section 19 and 23
This is a discussion on section 19 and 23 within the Ask for RTI Query forums, part of the RTI Community Support category; dear members i would like to have the clarifications on the following point u/s 19 and section 23 of the act. 1. is there a time limitation in the act ...
- 07-13-2012, 05:53 AM #1Just Popping In
- Join Date
- May 2012
section 19 and 23
i would like to have the clarifications on the following point u/s 19 and section 23 of the act.
1. is there a time limitation in the act for disposal of secon appeal.?
2. u/s 19 (6) the act stipulates a time limit of maximum 45 days from yje date of receipt for the disposal of the first appeal and similarily is there any time limit for the disposal of second appeal.
3. can any appellant seek the justification provided u/s 19 (5) by a PIO to the first appeal authority for denying the request under separate RTI application.
4. section 23 stipulates that no court shall entertain any application on the order. i would like to be enligtned on this. how one can get his grievences redressed when he is not satisfied with the decisions of the first and second appeal and when there is material evidences are available in support the same of which has not been considered in both the appeals or came to light after the diposal of appeals. i have series of RTI application pending which are partly disposed and i am contemplating a writ in the supreme court /high court to direct the PIO to provide these infrmations. the bank is getting away with the second appeal by providing misleading information when the second appeal is heared where the time limitation is only 15 minutes given for the proceedings.
- 07-13-2012, 08:26 AM #2
1 members found this post helpful.
Re: section 19 and 23
2. Section 19(6) does prescribe the time-limit for disposal of First Appeals, but again there is no similar provision for disposal of Second Appeals.
3. As per section 19(5) of the RTI Act, in any appeal proceedings (i.e. first appeal, second appeal or for that matter an appeal before a court of law) the onus (burden of proof) to prove that a denial of a request was justified shall be on the PIO, who denied the request.
So, one may file a RTI application seeking a photocopy of justification of denial submitted by a PIO during the course of appeal proceedings in compliance with section 19(5) of the RTI Act.
But ideally an applicant should invoke (make use of) this provision in the appeals itself, especially during the course of hearings of appeal proceedings .
4. Any provision of an Act (Central or State) which violates the basic structure of the Constitution of India is likely to be quashed by the Courts under the well established Doctrine of Judicial Review.
A 13 Judge Constitutional bench formulated under Chief Justice Sikri has defined the Basic Structure of the Constitution of India in detail in Kesavananda Bharti V. State Of Kerela (AIR 1973 SC 1461).
One of the features of the Basic Structure of the Constitution is that every aspect of governance will be governed by three branches namely, The Legislature, The Executive & The Judiciary.
Section 23 of the RTI Act which bars the jurisdiction of Courts, violates the basic structure of the Constitution and as such its practical applicability is null and void.
For further reading on the subject of section 23, please click on the following link: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/blogs/...-act-2005.html
Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence - John Coolidge