deposit of fees

[ssatishrao]

i have a querry on RTI the information asked for was refused by CPIO, the appellate committe also upheld the decision of CPIO thereafter the CIC has asked the Public Authority to supply the information. My question is whether it is justified and legallly correct that the public authority is asking the applicant to deposit the fees for photocopy of the documents

[ganpat1956]

Dear Satish Rao,

The answer to your query is YES. It is justified and legally correct on the part of the public authority to ask the applicant to deposit fees for photocopy of the documents.

For full details on the fee structure, please refer to the FAQ (frequently asked questions) section in this web site.

[brijeshbhatt]

One should pay fees for services.

[ssatishrao]

thaks a lot

[mpai]

i have a querry on RTI the information asked for was refused by CPIO, the appellate committe also upheld the decision of CPIO thereafter the CIC has asked the Public Authority to supply the information. My question is whether it is justified and legallly correct that the public authority is asking the applicant to deposit the fees for photocopy of the documents

You have not informed, the time gap between the time of your application and the time the CPIO has asked you to deposit the fee. If this time gap is more than 30 days, then the public authority has no right to ask you to deposit the fee. Please check sub-section 6 of Section 7 of the RTI Act 2005 which clearly states

[LEFT][/LEFT]

<CENTER><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=7 width=463 border=1><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top height=48>(6) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (5), the person making request for the information shall be provided the information free of charge where a public authority fails to comply with the time limits specified in sub-section (1).
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></CENTER>
Therefore if more than 30 days have been passed, the CPIO cannot ask you to pay. In case you have already paid the amount, you can make another appeal either to the AA or the CIC asking for full refund.

Manoj Pai

[colnrkurup]

I just could not grasp as to why Mr.Satish Roa has to make the payment. I am with the vews of Mpai.
The case is too obvious that he did not get the information within 30 days. I shall be grateful if any disagreement with the views of Mpai can be posted to get myself educated

[chanda_s]

i view the issue slightly differently.

section 7(6) as quoted above by mpai says that information shall be provided free of cost if "Public Authority fails to comply with the time limits specified in sub-section (1 )."

but it may be seen that the subsection (1) being referred to says :

Subject to the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 5 or the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 6, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, on receipt of a request under section 6 shall, as expeditiously as possible, and in any case within thirty days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of such fee as may be prescribed or reject the request for any of the reasons specified in sections 8 and 9:

the CPIO may give info or refuse it within the time frame. it is apparent that the CPIO in this case has refused to give information. which means requisite fees needs to be paid only if the CPIO had refused information AFTER 30 DAYS of application. if the CPIO has refused to give the info within 30 days, then i am afraid the fees has to be paid.

[colnrkurup]

Irrespective of the fact that the information is refuced within 30 days or after 30 days, so long as it is not provided within 30 days the information stand refuced on expiry of 30 days.Of course when the PIO give misleding or even false information, so long as the same was provided within 30 days the benefit of Section 7(6) cannot be claimed. This benefit is available only when the information is refuced or deemed refuced by PIO andit remain refused for 30 days. The PIO has a solace in Section 7(3)that in case he send an intimation with details seeking further fees, the thirty day's Clock stop on the date he send the intimation. It will start from where it is stopped on the date the further cost as determined by the PIO is depositted. The Sub section (1) says that .......in any case within thirty days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of such fee as may be prescribed or reject the request for any of the sections 8 & 9. In this case neither it is decided to provide the information within 30 days nor gave any intimation under Section 7(3) for deposit of additional fees. The information stand not provided within 30 days in any case. Whatever may be the subsequent decision when the information stand not provided by PIO within 30 days,as explained above, it is deemed as refusal. When it is provided after 30 days, even on second appeal, it has to be provided free of charge.

[karira]

Both chanda_s and mpai are correct.

Section 7(6) comes into play if the 30 days (or the 30 + 5 days) period is over.

Otherwise, the applicant must pay the fees (both the application fee and the fees for obtaining information as per the relevant rules framed for the state/centre).

[mpai]

Both chanda_s and mpai are correct.

Section 7(6) comes into play if the 30 days (or the 30 + 5 days) period is over.

LOL Karira, you have failed to mention Col. Kurup as well. In fact Col. sahib has vide his own post time stamped 09-07-2007 08:05 AM has only rephrased his comments to agree to what I had earlier posted.

Looks like he followed the Domino’s Pizza "30 minutes or it's free" policy.

Now here is yet another exercise for some of our Young RTI Turks to ponder over.

What if the CPIO returns your RTI Application in original along with the application fees paid and the AA / CIC directs the CPIO to provide the info?

So order a Pizza and start debating.

Manoj