Info u/s 2[ f ]

[jps50]

In Gujarat, there is stay of High Court on decision of GIC treating coop societies/banks as PA under RTI act. My friend was advised to file application with Sub-Registrar of Coop societies to suck the info by invoking sec 2[ f], as he has powers to obtain required info under gujarat state coop soc act. Sub-Registrar wrote to the coop bank to furnish info. Bank quoted stay order as above and declined info. Though stay is for treating coop banks as PA and it does not bar section 2 [f ] of RTI act which is applicable to private entities, sub-registrar is finding himself helpless. Should my friend go for first appeal or wait for the sub-registrar to invoke penal provisions under coop soc act to obtain requested info.

[rajub]

Dear Jps50,

Are you sure sub-registrar would use the powers to penalise the coop. socciety ?

And even if the penalty is levied there is a strong possibility that coop. soc. will challenge it in HC.

If you go for FA, the FAA may also direct the coop. soc. to furnish information . But what about its implementation ?

How about your friend filing a wp against subregistrar and coop. soc. for coop. soc. refusing to comply with directions by subregistrar under coop. soc. act ?

Just today I happened to talk to a High Court Adv. (for some other case). He said if the case is not too complicated the HC normally hold early hearing at amission stage and finish off matter within 2 or 3 hearings.

Rajendra

[sidmis]

It's upto the Registrar to obtain the information . He is empowered to do that under such law.

There's grey line though. Some one was arguing that the Public Authority will not ask any information on your behalf. I am not sure.

In this case you urge the Registrar to take whatever action he considers applicable within 30 days. Thereafter you have no other option to file 2nd Appeal .

You first exhaust the RTI route before going to court.

He said if the case is not too complicated the HC normally hold early hearing at amission stage and finish off matter within 2 or 3 hearings.

Dear Rajendra,

Do you trust your Advocate that much. Can you get a written letter from him that the case will finish within 2/3 hearing? I have not much idea about court hearings. But I hear that a single hearing can take as much as 6 months and more.

[rajub]

Originally Posted by sidmis

Dear Rajendra,

Do you trust your Advocate that much. Can you get a written letter from him that the case will finish within 2/3 hearing? I have not much idea about court hearings. But I hear that a single hearing can take as much as 6 months and more.

Dear Sidmis,

No litigation is 100% guaranteed for success. I had advised some of my friends to be suspicious of the lawyers when they(lawyers) said success is guaranteed.

We have to take the informed decision. We also know that there are absolutely ridiculous IC decisions.

But your advice is quite correct that before going to court one should exhaust all the options under RTI .

In the present case if the info required is too sensitive then I think the coop society may not give up easily. And they have very strong point of high court stay as a pretence for refusal.

Hence I said earlier the applicant has to take the informed decision considering all the possible outcomes.

But I reiterate "your opinion that first RTI route should be exhauseted has quite a weight".

Regards

Rajendra

[sidmis]

In this case you urge the Registrar to take whatever action he considers applicable within 30 days. Thereafter you have no other option to file 2nd Appeal.

Actually I made a mistake here.
It should read as 1st Appeal.

[sandeepbaheti]

Under RTI you cannot force the registrar to collect information from other PA. It all depends on the co-operation of the registrar. Try to involve him, tell him about why you need the information and try to get his sympathy. Then he may be willing to use his powers to get the information .

If you file a first appeal against the registrar, he can easily escape by saying that the information was not held by him and he could not have forwarded the application due to high court order. Also he will not be interested to help you any more.
So I suggest you should seek his co-operation and not appeal against him.

[jps50]

Thank you all for the interest. Now a days U have to "buy" cooperation from govt officers. The point was, whether we can compel the registrar to suck the info under sec 2 [ f ] or not. Guj High Court stay is not on sec 2 [f ]. It is on treating coop societies/banks as public authority under RTI . Recently Karnataka H.C. has ruled that coop societies are not PA. 2 [f ] is applicable to private bodies and not PA. Hence HC stay has no relevance to my friend's appln. He would be moving first appeal shortly.

[sandeepbaheti]

I think you cannot compel the PIO to suck any information . PIO is bound to provide only whatever information is available with him or under the control of his PA. If cooperative societies were to be considered a PA then he was bound to forward the application to them. But since they cannot be considered as PA so he cannot forward.

[jps50]

Section 2 [f] reads as under:
(f)”information" means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force;
My contention is that PIO is bound to supply "INFORMATION" [other than barred under sec 8 ] under RTI Act. The word information includes information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force. He has to supply what ever he is already having plus remaining items which need to be pulled under societies act. My friend has not asked any info which cannot be obtained by sub-registrar under coop societies act. There cannot be discretion.