Dr Raja Muzaffar Bhat
On July 18th recently State Chief Information Commis-sioner (CIC) Khurshid Ahmad Ganai held 5th RTI roundtable with District administration Budgam . Almost all the designated First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) , Public Information Officers (PIO) and other district level officers attended this conference. Several RTI campaigners of the district were also invited by the District Administration. CIC appreciated the efforts of newly appointed District Development Commissioner Mohammad Haroon Malik for organizing the roundtable. Before Budgam roundtable CIC conducted similar meetings in Srinagar, Jammu, Anantnag and Baramulla districts. During his interaction with officers of Budgam district, CIC explained in detail the relation of RTI with development. He reiterated the role played by Right to Information Act (RTI) towards better implementation of developmental programmes. During the conference, CIC emphasized upon the First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) to know their Quasi-judicial rolefor effective implementation of Right to Information Act (RTI).
What is the role of FAAs ?
J&K RTI Act 2009 as well as Central RTI Act of 2005 have provision of appeals. In case the Public Information Officer (PIO) does not provide information under Right to Information Act (RTI) or provides misleading or incorrect information, the aggrieved person can file an appeal before a senior officer. For example if an Executive Engineer of PWD (R&B) is the designated PIO and information seeker does not gets satisfactory answer from him, 1st appeal has to be preferred before his Chief Engineer who is the designated First Appellate Authority (FAA) and a Quasi-Judicial authority. If the appellant is again aggrieved, then 2nd appeal can be moved before the State Information Commission (SIC).
According to my personal observation more than 90 % appellants whom I have met have not been satisfied with the role of First Appellate Authorities (FAAs). This is the main reason these aggrieved people file 2nd appeals before the State Information Commission (SIC). 2nd appeals could have been brought down, had the First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) , been aware of their role. The First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) as per section 16 (3) can recommend for action to be taken against the Public Information Officer (PIO) if they deliberately provide incomplete, misleading and incorrect information. FAAs have to make this recommendation in writing to State Information Commission (SIC). But I have not come across a single case in last 8 years wherein an FAA recommendedSIC to take action against an erring PIO. This makes it clear that FAAs shield PIOs for their wrongdoing…..
Case study :
One Abdul AhadGanai a resident of Palpora village in Budgam came to our office for seeking assistance in filing 1st appeal few months back. This poor villager had sought information from the Executive Engineer Irrigation Division Budgam in January this year regarding an irrigation canal and retaining wall constructed in their village. Abdul Ahad alleged that retaining wall was not constructed at a particular location where it was needed. He along with several other villagers allege that their agriculture land was under threat of soil erosion, but some other location was chosen. He decided to seek details under RTI. The information provided by the Executive Engineer (PIO) was misleading according to Abdul Ahad. On 22nd February 2017, the aggrieved villager filed an appeal (First Appeal) before the Chief Engineer Irrigation & Flood Control Kashmir who is the designated First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA instead of hearing Abdul Ahad forwarded the case to same Executive Engineer (PIO) without any intimation to information seeker. The Executive Engineer (PIO) did act after 1st appeal but he again provided misleading information alleged Abdul Ahad. Even if he had provided correct information , still the procedure adopted by the Chief Engineer (FAA) while disposing off the 1st appeal was against the provisions of the RTI Act . As mentioned above First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) are quasi-judicial authorities, so their office is a court and appeals cannot be decided without hearing both the parties (PIO and the information seekers).
Majority of First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) in J&K dispose RTI appeals in the same way. The main reason for this is lack of training given to First Appellate Authorities (FAAs). Even if some workshops are organized for PIOs , the FAAs are hardly trained about their role. Let Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) interview a dozen First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) across state , I am sure not even 1 % of them would be knowing their roles and responsibilities under the J&K RTI Act 2009. Abdul AhadGanai who lives under Below Poverty Line (BPL) has now sought intervention of State Information Commission (SIC) by filing a 2nd appeal before the commission. While talking to this author Abdul Ahad said:
“Executive Engineer Irrigation Division Budgam (PIO) provided me another set of information after I sought relief from Chief Engineer Irrigation & FC Kashmir (FAA) through an appeal (1st appeal) . The information provided was again misleading and did not match with his previous reply. The officer in his reply told me that M/S Al Noor Group Mazhama was executing the work in my village on an irrigation canal & retaining wall but some other contractor is actually working on ground. The bund (R-Wall) constructed was to be filled with small boulders as per the estimate obtained under RTI , but actually big boulders have been used which can be cross checked as well. The rates mentioned in 1st RTI reply does not match with information provided after 1st appeal. We had been requesting the officers to construct a R-wall (bund) at a site where agricultural land is located which not only belongs to me but it belongs to several other villagers. The officers in-spite of assuring us to construct a bund (R-wall) at the designated site, chose another place where the retaining wall (R wall) was not at all required. I was thus forced to use my Right under RTI Act to make these corrupt officials accountable”
Conclusion :
Huge number of funds are pumped by New Delhi in J&K for developmental activities. There are hundreds of proven cases wherein these funds were mismanaged or misappropriated in one way or the other. If Abdul AhadGanai has genuine claims,then he has chosen a right path to mount pressure on public authorities to execute developmental works with utmost transparency. I am sure he will not fix a deal with the officials. As the information seeker has already moved an appeal before the State Information Commission (SIC), it indicates that he has not succumbed in between. I believe if people make judicious and honest use of RTI, it is going to act as an Engine for Jammu &Kashmir’ s overall development. I appreciate CIC Khurshid Ahmad Ganai for conducting district wise RTI roundtables. During last 5 months CIC has organized 5 such programmes and now he is planning to have similar programmes in far off places like Gurez ,Tangdar , Kishtwar in the upcoming months. Such meetings have generated a hope not only among the RTI activists, but people in general appreciate these activities.
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Follow our WhatsApp channel