1) Let us restrict ourselves to the case of sanctioned building approval plans. The Maharashtra Govt / BMC had previously settled the price of COPY of such plans at Rs 230 per plan.
2) It is very likely that such plans are either large photocopies in A0 size or blueprints in large sizes for which no fees have been prescribed.
3) So the question of application of Rule 4(1)(A)(b) for supplying at Rs.2 per page does not arise. The second part of this rule is consistent with Rule 4(1)(A)(a) and the approved plan copy will be provided at Rs. 230 irrespective of which Rule (a) or (b) is followed.
4) I recall what our member CA Rakesh Gupta had once queried, why should photocopies be given at Rs. 2 per page when the market price is 50p ?
5) BTW the Maharashtra rules are consistent with section 4 "All materials shall be disseminated .. easily accessible .. available free or at such cost of the medium or the print cost price as may be prescribed.". (Correlate with "readily available"). In a discretionary situation ("or") the PIO is allowed to compute the cost to his advantage and you cannot complain.
6) The Maharashtra SIC's website is entirely in Marathi so where did you locate an English version ? Who is the SPIO of the MSIC ?
Sarbajit
--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, Sunil Ahya <sunilahya@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> With reference to the Maharashtra Right to Information Rules, 2005, made by
> the Maharashtra (appropriate) government under section 27(2) of the RTI Act,
>
> I have copy pasted below Rule 4 (1) (A) *(a) & (b)* of the said Rules,
>
> Rule 4(1):
>
> (A)(a) when the concerned Department has already fixed the price of
> some documents,
> maps, etc.
>
> The price so fixed* plus *postal charges.
>
>
>
> (b) when the information is readily available, either by way of
> photocopying, or by other way (copy).
>
> (i) rupees two for each page(in A-4 or A-3 size paper) created or* copied
> plus* postal charges; or
>
> (ii) actual charge or cost price of a copy in large size paper
> *plus*postal charges.
>
> It seems, use of the following words in Rule 4(1) is ambiguous and lacks
> clarity:
>
> "already fixed" in *Rule 4 (1) (A) (a), *
>
> "readily available", & "created" in *Rule 4 (1) (A) (b),*
> *
> In the event, when both the conditions occur simultaneously i.e. a PA has
> already fixed a price for a particular info and also the same is readily
> available for photocopying:
> *
> On one hand, a PA would invoke Rule 4 (1) (A) (a) if charges for the
> requested information are *already fixed* by them irrespective of whether
> the information is readily available for photocopying,
> *
> *
> Whereas on the other hand an applicant would invoke Rule 4 (1) (A) (b)
> suggesting that if the requested information *is readily available for
> photocopying*,(why charge more) then the prescribed A-4, A-3 or if larger
> than that, actual cost incurred for photocopying should be recovered,
> irrespective of the charges prescribed by the PA for the same.
>
> I think, a clarification from the Maharashtra General Administration
> Department (GAD) needs to be sought, with a request to issue a Memorandum /
> GR in this regard.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sunil.
> --
> It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen -
> Aristotle
>
No comments:
Post a Comment