The Public Authority claimed that records were eaten by the termite and the same could not be provided. It is pathetic to note that such an important department like “Department of Legal Affairs” comes up with an explanation that it could not give information as records were eaten away by termite, notes Central Information Commission. It was directed to produce termite eaten records.
It sadly reflects the state of notary/legal records. Notary Public is an important public functionary which documents certain activities for the purpose of legal consideration of transactions in the court of law. If notaries claim that their records are not produced to regulatory or contend that they are eaten away by termite, it gives rise to serious suspicion about the genuineness of concerned notary transactions, which the public authority is duty bound to check.
The Public authority and the notary are under a legal duty to protect and preserve such records/registers. If records are truly eaten away the termite, they owe an explanation to the people why they failed to prevent it. They also have a duty to give Read more ›
In a Central Information Commission hearing it was advised to Railways Recruitment Board advised not to destroy examination copy during the pendency of a RTI appeal. It was advised by CIC to Change their record retention policy so that a marksheet which is under consideration in an appeal under RTI Act is not destroyed.
It was also advised to put on Railway website basic details about every examination after the results are declared e.g. copy of question paper, key answersheet, cut off marks etc.
The RTI Applicant has south information on the total marks obtained, copies of question paper and key answersheet, copy of OMR answer sheet and cutoff marks merit of General, OBC & SC/ST categories in the above examination. Read more ›
Delhi Government 38 Departments are allowing Ping Pong with RTI Applications, claims the RTI Applicant. A senior Citizen RTI Application asking for handicapped pension for his wife was transferred to 29 Public Information Officers (PIOs). Among those authorities, some of them transferred the application to each other. The issue is in fact, multiple transfers of the RTI application from CM office to a number of PIOs, spending huge amount of money on the correspondence and yielding nothing.
Can Govt spend public money on such purposeless transfers? There appears to be a serious governance crisis as the appellant and the citizens similarly placed, are not getting any information under the RTI Act from Delhi Government, noted CIC.
Applicant stated that “When the question was nonpayment of pension, it is supposed to be decided by the office of the CM, and it cannot simply shirk its responsibility by transferring the RTI application to the MCD”. Read more ›
While obtaining information regarding details of selected candidates of economically weaker sections (EWS) from Doon Public School the PIO alleged that RTI Applicant has threatened her saying that “My dekhunga, my kuch karunga” and that applicant is not having any public interest behind his RTI applications. The RTI applicant denied all the allegations made by the officer and further stated that he is heading an NGO and all his activities are for public interest.
The Commission having heard the submissions and perused the record directed the PIO/Education, West B District to provide point wise revised information to the appellant. The EWS Form is for application in Delhi can be downloaded from here formstore.in Read more ›
Department of Personnel and Training , Director IR has invited views/suggestions from the citizens on the draft guidelines regarding elements that a RTI reply should essentially contain by 16.04.2015. through email at email@example.com. You can visit our forum here and post your views/suggestion for improvement.
The draft format has been vetted by Ministry of Law and Justice and contains following elements:
- The name, designation, official telephone number and email ID of the CPIO
- In case the information requested for is denied, detailed reasons for denial quoting the relevant sections of the RTI Act should be clearly mentioned.
- In case the information pertains to other public authority and the application is transferred under section 6 (3) of the RTI Act, details of the public authority to whom the application is transferred should be given.
- In the concluding para of the reply, it should be clearly mentioned that the First Appeal, if any, against the reply of the CPIO may be made to the First Appellate Authority within 30 days of receipts of reply of CPIO.
- The name, designation, address, official telephone number and e-mail ID of the First Appellate Authority should also be clearly mentioned.
- In addition, wherever the applicant has requested for ‘certified copies’ of the documents or records, the CPIO should endorse on the document “True copy of the document/record”. sign the document with date, above a seal containing name of the officer, CPIO (in place of designation) and name of public authority.
Read more ›