Success at last! Persistence only pays, even with RTI!!

**rajasury** · 05-20-2010, 06:42 AM

I had requested for some documents pertaining to the projects undertaken by Co-operative Housing Society who promoted layouts of plots in Chennai/Tamil Nadu. The PIO of the Society (though, no one was officially nominated as PIO by the Society), furnished some of the information requested for (it was only partial and very much incomplete) and rejected the request for providing the name, address, phone no. and plot nos. of the members of the various layout developed by them. I filed an appeal and the Special Officer of the Society rejected my appeal saying that they are not covered as "public authority" under section 2(h) of the RTI Act and further stated that though they had furnished some information earlier ( by the PIO), they were not required to do so.

I was, now, more determined to fight tooth and nail to counter this at the Information Commission level and to prove that they were, in fact, a "public authority". I drafted a letter and posted it in this site and asked for comments from the learned members. In fact, I received some valuable tips from the members and some encouraging words. Immediately after I filed the appeal before the State Information Commission and endorsed a copy to the PIO and the FIrst Appellate Authority, I got a call from the Society asking me to withdraw the appeal with the assurance that they would provide the details required by me. But when I actually went to the Society to get the details, there were only oral assurances and no document was forthcoming.

The appeal, in the meantime, came up for hearing (today, 20.5.2010) and when the Summon reached their office, prompt came their call asking me to collect the documents from their office, with of course, the request to withdraw the "complaint". The very next day I got most of the documents with the assurance that the other documents which had a reference in the documents provided by them would be furnished to me as and when I list and send it to them. Today, I have planned to withdraw my Appeal.

Does it not prove that only Persistence pays even with RTI!

All the best for all of you!

Raj

Similar Threads which you may be interested into:

**sreesnake** · 05-20-2010, 01:53 PM

Sponsorer

Congrats! However, withdrawing the second appeal is not, in my humble opinion, the right move. You should have made them present their case in the hearing and see them writhe in embarrassment. Govt. officials ( I am one too!) never learn unless they get the rough end of the stick at least once. Anyway, the Commissions are too 'govt. friendly' that they wouldn't have imposed any penalty. Just the experience they get will deter them from trying to frustrate future applicants

**karira** · 05-20-2010, 10:47 PM

rajasury,

You went through all this only to withdraw your appeal !

**nk agarwal** · 05-21-2010, 08:37 AM

I too feel that the 2nd appeal should not have been withdrawn.
(1) I am not sure if the offer for withdrawal of 2nd appeal was communicated in writing to the applicant.
(2) I think the case is still open for the applicant to file a complaint for delay, harassment and inconvenience as the PA supplied info partial or complete only after receiving the notice for hearing.
nk agarwal

**rajasury** · 05-21-2010, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by sreesnake

Congrats! However, withdrawing the second appeal is not, in my humble opinion, the right move. You should have made them present their case in the hearing and see them writhe in embarrassment. Govt. officials ( I am one too!) never learn unless they get the rough end of the stick at least once. Anyway, the Commissions are too 'govt. friendly' that they wouldn't have imposed any penalty. Just the experience they get will deter them from trying to frustrate future applicants

I appreciate the concersn expressed by 'sreesnake', 'kaira' and 'nkagarwal'. When I said mentioned in my earlier thread that 'I plan to withdraw my appeal', I didn't mean that I would not appear before the Commission and enter into a compromise deal with the public authority. In fact, I went and appeared before the Commission yesterday. The PIO too appeared and as 'sreesnake' wanted, the PIO was writhing in embarassment, though that was not my intention.

The issue of whether the Society is a public authority under section 2(h) was, in fact, taken up by the Commission. By answering the questions posed by the Commission, the PIO was made to realise that they are under the control of the State Government and hence they are, in fact, a public authority under section 2(h).

And finally, I'm not the one who wants to score points over others and make the other person feel inferior. I am of the firm opinion that this Act should not be used to settle personal scores. What is required is only getting the required information. When I got the information and a promise was made that whatever information required would be provided, I felt there is no meaning prolonging the issue. The purpose is achieved, thanks to the support and guidance given by this forum. Keep up your good work. Give your valuable opinion also. Thanks again.
Raj

Raj