Re: [rti4empowerment] suggestion/objection on the proposed amendment in rules of RTI Act,2005

Sir exactly what u want to say?.....pls clerify

On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:30 PM, DSouza Wilberious Evanglist <wilevades@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Ashish Singh,

We ourselves have tolled the death  Knell to RTI

WEDS

From: ashish singh <jurno.ashish@gmail.com>
To: rti4empowerment@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, 10 January 2013, 10:54
Subject: Re: [rti4empowerment] suggestion/objection on the proposed amendment in rules of RTI Act,2005

 

hello guys where r u in these days...no RTI...nothing anything....specially after killing of 2 army solders by pakistani army......

 

 

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 8:55 PM, P ESAKKIMUTHU <p.esakkimuthu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: PONNIAH ESAKKIMUTHU <pesakkimuthucitu@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 8:40 PM
Subject: SUGGESTIONS AND OBJECTIONS ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT IN RULES OF RTI ACT 2005
To: usrti-dopt@nic.in

Dt.20.12.10

 

From

P.Esakkimuthu,

RTI Activist,

17C-Masilamanipuram IInd Street,

Thoothukkudi-628008

Tamilnadu

 

To

 

Sri R.K. Girdhar

Under Secretary (RT1)

Government of India

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions

Department of Personnel Training

North Block, New Delhi-110001

By Email to usrti-dopt@nic.in

Dear Sir

Sub: Amendments in Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005 and the Central Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules, 2005-suggestions and objections filed-reg

I am submitting the following suggestions and objections on the subject matter which may kindly be taken note of while finalizing  the proposed amendments on the subject matter

4. Request for Information

The words" one subject matter and shall be limited to two hundred and fifty words, excluding the address " is highly unwarranted and it will defeat the very purpose of the RTI Act.The Public and common man are not trained to count the words. It will be very easy to the CPIOs to reject the application if the words are more than 250 and the requested subject is more than one. The purpose of Sec 6(3) will be meaningless. This amendment  would be anti-transparency, anti-accountability, anti-right to information,  and hence to be dropped in all its seriousness.

5. Fees for providing information:  The following amendments are unwarranted and it will defeat the very purpose of RTI Act. The CPIO will fix the cost/amount  unilaterally and it will be normally supported by  Appellate Authority and it will pave way for accumulations of Second Appeal before the CIC which is already loaded with heavy workload.

(a) rupees two for each page in A-3 size or smaller size paper;

(c ) actual cost or price for samples or models;

(d) for inspection of records, no fee for the first hour; and fee of rupees five for each subsequent hour (or fraction thereof);

(g) the actual amount spent by public authority on hiring a machine or any other equipment, if any, to supply information; 

(h) Postal charges, in excess of rupees ten, if any, involved in supply of information

Under Rule (a) The fee for copies of document is now fixed at Rs.2/- per page.This fee is high when compared to the actual expenses incurred in this connection. Now  zeroxing a page cost  paise 50/- in many places and Re.1/- in some places. In some places it is less than 50 paise. Hence the Rules may be amended suitably to fix the additional fee for documents at Rs.1/- per page.

 

Under sub (d)-For inspection of records fee can be fixed for every completed hours and fraction thereof may be ignored.

Under (g)- actual amount spent for hiring machine or any equipment may be deleted as every public authority is provided with infrastructure meant for offices.The CPIO may resort to hiring machine wantonly under the pretext of office machine under repair  thereby demand charges heavily with a view to deny the documents asked for.

Under (h), the entire postage must be born by the PA and it should not be transferred to the shoulder of the information seeker. The CPIO and FAA started charging fees for postage, the purpose of RTI Act would be defeated. It will rather discourage the information seekers  on the ground of bearing postages. After all no PA is going to spend from his own pocket. It is the expenditure of the Govt/PA's Account. This amendment  would be anti-transparency, anti-accountability, anti-right to information,  and hence to be dropped in all its seriousness.

6. Payment of fee: Under this rule  the following words may be substituted in the place of "Provided that a public authority may  accept fee by any other mode of Payment "

"Provided that a public authority shall accept fee by any other mode of Payment chosen by the applicant including Money Orders  and it shall be applicable to additional fee meant for documents"

This substitution will make easy the common citizen to pay the fee as he wishes to make the RTI Act easily accessible to him

7. Appeal to the first Appellate Authority: In this rule provision to make first appeal is formulated.Rule should not circumvent the main provisio of the Act. In this rule, first appeal is provided for non-disposal of application which is in contravention of Sec 18 which provides for a complaint to the CIC for this type of non-disposal by the CPIO and to penalize the CPIO for disregarding the application seeking information. Hence the word " or non-disposal of his application by the Central Public Information Officer within the prescribed time, " may be deleted as it would go against the spirit of RTI Act.

Similarly no format for first appeal is warranted. It is sufficient that first appeal is made against the order of CPIO while making first appeal. Hence the word" in the format as given in the Appendix" shall be deleted as it would render difficult to common man to make appeal and the CPIO to reject the first appeal if the format is slightly different or altered.

8. Documents to accompany first appeal to the first Appellate Authority:

This is also NOT required as the FAA is an authority superior to the PIO and when the FAA is housed in the same office/building. If the FAA is located in different area , such amendment may be insisted. Hence the following amendment in the existing amendment may be made

"Every appeal made to the first Appellate Authority shall be accompanied by the following documents, if the FAA is located/housed in different area/building"

The following  may be substituted in the place of " duly authenticated and verified"

"duly self attested  by the appellant"

10. Documents to accompany Appeal to Commission: In this rule The following  may be substituted in the place of " duly authenticated and verified"

"duly self attested  by the appellant"

11. Admission of appeals: (1) In this rule the words "On receipt of an appeal, if the Commission is satisfied that it is a fit case for consideration, it may admit such appeal" may be deleted and the following words may be substituted

"All complaints/appeals should be admitted and disposed off on merit. Within a period of sixty days from the date of receipt"

There must be time limit for disposal of the appeal by the CIC like the time limit given to CPIO and FAA or otherwise the CIC is as on date keeping pending of cases without trial for more than one year etc. If this time limit is not provided for the CIC, the RTI Act will loose its importance, meaning, spirit and significance and the applicant will have no faith in the functioning of CIC. 

12. Procedure for deciding appeals & 14. Personal presence of the appellant before the Commission &15. Presentation by the Public Authority

 The appellants are now finding it very very difficult to attend the personal hearing/video conferencing. Hence the compelling the appellant for personal hearing /video conferencing must be dispensed with. Alternatively, the reply/counter  of the CPIO/FAA  may be obtained by the CIC and on the basis of second appeal and the reply/counter, the CIC  shall pass orders on merit, after giving a chance to the appellant to offer any remarks/rejoinder to the reply/counter of CPIO/FAA within a time frame. If no reply /counter is received from the CPIO /FAA, the matter may be decided exparte. In case of penalty of whatever nature, opportunity shall be given to the CPIO/FAA as the case may be .Hence this rule may be amended as above to make the proceedings before CIC as summary proceedings unlike  from the present time consuming and difficult procedures 

A new rule may be added after Rule 18 as follows

Review on the order of CIC: A review of order of CIC shall lie if the order is passed by a single Information Commissioner and the review petition  will be heard by more than single Information Commissioner and the appellant alone is entitled for a review

The above suggestions/objections shall be considered by the rule making authorities in the interest  and well functioning of the RTI Act.

Yours truly,

P.Esakkimuthu