SIC takes serious note of denial of information by CID

By
Daily Excelsior
-

Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Jan 29: State Chief Information Commissioner, G R Sufi has directed the Public Information Officer of CID SBK Srinagar to explain as to why penalty under Section 17 of the State RTI Act may not be initiated for denying information to the complainant/applicant.
According to the brief facts and grounds of the appeal before the Commission, one Irshad Ahmad Dar had filed RTI application before the PIO, CID SBK Srinagar seeking information regarding departmental enquiry against Selection Grade Constable Abdul Aziz Mir for demanding illegal gratification in 2010.
However, the PIO passed an order informing the applicant that CID Department/Organization is an organization kept out of the purview of RTI Act by virtue of SRO-86 dated March 12, 2012 issued by the State Government.
On this, the complainant/applicant filed first appeal before the First Appellant Authority—SSP CID SBK Srinagar for ordering the disclosure of information but he also refused to furnish the information on the plea that CID was kept out of the purview of RTI Act.
While treating the complainant’s communication to the Commission as complaint, the SIC observed, “PIO and FAA have not gone through the provisions of State RTI Act. No doubt there is an SRO which keeps CID out of purview of State RTI Act issued under the provisions of Section 21 of the Act but the PIO and FAA should have carefully gone through provision of Section 21 of the RTI Act”.
“Had they done so, they would have found that information relating to allegations of corruption and human rights violation has not been excluded under Section 21”, the Commission said, adding “this Section clearly lays down the mechanism for providing such information which has not been unfortunately followed by FAA and PIO”.
“The information which concern occurrences of corruption cannot be suppressed because that would negate the relevance of the Act”, Commission said and directed the PIO to explain as to why penalty under Section 17 may not be initiated as the so called order as relied upon by the PIO is not an order in the eyes of law.

WhatsApp Icon Follow our WhatsApp channel