Mal-functioning of Odisha Information Commission (3)
How both the Information Commission and State Bureaucracy are careless to implement RTI Act in the state ? It was exposed step by step through RTI.
Dear friends
As per section 4(1b) of the RTI Act, each Public Authority is required to make voluntarily disclosure of information of 17 subjects within 120 days of enactment of RTI Act i.e., 12th Oct. 2005. Under section 4(4) of the Act, every citizen has right to inspect these proactively disclosed documents by personally making visit to these offices without submitting any application for information.
a. With a view to know the arrangements made by State Govt. for helping the Citizens to inspect these documents under RTI Act, I had submitted RTI Application on 23.12.2008 to the PIO, I and PR Dept to get the said information. On denial of information by the said PIO, I made a complaint to the Odisha Information Commission in the month of February,2009
b. After around one and half year, my Complaint Case No. 49/2009 was heard and disposed by Mr. Jagadanand Mohanty, State Information Commissioner on 29.6.2010 with direction to Secretary-cum-Commissioner, I and PR Dept. , Nodal Dept for RTI in Odisha to issue a Comprehensive Guideline for inspection of proactively disclosed information under section 4 of the RTI Act and sought compliance report.
c. After around 9 months, I received the order of Mr. Jagadanand Mohanty, SIC(J) in the month of March,2011. Finding no information from I and PR Dept., I submitted RTI Application on 5.4.2011 to the PIO, I and PR Dept. to get copy of the guideline issued by I and PR Dept. as per order of the Commission. The PIO responded on 16.4.2011 that the Govt. of Odisha is in the process of issuing guideline under section 4 of the RTI Act. It means no guideline has been issued by I and PR Dept. so far.
d. Out of curiosity to know how the order of the Commission is complied by State Govt., I submitted same RTI Application on 2.4.2011 to the PIO, Office of Odisha Information Commission seeking compliance report submitted by I and PR Dept. on Commission's order. The PIO sent a copy of the letter sent by Secretary-Cum-Commissioner, Iand PR where he has sent a letter to all Principal Secretaries of Govt. Depts to issue their own Comprehensive Guideline for inspection of proactively disclosed information on dt. 21.5.2011.
e. After obtaining this letter, in my quest to know the end result and how the decisions of the Commission is being carried out, I submitted RTI Application on 12.3.2012 to few Dept. like Dept. of Panchayat Raj, Health and Family Welfare, Women and Child Development, Forest and Environment etc. to get the information about steps taken in respect of issuing comprehensive guideline in order to comply the letter of Iand PR issued on 21.5.2011
f. I got response from the PIO of Dept. of Panchayat Raj who has said with reference to the order of the Commission that it is the business of I and PR Dept. as nodal Dept. to issue guideline for inspection of proactively disclosed information. Similarly, Women and Child Development Dept. could not understand the direction of the Commission sent by I and PR Dept. It has also forwarded same letter to District Social Welfare Officers of all districts to comply section-4 of the Act. Dept. of Health and Family Welfare has forwarded letter of I and PR Dept. to all Directorates to comply it.
g. It is astonishing that I and PR Dept which as a Nodal Dept. sent letter to all Principal Secretaries/Secretaries to issue guideline has not issued the same till today.
h. Though Mr. Jagadanand, SIC directed to I and PR Dept. to issue guideline, he has not taken a single step to follow it up whether the guideline was issued .
Friends, this not a single case. It is one of hundreds of cases where the Information Commissioners simply issue direction to Depts. to provide the information to the complainants and closed the case without any follow up whether the information complied. This is a trick adopted by the Information Commission to show the public that the commission properly directed to the PIO for information. But in practice there is no information to the citizens. A lot of information relating to corruption, and irregularities in PDS, MDM, Mining could not be exposed through RTI in our state, because of this trick of saving corrupt bureaucracy is played by Mr. Jagadanand and other Information Commissioners.
Now the questions come what I have done. Now I have again written letter to Mr. Jagadanand, SIC with a copy to Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra, SCIC on 27.3.2012 to reopen the case and ensure issuance of Comprehensive Guideline for inspection of proactively disclosed information and take action against the Secretary, I and PR Dept. for violating the order of the Commission.
Pradip Pradhan
Complainant
Dt: 17.4.2012
To
Mr. Jagadanand Mohanty
State Information Commissioner
Toshali Bhawan, Satyanagar
Bhubaneswar
Ref. No.- Second Appeal Case No 49/2009 disposed on 29th June,2010
Sub- Display of Mischief and careless attitude shown and Non-Compliance of the order of the Commission on 29th June,2010 on Second Appeal Case No 49/2009 by I and PR Dept, Govt. of Odisha.
Sir
I am to state that on dated 29.6.2010, while disposing my Second Appeal Case No. 49/2009, the Commission has given direction to the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Dept. of I and PR to issue a comprehensive guideline for inspection of proactively disclosed information under section 4 of the RTI Act and sought compliance report. After one year, finding no guideline issued by I and PR Dept. I submitted RTI application on 5.4.2011 to the PIO, office of I and PR Dept. to get copy of the guideline issued by Iand PR Dept. The PIO responded on 16.4.2011 that the Govt. of Odisha is in the process of issuing guideline under section 4 of the RTI Act. (Attached as Annexture-1). It means no guideline has been issued by I and PR Dept.
Then, on 2.4.2011, I submitted RTI Application to the PIO, office of OIC seeking information about copy of the compliance report from I and PR dept. on Commission's order on 5.4.2011. The PIO sent a copy of the letter sent by Secretary-Cum-Commissioner, Iand PR where he has sent a letter to all Principal secretaries of Govt. Depts to issue Comprehensive guideline for inspection of proactively disclosed information on dt. 21.5.2011 (attached as Annexture-2) . After obtaining this letter, in my quest to know the end result and how the decisions of the Commission is being carried out, I submitted RTI Application to few Dept. to get the information about steps taken in respect of issuing comprehensive guideline in order to comply the letter of Iand PR issued on 21.5.2011. I got response from the PIO of Dept. of Panchayat Raj who has said with reference to the order of the Commission that it is the business of I and PR Dept. as nodal Dept. to issue guideline for inspection of proactively disclosed information. (Attached as nnexture-3). Similarly, Women and Child Development Dept. could not understand the direction of the Commission. It has sent a letter to all DSWOs to comply section-4 of the Act.
I am terribly disturbed having gone through these correspondence how the direction of the Commission is simply thrown to dustbin without paying a little attention to it by state bureaucracy. It needs to be mentioned here that the Commission has sat idle by simply passing order without doing any follow up for the compliance of the order and its execution by Govt. in letter and spirit. The Secretary, I and PR mindlessly has written a letter to all Dept. to issue guideline which is not practically possible on part of any Dept. As I and PR is the nodal Dept, it has to issue comprehensive guideline for the same. The I and PR dept. is the biggest violator of RTI Act which needs to be punished by the Commission. It has simply befooled the Commission by sending such a useless letter in their bid to show that the Commission's order is complied.
So, I request you to hear the case once again and take action against the Secretary, I and PR Dept. for violating the order of the Commission and direct again to the Dept. to issue comprehensive guideline as quick as possible.
Thanking you
Yours sincerely
Pradip Pradhan
Complainant
Date- 27.3.2012
Copy to- Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra, State Chief Information Commissioner for information and necessary action at his end. The SCIC should seriously look into the matter in context of enforcing section of 4 of the RTI Act in the state.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.