Change Conceptfrom "Why Give " To " Why Not Give "

[colnrkurup]

Some of the SICs and even the CIC advance an excuse of giving more time to the PIOs to get trained and used to the concept of RTI Act for not awarding penalty. I don't think this is justifiable. Everyone, right from the PIOs to the Informtion Commissioners have to change their concept of RTI Act. Presently, in every case, the emphasis seems to justify " Why the information should be given". All one has to do is to change this concept to "Why the information should not be given" .

On receipt of a request, the PIOs should see why the informtion sought should not be given. He has to ask himself certain questions like, Is the informtion held by him ?, Has the prescribed fee has been remitted ?, Does the information fall under any of the exceptions given in Sections 8 and 9 ? & Does the information sough disproportionatly divert the resources of the public authority or not? If the answer is "YES" ,there should not be any reasons for not giving the information sought. All other excues are only window dressings.

[narayanvarma]

Title coined by you is very catchy.TO the last question put by you i am not agreeing.If PIO finds that info sought is likely to divert huge resources, at the most he may refer to some extent disclosures made u/s 4 and need not supply separately or at the most he may request the applicant to withdraw seeking of some items of info .OTHERWISE HE IS OBLIGED TO SUPPLY THE SAME.This, one may say is not fair provision of RTI Act but unavoidable. Do you agree ? Am i confused or right ?

[taurus]

Sec 7(9) of the Act says "An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority..." It is a fair provision though it may work harsh on some genuine info seekers. In such cases, the info seeker may ask for inspection of the records and take notes.
I agree with the view that the PAs should develop an attitude of giving as much info as possible. After all they may also be in the receiving end after retirement!!!

[colnrkurup]

Kindly ignore the portion "Does the information sought disproportionatly divert the resources of the public authority " or add "Not". It was a typing mistake.