[vashisthvivek]

Originally Posted by sidmis

I propose the following:

• Eliminate First Appellate Stage. Instead all RTI Replies must be approved by the Head of the Institutions. (Saves at least 45 days)
• In case of default penalise both the PIO and the person who has endorsed it. (They will think twice)
• Eliminate the distinction between State and Central Public Authority.
• Instead all RTI disuputes at state level should be handled by the State Commissions.No need of a central commission.
• Fix a time limit say 60 days within which the State commission should hear and give decisions. Impose penalty on delay.
• Create special RTI benches at the High Courts to hear cases related to RTI.

more to follow..

I liked 3rd and 4th suggestions very much. Although the Central Information Commission may be there, but the scheme should be like Consumer Dispute Redressal system, where appeal from the State commission goes to the Central Commission and then directly to Supreme Court. However, this will be fruitful only when the appointments in the Commissions are made as per the scheme of the Act and not by appointing the bureaucrats only. As regards to providing the information after vetting by the Head of the Department, the same may not be feasible, as it will burden the the HODs to a great extent. They will not be able to give due attention towards other developmental and important works. However, senior officers of the organisation should be appointed as PIOs, as at present junior officers are appointed as PIOs, who mostly work under pressure. Secondly, there should be provision to penalise the Appellate Authority also for delay and for passing misleading orders or for orders passed without application of mind.