In response to his appeal before the Commission, the UIDAI, Hyderabad called up the Applicant and provided an e-Adhaar copy to his satisfaction. The CIC also let go UIDAI by treating appeal as withdrawn. Earlier, Dr. Ravhuvir Prasad Mathur, has filed the appeal before the Commission against the respondent Unique Identification Authority (UIDAI), Hyderabad for not providing satisfactory information in response to his RTI-application.
The appellant vide his letter dated 13.12.2013 informed the Commission that in response to his appeal before the Commission, the CPIO, UIDAI, Hyderabad has called him and provided EIN and an e-Adhaar copy for Garima Mathur to his satisfaction and he may be allowed to withdraw his appeal. In view of above submissions of the appellant the instant appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by CIC.
Read more ›
Allegation of corruption ought to be supported by cogent and sound evidence under RTI. Also allegation of corruption’ does not mean mere conjectures and surmises. For the Information commission to frame a prima facie view about corrupt or malpractices being involved in any given case reasonably or to frame a view on the violation of human rights under Proviso (I) to Section 24 of the RTI Act, it should be supported by cogent and sound evidence.
As per the provisions of Section 24 (4) of the RTI Act 2005
“Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisation being organisations established by the State Government, as that Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify:
Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section:
Provided further that in the case of information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the State Information Commission and, notwithstanding anything contained in section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request.” Read more ›
Records are Government property and the retiring police official must handover the relevant records to the concerned staff. In a reply given by CPIO it has stated that the copy of police complaint, enquiry report, statement were with ASI Vinod Kumar then posted at PS Prashant Vihar. He is reported to be retired from Delhi Police. And thus the information cannot be provided. However, complainant went up to CIC for second appeal where it was contended that “police complaint records are Government property. It must be available within the police station. No person/officer can take/dispose of those records when he retires from service as claimed. Records must be handed over to the concerned staff/ SHO at the time of retirement.” Read more ›
The RTI Applicant is advised not to ask unrelated matters in RTI. The CIC while deciding the appeal, ruled that “The appellant is advised to ask for limited information and specific information instead of clubbing various unrelated matters in his RTI applications”. CIC further states number of queries should also be limited. The Public Information Officer cannot be expected to reply to these large number of queries within the time schedule as prescribed under the RTI Act. The delay in reply cannot be totally held against the respondent in view of large number of queries imposed by the appellant through RTI application. Read more ›