Right To Information

Part A : Decisions of CIC and SIC

As reported in BCAJ of October 2008, 4 more Information
Commissioners have been appointed at the Central Information Commission, one of
them being the RTI Activist from Mumbai, Shailesh Gandhi. In the very first
month of performing as CIC, he has discharged his duties well. He has disposed
of 142 appeals, has issued show-cause notice for imposing penalty in 32 matters
and has levied penalty of Rs. 7,500 in one case. Hereunder, is a brief report on
one of the 142 appeals decided by Shailesh Gandhi :

Mrs. Shruti Singh Chauhan had sought information from
Additional Secretary (Home), Government of NCT of Delhi about prosecution of
certain officers during the period 1-1-2000 to 30-4-2007.

PIO replied that information relates to personal information,
the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest
and it would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individuals. First AA
dismissed the appeal “on grounds of non-merit of the case, as the information
sought for is voluminous, sensitive and does not serve any public interest.”

CIC held : Firstly, if charges have been investigated and
found to have been substantiated, leading to asking for a sanction for
prosecution, this information cannot be considered as relating to the privacy of
an individual. Acts of public servants, where there is a reasonable ground to
believe wrongdoing, cannot be a private matter of a public servant. It has been
well accepted that the charges against public servants must also be disclosed to
the people. It has also been held that Members of Parliament and other
representative bodies must themselves declare charges against themselves on
oath, even when they stand for an election. Given this background, a claim that
disclosing names of those against whom sanction for prosecution has been sought
is an invasion of privacy and has no public interest, is completely erroneous.
In any case, as soon as prosecution is launched, the names and identities of
those being prosecuted would be in the public domain.

Based on the above view, CIC allowed the appeal and ruled :
“The Commission disapproves of the practice of PIOs using the exemptions of S.
8(1) without providing reasoning. The Commission is likely to view such practice
as a denial of information without reasonable cause and take consequent actions
as per the law. This time however, we feel the ends of justice will be met by
directing the Public Authority to be more diligent when using the exemption
clause. The PIO will give the information to the appellant by 10th November
under intimation to the Commission.

[In the matter of Mrs. Shruti Singh Chauhan : Decision No.
CIC/WB/A/2007/01096/SG/0080, decided on 16-10-2008]

An interesting decision is given by Chief SIC, Maharashtra,
Dr. S. V. Joshi on 10-11-2008.

Shri S. K. Nangia filed a complaint application u/s.18 of the
RTI Act on 9-9-2008. His original application sought information from MMRDA
about details of civil work relating to an open pit in Mulund (W) which caused
an accident of a car falling in a pit on account of the same being left open and
unfenced. In reply, the PIO advised the applicant to seek this information from
police station. In response to the first appeal on PIO’s reply, the AA directed
the PIO to provide the information sought. However, it was still not furnished.
Shri Nangia then filed a complaint with the Commission. SCIC held :

Firstly, it was totally wrong on the part of the PIO to
direct applicant to seek information from the concerned police station. In this
case, information was really with MMRDA, but even if it was with police station,
it was the responsibility of the PIO to send that application to the police
station asking them to provide information directly to the applicant. This is
considered to be serious lapse on the part of PIO.

The applicant’s application is to get information about who
were in charge of work. Police has already registered the offence and judicial
verdict will come in due course. It is pertinent to note that applicant is not
asking who is responsible for this mishap. He is merely asking the names of
officers who were entrusted with overseeing and supervision. This information if
already not given to the applicant be given in 5 days time on the receipt of
this order.

Lastly, applicant has stated that he has spent time, effort
and money for filing an appeal with AA, filing fresh application with police and
making payment of charges to the Police Department for information which all
could have been avoided had the PIO provided correct and complete information
for which he demanded a token compensation of Rs.100. The Commission appreciates
the concern of the applicant that he wants to stress the point of accountability
and is really not interested in financial reimbursement. He ordered that this
amount should be given to the applicant by MMRDA by recovering it from the PIO.

Part B : The RTI Act

— Viktor Frankl

This year is the diamond jubilee year of glorious services of
BCAS. Theme of the Diamond Jubilee Conference held on 8th November was :
Challenges of Change — Always ahead.

BCAS has always been ahead in its services to the profession, to its members and other CAs, CA students and society at large : the view endorsed by all speakers at this above conference.

However, at times I think that to be ahead holistically and in real terms, BCAS cannot be a bystander to just watch the changes that have been happening on the national scene and challenges that are being faced by concerned citizens. BCAS and its members can’t limit solving only challenges of change to the professional areas. On that yardstick, I believe that to be ahead, it has to gear itself much more proactively to the challenges of change that the nation faces.

The Right to Information Act has brought in changes which have challenged the sleeping and non-inclusive minds et built up in the governance of this country. Frankly, citizens have also remained passive and maintained a lackadaisical attitude and in keeping with the Indian psyche, have remained tolerant to all injustice, corruption, non-accountability, etc.

There are many stakeholders in the implementation of the RTIAct. They include: (1) Public Authorities and PIOs & AAs (information providers) (2) Information Commissions, States and Central (3) Central and State Governments (4) Indian Citizens (both urban & rural) (Information seekers) (5) Media (6) Activists’ groups, NGOs, CBOs, etc. (7) Competent authorities such as the Courts, the House of the people, etc.

