Maharashtra Government has drafted Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules, 2012. Same are in internal circulation but RTI Activists have managed to get the copy thereof.
These rules are complicated and all RTI Activists (signed by 89 RTI Activists) have opposed them and have made out a detailed letter to the Chief Minister with copies to
1) Shri Jayant Banthia, Chief Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra
2) Principal Secretary – General Administration Dept.
3) Principal Secretary – Law and Judiciary Dept.
There are 11 sub-rules. Presently, there are no separate rules for appeal procedure. The Maharashtra Right to Information Rules contain one clause for Appeal Procedure (sub-rule 5).
Sub-rule 4 of the draft rules is the most objectionable. The same reads as under:
“Accompaniments to memorandum of appeal: – Every memorandum of appeal made to the Commission shall be accompanied by the following documents namely:-
(i) copy of application made to the State Public Information Officer;
(ii) self-attested copies of the order, letter, documents, or correspondence received from the State Public Information Officer and the first appellate authority;
(iii) copy of the first appeal;
(iv) copy of order if any, given by the first appellate authority against which the appeal is being preferred;
(v) date-wise list (Index) of the documents referred to in the appeal;
(vi) affidavit in the format given in Annexure “B” affixed with Rs. 2 court fee stamp;
(vii) any other document, as deemed fit by the appellant.” Objections raised by RTI Activists read as under:
The affidavit as referred to in rule 4 requires the RTI appellant to include additional personal details e.g. “name of father/husband, age – yrs., service /business”. This rule is a blatant violation of Section 6(2) of RTI Act 2005, which states, “An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give… any other personal details except those that may be necessary for contacting him.” Also, this affidavit only burdens the RTI appellant (who is quite often a common man, and not an experienced RTI activist) with a meaningless, difficult and costly legal procedure. Change needed: Provision for affidavit should be deleted. In compliance with the RTI Act, no extra personal details must be asked, other than the ones needed to contact him.
