Commission’s Decision: 3. Until the prescribed fee of Rs.10/- is paid in the form of valid instruments, namely cash, bank draft or IPO, the RTI Act would not get invoked. The complainant is, therefore, advised to deposit the RTI fees, as above, to obtain the required information.
Yes, I had a look at this decision besides several others earlier. If you observe closely, it looks like the hearing was never held at all.
CIC decisions, being of quasi judicial nature, should be speaking orders. There are no details on the nature of the information asked etc.
An important note, I would like to ask the PIOs who might be reading this is that, next time you write to an applicant to pay the Rs.10/- fee, never forget to mention the BPL Certificate. Of course, it cannot apply to the current CIC decision referred to by Karira, as the applicant is an advocate from Shivpuri. Maybe he had some trick up his sleeve.
Advocates can also be under BPL !
At least my advocate always cribs that he is poor.
(He He He He He He He, LOL)
Jokes appart, advocates have to enroll under the Bar Council. Recent membership is slightly high now. Besides, they have a lot of welfare measuers etc. So in very rare case, would they actually hold a BPL Card.
if one is found holding a BPL card, i think it is time to use RTI to find out how on earth he managed to get it.
that apart, it was a wonderful discussion. but whats the result? when do the 30 days start?
to my knowledge and understanding, it would be 30 days from the reciept of complete request and no request is complete without the fees prescribed. further, if the PIO intimates the applicant to pay additional fee for providing information, then as per section 7(3)(a) "the period intervening between the despatch of the said intimation and payment of fees shall be excluded for the purpose of calculating the period of thirty days referred to.."
so as per example given by Mr. mpai in the post numbered 5 in this thread, the period of 30 days commences on 11th may and expires on 15th June. by 15th june, the information has to be provided.
the following post may please be checked in this context. can anybody provide the actual decision? the post reports a CIC decision that the information has to be provided within 30 days from the date of request and not from the date of payment of fees prescribed.
The argument given by CIC Mr Habibullah is:
Appellate Authority Shri Thakur’s claim that the time limit begins to apply only
from the date of receipt of the fees is without basis in law. Under Sec. 7(1), on
receipt of a request u/s 6, the CPIO shall as expeditiously as possible and in any
case within 30 days of the receipt of the request provide the information on
payment of such fee as may be prescribed. It is, therefore, clear that whereas
the information may be provided only once the fee is received, it is not
open to the CPIO to begin process of the application for information from
the date the fee is received.
Basically, he feels that the PIO should have the information "ready" within 30 days, and give it to the applicant when the fees are received.
Thanks manoj for pointing it out. It's back, but the earlier one had an exploit which might have compromised the database, hence removed. The only disadvantage as of now is that all thanks are rest to 'Zero'. It's the beginning again