Proposed Amendments - Second Appeal and its admission

[dr.s.malhotra]

this thread is meant to discuss POINT 9 , 10 AND 11 of proposed amendments and is on filing of 2nd appeal and its requirements and its admission by CIC

9. Appeal to the Commission: A person aggrieved by any order passed by the First Appellate Authority or by non-disposal of his appeal by the First Appellate Authority, may file an appeal to the Commission in the format as given in the Appendix.
10. Documents to accompany Appeal to Commission: Every Appeal made to the Commission shall be accompanied by the following documents, duly authenticated and verified:
(i) Copy of the application submitted to the Central Public Information Officer;
(ii) Copy of the reply, if any, of the Central Public Information Officer;
(iii) Copy of the appeal made to the First Appellate Authority;
(iv) Copy of the Order, if any, of the First Appellate Authority;
(v) Copies of other documents relied upon by the Appellant and referred to in the Appeal;
(vi) An index of the documents referred to in the Appeal.
11. Admission of appeals: (1) On receipt of an appeal, if the Commission is satisfied that it is a fit case for consideration, it may admit such appeal; but where the Commission is not so satisfied, it may, after giving an opportunity to the appellant of being heard and after recording its reasons, reject the appeal.
(2) The Commission shall not admit an appeal unless it is satisfied that the appellant had availed of all the remedies available to him under the Act.
(3) For the purposes of sub-rule (2), a person shall be deemed to have availed of all the remedies available to him under the Act:
(a) if he had filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority and the First Appellate Authority or any other person competent to pass order on such appeal had made a final order on the appeal; or
(b) where no final order has been made by the First Appellate Authority with regard to the appeal preferred, and a period of 45 days from the date on which such appeal was preferred has expired.

SALIENT FEATURES
1. documents with appeal to be attested by appellant and the appeal to be verified by appellant
2. 2nd Appeal can be filed after 45 days of first appeal if there is no response from FAA .- any punishment for FAA if it fails to decide matter in 45 days ?
3. 2nd appeal can be rejected at onset after hearing the Appellant if CIC considers it is not fit for consideration- this is like admission of writs in High Courts - how correct this is ?
4. Appeal to be as per Appendix in prescribed format

Plz give your analysis , suggestions and recommendations .


Similar Threads which you may be interested into:

• Proposed Amendments - Orders of CIC & their Compliance
• Proposed Amendments - First Appeal Stipulations
• Proposed Amendments - Request for Information
• Proposed Amendments - Fee and its payment
• Activists against proposed amendments to RTI Act

[ambrish.p]

Sponsorer

(1) On receipt of an appeal, if the Commission is satisfied that it is a fit case for consideration, it may admit such appeal; but where the Commission is not so satisfied, it may, after giving an opportunity to the appellant of being heard and after recording its reasons, reject the appeal.

Not required. Rule says its PIO who has to explain.

Appeal to be as per Appendix in prescribed format

Not required as this change may give PA liberty to deny applicant on this technical ground.

regards

[dr.s.malhotra]

there is a common intention behind the RULE 9-11 in proposed amendments .
Simplicity is giving way to technicality and uniformity . The Govt wants the citizen to be well informed of immediately relevant norms and Rules . This is not a bad step as it will bring uniform code for paper-work . It will reduce time per case per hearing because Commission will not have to search for relevant pleadings in the file . Although there will be initial glitches for the unassuming and illiterate , but within a short span of 6-12 months it will become an accepted norm . It would be more appropriate if the notification of technicalities is postponed by an year or so .
I believe the documents are to be self-attested , so verification and self authentication of documents and appeal facts should not pose a problem .
The only thing that worries me is summary rejection of 2nd appeal . You are likely to see a spurt in writs . But un-necessary appeals will not see the light of the day . One will have to be prepared well for the admission of the 2nd appeal - a matter of granted right turning into an acid test . But at the same time , norms are going to be established for a systematic judicial approach to the 2nd appeals . It can not be denied that few intended and few unintended errors will be seen in Orders of CIC , but instead of lingering 2nd Appeals you will at least have a finality in your hand to file writ if advised or to get ready for a better next RTI Application .
I do not see much wrong in it , provided for another 12 months or so , the CIC is a bit accommodating to the less educated . Only the RTI Act will not be simple anymore .

[dr.s.malhotra]

the second appeal should be disposed off in a time bound manner say 60 days .

[P.Suresh]

Dt: May 28, 2011

Dear Sir,
A normally educated citizen that I am, after having seen the way courts function, the high handedness of individuals including presiding officers, court officials, peons, the deciding authorities themselves etc, in the true interest of justice, for God's sake; I sincerely oppose concepts like admission of appeal (as it happens in courts), outright rejection of appeals by the court etc.

Sir, I stand testimony to court master's ignorance of rules. Pea nut quacks in conjunction with court officers, presiding officers etc cleverly by pass rules, violate rules, make rules to work for some in particular way and make the same rule work in some other way for some others. This causes lots of imbalance, injustice.

RTI is meant to be a tool for honesty, plain talk, transparency. RTI should be means for a lay man to slap, hang so called big OFFicers (who are corrupt or inefficient white elephants, illegal entrants who have got onto so called pErmanent rolls through absorption/regularisation by stabbing several of his/her contemporaries and are stage managing all other developments eversince through manipulation, manipulation, more manipulations)

Thus, it SHOULD DEFINITELY not come under ambits of rules of likes of the ones in courts. A step ahead, with due respect to court as a statutory, policy making, regulating mechanism and with due respect to luminaries who have laid their everything to enrich legalities, judicial system; please permit me to pour out the heart's true pains. From within context of discussion and from within capacity as one amongst the billions of citizens of this sacred, just land that India was, is supposed to be, would be so from now on many complexities which are beyond words, render almost all of these courts unjust, impracticable. No wonder these courts do NOT render true justice.

Hearing, hearing day and that pertains hearing should not turn to be a raffle. Muscle, money, influence etc should NOT play ANY role whatsoever. Narrations during the hearing, presence of parties etc should not be the main onus on which cases get decided (as what it is unfortunately happening in courts today). It is all remnants of erst while colonialism. Red tapeism per se should GOOOOOOO.

Sir, no way, no way, NOOOOOOOO. A fat NOOOO to concepts of rejections at admission etc. Let all that happen leisurely in the clerk's/manager's room. Let applicant have all the opportunity to understand, fulfill lacunae if any etc. After due clearance let it come for hearing. Once, CIC registry certifies that documents are in order, then CIC court should be vetting authority, pro transparency statutory authority and should not go much into nitty-gritties like need for education, lawyer etc that is being indicated. Law should be simple enough for average citizen.


Thank You,

P. Suresh