Cic issues show cause, conducts hearings, but does not pass orders.

**changethechangers** · 02-24-2011, 10:53 PM

Certified copies of file No. CIC/SG/C/2009/001619,001621,001622 (as on 17/2/2011) provided by Sh. Dhirendra Kumar, US, Central Public Information Officer & DR of CIC indicate that there are show cause notices issued from the file, the respondents have visited CIC, marked their attendance, filed written submissions, but no order has ever been passed for disposal of the show cause notices.

I have got hold of the certified copies today only and more analysis will reveal many more interesting things.

So the reason for reluctance of the Central Public Information Officer to provide list of undisposed of/pending show cause notices in response to an RTI application (refer thread Registery of sh. Shailesh gandhi, information commissioner does not have list of undisposed show cause notices.) can now be understood.

**karira** · 02-25-2011, 10:36 AM

Sponsorer

Originally Posted by changethechangers

Certified copies of file No. CIC/SG/C/2009/001619,001621,001622 (as on 17/2/2011) provided by Sh. Dhirendra Kumar, US, Central Public Information Officer & DR of CIC indicate that there are show cause notices issued from the file, the respondents have visited CIC, marked their attendance, filed written submissions, but no order has ever been passed for disposal of the show cause notices.

I have got hold of the certified copies today only and more analysis will reveal many more interesting things.

So the reason for reluctance of the Central Public Information Officer to provide list of undisposed of/pending show cause notices in response to an RTI application (refer thread Registery of sh. Shailesh gandhi, information commissioner does not have list of undisposed show cause notices.) can now be understood.

But there is no provision in the RTI Act for the CIC/SIC to pass an order within a certian time period after completing the hearing.

In APSIC, there are orders to be issued where hearings were conducted by ICs nearly a year ago. By the way, those ICs who heard the cases, have also retired !

**changethechangers** · 02-25-2011, 11:12 AM

Yes, you are right. There is no provision regarding time limit. But this is legal position. What about moral position? When the IC who is known and praised for issuing orders within 10 minutes of hearing is found to be actually doing something else, people should know that. And the ICs you are referring, would not have ever claimed that they will bring the pendency level to less than 3 months or will quit.

**changethechangers** · 03-02-2011, 10:19 PM

The Show Cause Notices have been issued by the Dy. Registrar. But there is no instructions from the IC to him to issue the SCN. An SCN has been issued in the name of Dy. Registrar, and someone has signed on his behalf. Here also, no instruction from IC or Dy. Registrar is available in the file. Amazingly, the Show Cause Notice to the PIO is for non-compliance of directive of IC(SG) for section 4 compliance and refers to some inspections conducted by "officers/officials of the Commission". But no instruction to any one to conduct inspection is available in the file, neither any inspection report is available in the file.

So can you imagine the reason for passing no orders on the Show Cause Notices?

**munikrsn** · 03-06-2011, 09:44 AM

If there is no provision in the RTI Act for the CIC/State Information Commission to pass an order within a certain time period after completing the hearing, then the law makers should be prevailed upon to amend the act so that orders are passed within a reasonable period. If no orders are passed within a reasonable period, then the very purpose of RTI Act is defeated. Accountability has to fixed in such cases.