Tuesday 18 August 2015


I have been writing a series of blogs RTIA (Right to Information Act)- Exposing the Idiots and Traitors amoung Public Servants. Since our courts are unapproachable for the mango people the only thing I could do was to share my experiences with the public at large. But even media doesn't support honest efforts to share these kind of experiences though it is well known that such experiences are very common and has been worse than cancer as far as the society is concerned.

I have posted the following documents as blogs indicated against them:

1. My application, dated 19/9/2013, under the RTI Act to the Railways seeking info on the updated status of Road Over Bridges and Road Under Bridges (ROB/RUB) under construction in Palakkad/Salem Divisions. This document is at http://www.slideshare.net/raviforjustice/rti-rlyspkd-salem-divbridgesfup130919appln

2. There was no response from the Public Information Officer (PIO) or from the 1st Appellate Authority. Hence the 2nd appeal was filed with the Central Information Commission on 9/1/14. This document is available at http://www.slideshare.net/raviforjustice/rti-rlyspkd-salem-divbridgesfup1309192nd-appeal090114 Please note Para 6 of this appeal.

3. The decision of Vijay Sharma, Chief Information Commissioner, Central Information Commission is at http://www.slideshare.net/raviforjustice/rti-rlyspkd-salem-divbridgesfup130919cic-order0807110815

It is to be noted that he has totally neglected the major part of the application and ordered provision of information pertaining to only paras 3.1 and 3.2 of the application! Even para .3 has been neglected!

Ultimately, even while ordering provision of part of the information, no action has been taken to penalise the defaulting PIO under Sec 209 of the RTI Act.

In this context your attention is also invited to a similar case, actually the predecessor of the current series of activities- the first time I sought info on the status of work on the ROBs and RUBs in the same division in 2007. The Information Commissionor who decided the 2nd appeal then was Annapurna Dixit. Though the IC had not given the absolutely correct order then it was by far the best order I have seen from an IC. The short coming was in calculating the period for which penalty had to be imposed. The delay had to be worked out from the date of submitting the application and not from the IC's first order! Anyhow this order is available at http://www.slideshare.net/raviforjustice/the-best-order-by-an-information-commissioner-under-the-right-to-information-act

4. Ultimately the letter from the PIO, complying with the treacherous order of the CIC is at http://www.slideshare.net/raviforjustice/rti-rlyspkd-salem-divbridgesfup130919cic-ordercompliance110815

5. Sec 219 of the Indian Penal Code is given below:

Public servant in judicial proceeding corruptly making report, etc contrary to law-
whoever being a public servant, corruptly or maliciously makes or pronounces in any stage of a judicial proceeding, any report, or order verdict, or decision which he knows to be contrary to law shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extent to seven years or with fine or with both.

6. Now it is for the discerning and responsible members of the public readin this blog to do what they can do.

P M Ravindran

No comments:

Post a Comment