The RTI Act has heralded citizens’ rights to be recognised, has operationalised the fundamental right of the citizen guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India and has empowered citizens to be part of democratic operation of the country. The Act has thrown a challenge to all stakeholders to get tuned to changes in the governance brought in by this revolutionary and extremely powerful Act, the likes of which India has never witnessed before. Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, while inaugurating 3rd Annual Convention of the Central Information Commission on 3rd November talked on various challenges of change brought about by the RTI Act. He said:

There will be a major challenge for public authorities in the arena of information house-keeping. There is a challenge for the information seekers in not misusing the right available in the Act by making vexatious demands and thus deprive genuine information seekers of their legitimate claims on limited public resources and so on.

Mahatma Gandhi had once said: Political freedom has no meaning unless it leads to win economic, social and moral freedom. The Right to Information Act and National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA) are two acts which are tools to bring social and economic freedom respectively, which would then lead to moral freedom.

Weprofessionals, educated and intellectuals are the major stakeholders for the success of these two Acts. As Barack Obama, the President-elect of the USA said “So tonight, let us ask ourselves – if our children should live to see the next century, what change will they see? What progress will we have made? This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment. This is our time …. “

We professionals need to raise the same questions to ourselves: How are we going to shoulder challenges of sweeping changes happening on the national scene on account of implementation of these two Acts: RTIand NREGA. Are we going to just witness sea change in the lives of millions of citizens with the operation of those two instruments legislated by the Government of India or be a part of the makers of this change, partners in advancing its benefits to really go ahead? I hope that in coming years BCASFoundation and BCASmembers becomepart of this movement of change and go ahead in bringing new standards of transparency and accountability, bringing positive change that shall give hope for better INDIA, happier inclusive society,so essential for experiencing the value of democracy.

                                                              Part C : Other News

•  Landlease of Gujarat farmers:

The farmers in Gujarat are moving RTIapplications to the State Government seeking documents related to land ownership. Armed with archaic documents prepared during the British Raj and written in rich Gujarati prevalent during the rule of the Gaikwads, farmers are approaching the State Government with a hope. The farmers are optimistic that the land leased to the then Bombay Province by their fore-fathers in 1912,for 99 years would be returned to them. The State Government, however, is unper-turbed and says the British did compensate the farmers for the land, and that there is no question of the situation taking a Singur-like turn.

Not prepared to wait until the lease period gets over in 2011, the farmers became active with RTI applications ever since they learnt that the State has allotted 1,100acres of land to the Tatas. However, they clarify that they are neither against Nano, nor are they creating a noise because of its arrival. “Documents in our possession are older than Tata Group’s presence in Gujarat. We are not trying to ride the wave and earn an extra buck. We are just seeking our land back, once the lease period is over.”

• RTI Activist Chetan Kothari :

Mr. Chetan Kothari writes in Sunday MID DAYof October 12, 2008: “I was duped to the tune of Rs. 11 lakh that I invested in plantation and holiday packages of Suman Motels Limited in the late 90s. I used RTI to get information about the company,so that I could pursue my case in the Court.” The two RTI applications revealed that despite 200warrants and summons issued in the name of the MD of the company, none of them were executed. This made his case strong as he was representing 600 people who were duped similarly.

Mr. Kothari believes that information is a tool which when used in a positive way can bring about a revolution and zeroing in on subjects requires a lot of reading and general awareness.

• Documentaries  on RTI :

The awareness about the RTI Act, 2005 is slowly catching up in the country. Helping this cause is a small tribe of documentary makers, who through the visual medium are trying to make people aware of RTI’s power.

Documentary-filmmaker Priyanka Tiwari, who works for a Delhi-based NGO Kabir that works on RTI,has made 15 short films in the last two years. She says apart from creating awareness, they also portray success stories. (Some of these CDs are available at BCAS Library.)

Satish Shinde from Films Division claims to have made the first feature film on RTI. “The challenge was how to make the act visually appealing,” recalls Shinde. The film has also been dubbed in 12 languages. Like NGO,Kabir, Shinde’s film is also widely used by NGOs. He feels that, generally, the RTI awareness has risen by 30 to 40%.

• BMC becoming Pro-RTI:

Getting information under the RTIAct will soon be just a click away. In a month’s time, citizens will be able to file their RTI application on the website of Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation.

According to BMC officials, the process will be centralised and the applications will be forwarded to the civic body’s concerned departments. The payments can be made in the same way as property taxes are paid. The website will allow people to post their address, so that they can be provided with the necessary documents.

•  Refund    for delayed courier charges:

What if an important document couriered to you through the postal services reached you after a day’s delay? You would have either cursed the system or may not even have noticed it as most courier parcels hardly reach their destinations on time. But Dadar resident Milind Mulay decided not to take it lying down. Mulay used the Right to Information (RTI) Act to get a refund when two articles he had sent through speed post reached their destination after a day’s delay. He had sent two couriers to Thane and Kalyan from the Shivaji Park post office at Dadar.

He first did some leg-work and found out from the website of the Indian Postal Service about the rules and regulations in case of delay. The web site also has an option by which one can track the path of the courier. But the web site had not updated the path of his courier. So he went to the post office’s west division headquarters and asked them to give a copy of the delivery slips. The receipts showed that the parcels were not delivered on time. Mulay then wrote a letter to the post office asking for compensation for the delay. The officials at the post office did not bother to answer his letter, he then filed an RTI application.

The senior superintendent of the Mumbai city west division responded within 10 days and refunded the entire amount Rs.50 for the delay. He also said this was in accordance with the money-back guarantee scheme. The delay occurred due to a service fault and a detailed report has been sought from the respective section.

Mulay said he was prompted to file an RTI query as numerous people in the country faced this problem. More than the financial part, he wanted to show that the RTI Act can be put to everyday use and cut the red tape in the Government.