Dear Col.
7(9) "An information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in which
it is sought unless it would disproportionately divert the resources
of the public authority or would be detrimental to the safety or
preservation of the record in question."
The keywords are "ordinarily", "unless" and "form"
1) The information must (ordinarily) exist in the "form" it is sought.
In your example if the information is in the form of video then the
applicant (ordinarily) must seek it in the form of a video/diskette,
he should not ask for printouts from the video.
2) By the Act, the PIO has some discretion in the matter. He can plead
that it would a) DISPROPORTIONATELY divert the resources of the P/A
(otherwise this is a very wide ranging term) b) endanger the
information. Once he takes one of or both these pleas, then it is open
to him to provide the material in some other form. Of course it can be
challenged in appeal.
3) The usual tactic the PIOs use is to say we are allowing
"inspection" come and select what you want to copy. This tactic is to
be evaluated with care and is NOT to be rejected out of hand. It can
be a "win-win" situation if the citizen is as competent as the PIO and
cooperates with the PIO. OTH, if the applicant is a duffer then the
PIO will escape from his obligations.
4) "Convenience" of the PIO is irrelevant. We must first see the form
in which the information exists, and the ease with which COPIES of the
information can be made to provide to the
applicant against payment. A picture is worth a 1000 words. A CD/video
(at Rs. 50) is much better than 100,000 printouts of every frame
therein at Rs. 2 per page
Sarbajit
On 6/21/10, Col NR Kurup <colnrkurup@gmail.com> wrote:
> Section 7(9) stipulate provision of informtion ordinarily in the form
> in which it is sought. A doubt has arisen whether this provision is
> reciprocative or not i.e., If the PIO consider that provision of the
> information cannot be done in the form in which it is sought on a plea
> that it would disproportionatly divert the resources or would be
> detrimental to the safety or preservation of the record in question;
> is the PIO within his legal parameter if he FULLY PROVIDE THE
> INFORMATION SOUGHT in a different form convenient to the PIO which he
> claim will save him from disproportionately diverting his resources ?
>
> For Eg. A cityzen seek the information in video form The PIO provide
> it in printed form. Does the applicant has any locus standi when he
> insist on its provision in the video form when he has already been
> provided the required information in printed form ?
>
No comments:
Post a Comment