Commission takes serious note, seeks explanation
*JKPSC cautioned against violating timeline under RTI Act
Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Feb 21: There is no end to the avoiding of proceedings of Second Appeals before the Central Information Commission (CIC) by the Central Public Information Officers (CPIOs) of the departments of Government of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and this has once again been viewed seriously by the transparency watchdog of the country, which has sought explanations from such officers.
Follow the Daily Excelsior channel on WhatsApp
Though the Central Information Commission does not have a specific circular explicitly addressing only the issue of non-appearing CPIOs yet its rulings consistently hold CPIOs accountable for failing to provide information under the RTI Act, including situations where they do not appear before the Commission and can recommend disciplinary action against them in such cases.
From time to time, the CIC passed strictures against the CPIOs of J&K Union Territory departments for taking casually the notice for appearance during the Second Appeal proceedings and in large number of cases even written explanations were sought from them. However, the situation has not improved till date and in several Second Appeals the CPIOs still resort to unexplained absence thereby creating obstruction during the proceedings.
This can be gauged from some more cases, which were handled by the Central Information Commission during the past few days. In Second Appeal titled Skinder Singh Versus Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department of the J&K UT pertaining to BPL cards of village Sarore of Samba district, the CPIO remained absent during the hearing even after receiving advance notice.
Accordingly, the CIC took grave exception for the unexplained absence of CPIO during the hearing and said, “such casual conduct of the CPIO causes unwarranted obstruction to the appellant’s right to information and is in grave violation to the provisions of RTI Act”. In this regard, the CIC has directed the CPIO to file a written submission detailing the reason for his unexplained absence during the hearing before the Commission. “The written explanation should reach the Commission within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order”, read the order of the CIC.
Similarly, in two separate Second Appeals titled Sumeet Slathia Versus PIO of UT of J&K, which pertain to the assets of Municipal Council Udhampur, the CPIO of Municipal Council remained absent although he was given advance notice in this regard by the Registry of the Commission. In both these appeals, the CIC has sought written explanation from the CPIO within 15 days for creating obstacles in the proceedings.
Commenting on the situation, the legal experts said, “if a CPIO repeatedly fails to appear or provide information without a valid reason, it can be considered a violation of RTI Act and can lead to penalties or complaints being filed with the Commission”, adding “if a CPIO has a legitimate reason for not appearing he or she should inform the applicant and provide a suitable explanation. Moreover, in case of absence, the CPIO is required to designate another officer to participate in the proceedings”.
“However, this is not happening in majority of the Second Appeals thereby receiving sharp criticism from the Commission as well as necessitating the issuance of orders seeking written explanations”, they further said and stressed that Government of Union Territory of J&K should pass clear instructions to all the CPIOs for taking the Second Appeal proceedings before the CIC seriously.
Meanwhile, while dealing with a Second Appeal highlighting delay in furnishing of information vis-à-vis Prosecuting Officer (Preliminary Examination) 2021, the Central Information Commission has cautioned the CPIO of J&K Public Service Commission (JKPSC) to strictly adhere to the timeline as laid down under the RTI Act while responding to the RTI applications in future.
“It is made clear that non adherence of the timeline in future while answering RTI applications shall attract penal action as per law”, read the order of CIC passed in the Second Appeal.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
