Irrespective of the views expressed above, is there any way out other than complaining to the Public Authority concerned when the PIO does not obey the SIC's orders, the SIC does not wish to press him further or does not want to direct the Public Authority to intiiate action on the criminal misconduct of the PIO ? I means can the appellant proceed with filing a criminal suit against the PIO starting with Notice under Section 80 CPC ?
Thanks for writing in. The hearings subsequent to my last post has been quite disheartening. This case has been heard at the UPSIC almost 7 times over a period more than 12 months now. The PIO/ APIO GNIDA didn't even bother to appear even once in any of the hearings despite all the "strict" orders of the Learned SIC. On the 5th hearing the Judge who was following my case was on leave so the New Judge who heard his cases on that day kind of avoided pronouncing a decision despite all the glaring facts. When I pointed out that it is almost an year since appealing and its time now to pull up the erring officials by initiating action [punishment] against them u/s 20 of RTI act and u/s 176, 177, 186, 187, 188 and 288 of IPC for contempt against the officials, I was aghast when the learned Judge replied the IPC sections are not admissible under RTI... I provided the Judge with various case reference provided by this forum where notices relating to action under the above mentioned sections of IPC has been issued by the CIC, the Judge simply remarked its still not time for such action. Also disturbing was his statement.. ".. so what if its 12 months that the case has dragged... we must give the PIO and APIO a chance to defend themselves...." before dismissing me for the day... I wonder if ever my case will qualify for some serious looking into... At The GNIDA its jungle rule and run by a mafia of corrupt builders and GNIDA officials... GNIDA has officially stated in one of their uncertified copies of replies to my querries that Building Bye Laws and Regulations are a farce at Greater Noida and are only meant to be on the papers only and not followed.... I've shown this reply to the learned Judge... but, if even if this kind of a statement fails to move the learned judges to initiate action against the corrupt, inept, unscrupulous elements in the offices of authority... I wonder if any thing will ever work to make them sit up... The seventh hearing was adjourned because the Judge was on leave again..... I wasted a full day in Lucknow and I've never felt my time so wasted..... The next hearing is on September ... and I now plan to file an RTI application with the UPSIC asking them waht prevents them from taking any action against the PIO/ APIO as pointed out by me in my various representations to the UPSIC in this regard.... I only fear that after filing the application I my become a victim of Vendetta of the UPSIC..... so far so much... I'm kinda lot of disappointed with the whole system of functioning of the RTI... Come what may I intend to see this case to its logical ends come what may.... all suggestions from the members of the forum are welcome.... pls do advise
Thursday , May 01, 2008 at 02:06:23
Updated: Thursday , May 01, 2008 at 02:06:23 Print Email To Editor Post Comments
New Delhi, May 1: It is a sorry state of affairs in Uttar Pradesh on the Right to Information (RTI) front, with close to half of the over 9,000 appeals and complaints made in a year yet to be disposed.
Between April 2006 and March 2007, the total number of appeals and complaints made under the transparency law stood at 9,946. And of these, a total number of 4,088 appeals and complaints were pending disposal.
The information was given in a reply to an application filed by RTI activist Retired Commodore Lokesh K Batra to the Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission (UPSIC).
Batra had originally filed an RTI application with the UPSIC under Section 25 of the Act, which makes it mandatory for all State Information Commissions and the Central Information Commission to furnish reports on the implementation of law.
But he did not get the desired information even after filing the same RTI for two consecutive years.
In 2007, the UPSIC replied that the required information could not be provided, as the report of the Commission for the last year had not been prepared.
"Due to acute paucity of staff, no such statement could be prepared by the Commission as desired by you so far nor it is still in such a position as to prepare and provide the same in near future," was the reply the RTI activist got.
Not ready to give up, Batra filed another RTI plea to know the monthly disposal of appeals and complaints with the UPSIC.
"The results were surprising. Cases accumulated despite the state having the highest number of information commissioners, which is the opposite of what should have happened," he said.
"If this is the state in one year, then imagine the number of cases pending now (since the implementation of the RTI act)," Batra asked.
A comparison of the website of the UPSIC (www.upsic.up.nic.in) and the CIC (cic.gov.in) clearly indicates poor implementation of Section 4 of the Act, which makes it mandatory for the Commission to keep its website updated on the progress made on the complaints.
"The UPSIC has failed to maintain the required data in the website in compliance of the Act," he said.
When contacted, Chief Commissioner, UPSIC, Justice M A Khan accepted paucity of staff as a reason for not maintaining documentation of the information and not updating the website.
He said: "We do not have either proper infrastructure or manpower. We have ten information commissioners and we work on a rotational basis. We gets lots of cases, but then we do not have basic staff like data operator or web designer."
"Seeing the poor state of the SIC, the IAS officers are reluctant to continue working with us," Khan said.
Batra said: "If this lackadaisical attitude comes from the State Information Commission, who are the highest authorities for taking to task the public authority, there will be no check on the public authorities and the administration of the state too," Batra said.
Above article I have posted just to give an inkling of UPSIC affairs .And what Lokesh Batra has stated are hard facts ,but at the same time only a tip of iceberg.
As for Noida (Greater Noida Included) ,this stretch/town is the most cash rich jewel in the crown of any UP Govt and therefore any inconvenient queries regarding Noida Authority's functioning are ignored disdainfully.