Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 8 of 12

Thread: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS

  1. Question ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS


    Mitron Namaskar,
    Though quite old member, this is 1st posting.
    1. Information seekers, the applicants, are invariably the tortured persons and are alone, while the information furnishing person has an army of personnel for his support, who are expert in advocacy and very often practicing advocates. Result is that the applicant is in the disadvantageous position and the Respondent successfully misguides the CIC/SIC, and the applicant is deprived of Justice. I feel the Commissioner should virtually act as advocate for the applicant. It should also b fathomed if procedure for review of the Judgment b incorporated in the Act.

    2. An scrutiny of Judgments shows that the Sec. 19 & 20 of the Act are not being invoked by the CIC/SIC even in the most deserving cases. This leniency is responsible for encouragement to not furnish the information or to furnish quite late, to furnish irrelevant, caigey, incomplete and wrong information, forcing the applicant to waste time/energy/money in attending the commission office times and again, for which he is not compensated.

    3. Judgments of CIC/SIC are not consistent. Variation is seen in the attitude of commissioner to commissioner or sometimes the concerned respondent, while the judgment should be like mathematics where 2+2 is always 4, as the Act is very clear and precise.

    With regards, opinion of fellow members shall be keenly awaited

    aamaadmi



  2. Re: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS


    Its only 2 years of RTI. With activists pushing for the effective use of right, things will improve. 60 year old mind set will take some time and public push to improve. Let us keep on keeping on. In India, unfortunately good things take time to get rooted in the system and mindframe. Lage Raho......
    It takes each of us to make difference for all of us.

  3. Re: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS


    aamadmi ji,

    You are 100% correct, I totally agree with you.

    rakatkam

  4. #4

    Re: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS



    Dear aamaadmiji,
    Even in the High Courts of various States, Supreme Courts are producing various judgements WITH DIFFERENCES BETWEEN JUDGE TO JUDGE for the Labour laws relates to 1926, Constitution of India, service rules etc. In all that also the result is not like mathematics. Same act, same rules but judgement varies from judge to judge. But our presentation of our dispute is very important. As far as RTI Act is concerned, the result we expect will improve within a spell of years as mentioned by jps50, since all the commissioners are not law graduates.
    SAMPATH.S

  5. Re: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS


    I second your views but with one point of difference:
    I feel the Commissioner should virtually act as advocate for the applicant.
    I think the commissioners should act judiciously based on the facts and circumstances of the case and within the framework of the Act. This should be sufficient and this is what is expected of them.

  6. #6
    Posts
    1,057
    Name:
    rajendra bakre
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    21

    Re: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS


    Quote Originally Posted by aamaadmi View Post
    I feel the Commissioner should virtually act as advocate for the applicant.
    In the appeal before SIC/CIC the applicant is expected to furnish the grounds for his prayer.

    The applicant may be an ordinary "illeterate" citizen. How can he furnish legal grounds for his request ? Even highly qualified appellants find it a daunting task to prepare an appeal (even application).

    The Act expects PIOs to be of helping nature. Writing the application for applicant if he cannot write it, making all possible efforts to help applicant.

    Then why SIC/CIC should not be helping nature ? Why they themselves should not find legal grounds for the prayer of appellant after he puts all the facts in his appeal.

    On the contrary it appears ICs are often tough against appellants so far as liberal interpretation of provisions of Act is concerned whereas very soft and lenient towards PAs in interpretation.

    If this sunshine law has to really shine not only the mindsets of ICs but appeal rules be changed.

    Once all the facts are presented by the appellant it should be the duty of the IC to find the legal grounds if the facts so suggest.

  7. #7

    Re: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS


    Grounds need not necessarily be legal grounds only. They can be factual grounds. They can be broad principles which even an illiterate person can make out if he is aggrieved. Literacy is not a prerequisite for logical argument!

  8. #8
    Posts
    1,057
    Name:
    rajendra bakre
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    21

    Re: ADVOCACY AT CIC/SIC and NON CONSISTANCY IN JUDGMENTS


    Quote Originally Posted by taurus View Post
    Grounds need not necessarily be legal grounds only. They can be factual grounds. They can be broad principles which even an illiterate person can make out if he is aggrieved. Literacy is not a prerequisite for logical argument!
    The appeal before IC must contain following items

    1) The brief facts leading to the appeal

    2) The grounds for prayer

    The prayer invariably contains the demand that information be supplied.

    What can be the grounds when facts leading to the appeal are already given? Are they not various sections of RTI Act ? Are they not legal grounds ?

    If a farmer wants to know whether any road was sanctioned from main road to his village or not and he gets a cryptic reply that under so and so provisions of RTI Act the information cannot be provided or is not available etc. Is he expected to establish legal niceties that the information is not exempted under the Act ? Almost every decision of IC reflects fierce legal battle if the PIO is adamant in not providing the information.

    Thus it is my humble and firm opinion that IC must act appellant friendly taking upon himself the responsibility of supplying the necessary grounds (legal or otherwise) for the request/prayer.

    I do not agree with the contention that if a person is aggrieved he should be able to give broad principles (except that I need this information).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


About RTI INDIA

    RTI INDIA: Invoking Your Rights. We provide easy ways to request, analyze & share Government documents by use of Right to Information and by way of community support.

Follow us on

Twitter Facebook RSS Feed Apple App Store Google Play for Android