief information commissioner.”
In the absence of a chief, the secretary said that commission faces a crisis.
Given the delays in appointing a new chief, it has been requested that the charge be assigned to senior information commissioner Pardeep Kumar Shekhawat, says the letter.
Activist Kumar said that no action has been taken so far. “In the past, during similar crises, the responsibility of the chief information commissioner was assigned to senior information commissioners, such as Urvashi Gulati and JS Kundu. At present, the appointment of a new chief information commissioner or other information commissioners seems unlikely as the selection committee must include a leader of the Opposition. Currently, the Congress, the largest opposition party, is yet to elect its legislative party leader,” he added.
However, the non-appointment of leader of largest opposition group in the state assembly delaying the appointments in the commission has been settled by the Supreme Court in January this year. Regarding a case of Jharkhand, a bench headed by Justice Surya Kant had directed that the largest opposition group in the assembly would nominate one of its elected members as a member of the selection committee for limited purpose of selection to both the posts in the commission.
A former state information commissioner, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that the ongoing situation would lead to prolonged delays for litigants and hinder justice. “In fact, each appointment could take nearly three months to complete. I believe this is the first time that such a situation has arisen, with no chief information commissioner in place and seven other posts lying vacant,” he added.
.JPG)
.JPG)
