To
Date: 9-12-13.
Shri V. Narayanasamy, Hon Minister of State,
Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pension,
North Block, New Delhi.110001.
Sub: Up-dating of Central Information Commission
(Appeal Procedure), 2012- GSR 603(E) dt 31-7-12 & other important Procedure
Orders.
Ref: Our representation dt 12-7-13 to you not
replied yet, though followed by RTI Application dt 9-9-13, 1st
Appeal dt 22-10-13 and IInd Appeal dt 9-12-13.
We are very much thankful to Ministry of Personnel
for expanding and elaborating the scope of Suo Motu Disclosures under Sec 4 of
RTI Act through Secretary`s D.O. no.1/6/2011-IR dt 15-4-13 & 21-11-13. We
are also grateful for up-dating Guide on RTI Act, 2005 under no. 1/32/2013-IR
dt 28-11-13. We request that Right to Information Rules, 2012 notified under
GSR 603 (E) dt 31-7-12 in Gazette of India may also be updated very early, as
Citizens are facing various difficulties in dealing with CIC, as brought out in
our representation dt 12-7-13 to you, Our Representation dt 21-5-12 to
President of India and other representations dt 30-8-12, 5-9-12 etc. The difficulties
caused in following respects of existing Rules, 2012 dt 31-7-12 are again
brought out for early action:-
i)
Rule 3: Application Fee: Though
Fee is prescribed for Application only under sub-section (1) of Sec 6, Fee for
Complaints under Sec 18 is being asked by CPIO of CIC and States. (e.g. CIC`s
no.CIC/CPIO/Misc/2013/153690 dt 31-7-13). Kindly, amplify and clarify this Rule
for Fee for Complaints.
ii)
Rule 6: Mode of Payment of Fee: Provision
for payment of fee through nominated Post Offices under Role of Department of
Post Offices as per instructions from Prime Minister are not included in this
Rule. CPIO of CIC is rejecting applications sent through nominated post offices
with Fee paid to Post Office. (e.g. CIC/CPIO/2011/1953 DT 2-11-11).
iii)
Rule 7:Appointment of Secretary: No duties of Secretary and other Registrars are laid down. After
declaring RTI-CIC (Management Regulations), 2007 dt 13-6-07 by Court as null
& void, it is necessary to incorporate such Management Regulation Rules in
this.
iv)
Rule 10: Process of Appeal: 3(b):
In cases of IInd Appeals, where AA has not passed orders, CIC asks AA to give
orders and asks Appellant to send IInd Appeal afresh, if not satisfied with
AA`s orders instead of calling AA for hearing and/or dealing with same IInd
Appeal papers, resulting in unnecessary expenses to Appellants of getting 4
copies of large number of papers typed/zeroxed etc, 2 copies for CIC, 1 for
CPIO & 1 for AA!
v)
Rule 11: Procedure for deciding Appeals: In many cases, ICs do not examine papers submitted by Appellants
in IInd Appeals and Rejoinders and do not give opportunity to be heard to
Appellants through phone and give Speaking Orders based on information given by
ACPIO/Representatives of PA during hearing. This can be verified by DOPT by
simple reading of CIC`s decisions in their Web Site. Rule must be amplified to
lay down that IC/CIC must discuss view points of both parties in detail in
Speaking Orders invariably and give reasons for arriving at his conclusion. It
must also be laid down to indicate whether rejoinder was received and examined.
