Dr Raja Muzaffar Bhat
At a time when filing of online applications on different issues is gaining momentum, the information seekers continue to move around Government offices looking after a Public Information Officer (PIO) who is supposed to receive applications under Right to Information Act (RTI). In most of the cases the designated PIO is either on leave or is out of office to meet his boss at district headquarter , directorate or civil secretariat. Poor applicant has to waste his time, energy and money. If the information seeker is bit clever he or she sends the RTI application via speed post. But there are no facilities available in J&K wherein an RTI application can be filed directly through an online portal or to send it directly to the PIO on his official email ID . There can be technical issues if the application is filed online or via email, because the RTI application fees of Rs 10 has to kept appended with the application in shape of Indian Postal Order (IPO) , Draft or Bankers Cheque or even cash. In order to address this issue a Private Members bill was submitted by BJP MLA R S Pathania sometime back, but the bill could not be discussed in the house.
What changes MLA Pathaniahad sought ?
The private members bill submitted before legislative assembly in 2015 by R S Pathania a lawyer and MLA sought some changes in sections 4, 6, 15 and 17 of J&K RTI Act 2009. MLA wanted amendment in the State RTI Act 2009 wherein it shall be mandatory on every public authority to notify/publish on its website and provide to the State Information Commission (SIC) as well the name, designation, postal address, facsimile number, E-mail ID, Debit / Credit Card payment portal of its Public Information Officer (PIO) as well as its First Appellate Authority (FAA) . The State Information Commission (SIC) can also display the name, designation, postal address, facsimile number, E-mail ID, Credit Card payment portal of the Public Information officers as well as the First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) on its official website.
MLA had suggested that a request for obtaining information under sub-section (1) of Section 6 can be filed through e-mail and specified fees/costs could be deposited through credit/Debit card of Master/Visa or RuPay Card payable to the Accounts Officer/Account of the Public Authority.
Amendments in Section 6,15 &17
The MLA had suggested that Sub-Section (1) of Section 6 of the Principal Act shall be substituted by the following:- (1) Request for obtaining Information.- A person, who desires to obtain any information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English, Urdu or Hindi accompanied by an application fee of Rupees Ten (Rs 10) by way of cash against proper receipt or by Indian Postal Order or demand draft or bankers cheque or using credit/debit card of Master/Visa or RuPay Card payable to the Accounts Officer/Account of the Public Authority. In Section 15 of the Principal Act, after sub-section (4), MLA R S Pathania had sought the following new sub-sections (5), (6) and (7) to be added. Every order made by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) or the State Information Commission (SIC) may be enforced by the First Appellate Authority or the State Information Commission as the case may be, in the same manner as if it were a decree or order made by a court in a suit pending therein. MLA also suggested that a complaint as contemplated for compliance of orders of the Commission shall be filed within a period of six months from the date of accrual of cause of action to the complaint. Provided that the State Information Commission may admit the complaint after the expiry of the period of aforementioned period if it is satisfied that the complainant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the complaint in time. Legal Affairs of the Commission shall be primarily responsible for all acts necessary and incidental to ensure proper pleading/defending cases against the Commission before the High Court and other Courts.
The Commission shall be at liberty to engage counsels for effective representation of the Commission in the courts where cases have been instituted against it. Amendment of Section 17 .- After sub-section (2) in Section 17 of the Principal Act, MLA through his private members bill suggested the following new sub-section (3) shall be inserted.:- (3) Whereas State Information Commission shall monitor and supervise compliance of sub-clauses (1) (2) (3) of section 4 and section 5(1) of the Act by the public authorities and in case it is found that any officer is found guilty of non-compliance of the afore-cited provisions, the Commission shall recommend disciplinary action against the guilty officer/Public Information Officer/Public authority as per the service rules applicable to him. Insertion of New Section 17-A.- After Section 17 of the Principal Act, the following new Section 17-A shall be inserted:- 17-A Whereas at the time of deciding any appeal, reference or complaint or otherwise, the Presiding Officer or member of State Information Commission, on a motion moved by a Public Information Officer or Ist Appellate Authority, is of the view that information-seeker has filed an application or multiple Right to Information applications concerning the same subject or before the same Public Information Officer seeking information with an ulterior motive or exerting any undue pressure/influence on the Public Information Officer/department, the natter shall be referred to Full Bench of the Commission and Commission may declare the information seeker as ‘unscrupulous information seeker and debar him from filing an application under Right to Information Act before the same Public Information Officer regarding the same matter and also impose a penalty not exceeding two thousand rupees.
Provided that the unscrupulous information seeker shall be given a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on him. Provided further that, the burden of proving that information seeker filed the application with ulterior motives shall be on the Public Information Officer or Ist Appellate Authority who alleges it. Provided that imposing of penalty on an information seeker shall be resorted to in very exceptional cases.
Conclusion:
Regarding changes in section 17 by inserting 17 (A) wherein a habitual RTI applicant can be penalized or debarred from filing RTI applications is a matter of discussion and debate. But Government must seriously think over the suggestions made by MLA through his Private Members Bill vis a vis payment of RTI application fees through credit or debit cards.
This does not mean that other modes of payment of RTI fees will be deleted, no not at all. Infact payment of fees by way of attaching a Rs 10 Non Judicial Stamp paper is also a very viable option. This mode of fees payment was deleted from the 2012 amendment rules. In addition to it sending RTI applications via email or uploading the same on an online portal is also a valuable suggestion. In search of Rs 10 Indian Postal Order (IPO), information seekers travel a long distance. For instance I have myself traveled from Budgam to Srinagar by spending Rs 200 to get a postal order of Rs 10 as the same is mostly available in General Post Offices (GPOs) or Head Post Offices. Let Rs 10 be received by the Accounts Incharge of the Public Authority via credit cards or debit cards as well. This can benefit a large section of society.
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel