Unexplained absence during 2nd Appeals, denial of info
Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, May 15: Taking serious note of unexplained absence during the 2nd Appeal proceedings and denial of information, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has sought written explanation from Assistant Labour Commissioner (ALC) of Reasi, Tehsildar Bahu, Public Information Officer (PIO) of Kokernag Development Authority and officials of Jammu Municipal Corporation.
Follow the Daily Excelsior channel on WhatsApp
As per the details placed before the Central Information Commission, an RTI application was filed on April 19, 2022 seeking information vis-à-vis under what Rules of the Labour Act, the Labour Department can issue license to the hotel or renew the same in Katra town and how many licenses were granted to the hoteliers during the period between January 1, 2019 to March 31, 2022 etc.
The concerned CPIO provided information in response to certain points but some of the information was denied on the ground that the same is related to third party or the information was not available on web portal. Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the appellant filed a First Appeal and the First Appellate Authority vide order dated 26.08.2022 asked the CPIO to provide information vis-à-vis only one point.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the appellant approached the Central Information Commission with the Second Appeal. The hearing before the CIC was scheduled after giving prior notice to both the parties.
After perusal of record of the case, the CIC observed, “the information available on record with the Public Authority as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and as permissible under the provisions of the Act, had been duly sent to the appellant. However, the respondent has failed to appear during the hearing to make submissions about the case at hand thereby leading to the proceedings being vitiated in clear violation of the provisions of the RTI Act”.
Accordingly, the CIC has directed the Assistant Labour Commissioner Reasi to submit an explanation for willful violation of the provisions of the RTI Act by unexplained absence during hearing. “The explanation should reach the Commission within four weeks of receipt of this order failing which appropriate action shall be initiated in terms of law”, read the order of the Commission.
Similarly, the transparency watchdog of the country has sought explanation from Tehsildar Bahu, Jammu for denial of information to the applicant regarding issuance of Fards and sale and purchase of land in the area under his jurisdiction.
“Despite passage of adequate time, no document has been received from the respondent-Tehsildar, Bahu. Thus there is no record which indicates that any information was sent at all to the appellant. Failure of the Tehsildar, Bahu in submitting any documentary evidence indicating the fact that response was sent by the office of the Tehsildar to the appellant, despite specifically being granted time by the Commission to do so, has thus resulted in the proceedings being vitiated and is a clear violation of the provisions of the RTI Act”, the Commission observed.
Accordingly, the CIC has directed Tehsildar Bahu to submit an explanation for willful violation of the provisions of the RTI Act by not responding to the RTI queries raised by the appellant. “The explanation should reach the Commission within four weeks of receipt of this order, failing which appropriate action shall be initiated, in terms of law”, read the decision.
In another Second Appeal pertaining to denial of information regarding number of Panchayati Raj Institution representatives stayed in budgeted accommodation of Kokernag Development Authority between October 2018 and March 2022, none was present on behalf of the respondent despite service of hearing notice in advance.
Upon perusal of records of the case, the CIC noted that neither any response had been sent by the respondent nor had any written submission been made before the hearing. “In addition to this, the respondent has failed to appear during the hearing to make submissions about the case at hand, thereby leading to the proceedings being vitiated in gross violation of the provisions of the RTI Act”, the CIC said.
Taking serious note of this, the Commission has directed the Registry to issue show-cause notice to the PIO, Kokernag Development Authority seeking explanation as to why penalty of Rs 25,000 should not be imposed for willful violation of the provisions of the RTI Act by causing deliberate obstruction in the supply of information and the unexplained absence of any representative during hearing.
“The response to the show cause notice should reach the Commission within four weeks of receipt of this order failing which appropriate order shall be passed on the basis of records. The respondent shall also send an accurate point wise response to the RTI application invoking the exemption clause under the RTI Act to ensure only information permissible under the scope of the RTI Act is provided to the appellant within three weeks of receipt of this order”, read the order of the Commission.
The CIC has also conveyed serious concern to the officers of the Jammu Municipal Corporation for denial of information to the applicant, who had sought the details of Safai Karamcharis appointed/engaged on temporary/contractual basis and made permanent thereafter and relevant orders in this regard.
While directing the CPIO, Establishment Section of JMC to provide all the information to the applicant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, the CIC has directed the Nodal Officer (RTI) JMC to seek explanation from the concerned officers for not appearing for the hearing before the Commission on the scheduled date and time and submit the same along with the compliance report.
“The Nodal Officer should ensure that hearings before the Commission are invariably attended to by the officers of the concerned department in future”, the CIC said.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