We have given examples of several cases in which papers were not examined in
our previous representations and can give still more examples of careless
dealings without keeping in view even rules of Natural Justice, if required!
vi)
Rule 12(2): Presence of Appellant: In many cases, Video Conferencing Centres are also 20-25 miles
away and it is not physically possible for disabled/handicapped citizens and
Senior Citizens of 75+ to go to such Centres. Many IC/CIC are permitting Phone Representation
but some do not give this facility and do not record reasons in Speaking Orders
for denying this. They are in hurry to close the cases!! Proper provision of
giving opportunity to be heard on phone in deserving cases may please be
provided. Many a times, 7 days clear notice for Hearing does not reach to the
Appellant. If he speaks on phone or sends E/Mail for giving opportunity to be
heard on phone, it should be recorded by Registrar on file and also mentioned
in Speaking Orders, if rejected. Not only, Applications/Appeals sent by E/Mail are
not dealt with without hard copy and that may be rightly but all communications
through E/Mails are ignored, which is not correct.
vii)
Rule 15: Orders of the Commission: Orders are treated as final, even if completely defective and
without examining view point of Appellant as given in IInd Appeal &
Rejoinders and no Review Petition lies and Appellant is asked to go to High
Court for reviewing incorrect and against Natural Justice Speaking Orders!!
Proper Review Petitions must be provided in these Rules. No replies are given
to representations to CIC for such defective Speaking Orders in terms of para
66 & 67 of Office Manual. Large number of cases can be produced before your
Ministry, if required, though some are already reported.
viii)
As per Notification no.CIC/Legal/2007/006 dt
13-2-08 and minutes of meeting held by CIC on 13-12-11, it was notified for the
information of general public that the Appeals and Complaints filed by senior
citizens shall be taken up by the Commission on priority basis and norms &
procedure for according priority to Appellants in Hearing Appeals/Complaints
filed before the Commission were decided in minutes dt 13-12-11.
Appeals/Complaints from senior citizens and differently abled persons were to
be put up to the Bench of the Commission where such cases are registered. This
is not being done for last 5 years and not a single case of senior citizen is
given any preference, inspite of showing by Appellants on top of each
Appeal/Complaint that preference is to be given in terms of CIC orders and age
is indicated and proof of age is given. Wrong information is being given by
your Ministry to MPs for Parliamentary Questions that preference is being
given, when there is not a single case of preference given for last 5 years and
no record is maintained for this. This is serious and may be looked into for
laying down proper instructions.
ix)
On
cancellation of RTI-CIC (Management Regulations), 2007 by Court, it is
necessary that various Rules in those Regulations are brought in these Rules,
2012. According to Rule 4(xv) of cancelled notification, Registrars were
responsible to ensure compliance of decisions of IC/CIC. This responsibility is
now refused by Registrars. Examples can be produced, if required. Proper
provision may please be made in these Rules.
x)
As per
Rule 15-Personal Presence of Appellant, if Appellant is prevented from being
heard, second opportunity is to be given before final decision is given. This
is not followed. Many examples can be produced. Proper detailed provision for
this may be made in these Rules.
xi)
As per
Rule 23 (2)-Finality of Decision, Special Review Appeal is laid down. On
cancellation of entire Regulations from legal point of view by Court, this
opportunity of Review petition is denied in each case!! This is too much!! Many
examples have been brought to your Ministry`s notice and still more can be
produced. Proper provision may please be made in these Rules for review.
xii)
As the
main Aim of RTI Act is to promote transparency & accountability in the
working of all Public Authority and streamlining their working, please provide
proper guidelines in these Rules that CPIO & AAs will ensure that all
lacunas came or brought to their notice through dealing with Applications &
Appeals are set right by bringing to the notice of concerned competent
authorities of their organizations. Examples: a) All prescribed columns are not
filled in Status Position of Letters, Appeals, Complaints etc in CIC Web Site.
Date given by Citizens for their letters, appeals etc are not shown, resulting
in difficulties to locate. B) Appeals & Complaints are not admitted and
shown in Status Position for months together. c) Non-compliance cases are not
chased even after 10-15 reminders. d) No preference is given to Appeals &
representations of Senior Citizens. e) Large number of letters, appeals,
complaints sent by registered posts are not recorded/shown in status Position
with dates given by citizens.
We shall be grateful, if these
important aspects are got examined and remedial action taken, giving reply to
us in terms of Para 66-67 of Office Manual.
Thanking you,
Yours Sincerely,
(M.V.Ruparelia)
No comments:
Post a Comment