[RTI INDIA] Contempt of Court ?

NOTE: To satisfy the rules of cross posting, this post is being made first in this group and parts of the post will be reproduced (copy/pasted - even though I am not IC MA or CIC ANTs Steno) 10 minutes later on www.rtiindia.org 

http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SM_C_2010_000895_M_44471.pdf 

"It is noted that the Complainant did not have an opportunity to go to the

Appellate Authority and has directly approached the Commission with her complaint.

In exercise of powers vested under Section 18(1) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act,

we direct the Appellate Authority to enquire into the allegations made by the

Complainant and after giving her an opportunity of hearing, to pass an appropriate

order with a view to ensuring that the desired information is provided to the

Complainant without any further loss of time.

3. We also direct the Appellate Authority to obtain the explanation of the Branch

Manager/CPIO in writing for not providing the information in time and to forward the

same to us along with his comments before 25 November 2010. We will decide on the

imposition of penalty on the Branch Manager/CPIO in terms of Section 20(1) of the

Right to Information (RTI) Act thereafter."

This is a clear case of the Commission delegating its powers and abdicating its duties under the RTI Act.

The Delhi High Court, while deciding the issue about the CIC Management regulations 2007 had already held:

23. A plain reading of the said Regulation 20 indicates that the

Commission may entrust an inquiry in connection with any appeal or

complaint pending before it to the Registrar or any other officer for the

purpose and the Registrar or such other officer while conducting the inquiry

shall have all the necessary powers, including summoning and enforcing the

attendance of persons, etc. It is apparent, straightway, that the powers which

have been given to the Commission under the RTI Act have been sought to

be delegated to the Registrar or any other officer, who may be appointed for

the purpose of conducting an inquiry. This is clearly impermissible. It is

beyond what has been provided in the Act. There is no question of the

Central Information Commission entrusting an inquiry to the Registrar or to

anybody else. This would be in clear and gross violation of the provisions of

the RTI Act. It would also amount to an abdication by the Commission of

the duties specifically cast upon it by the statute. Regulation 20 is, therefore,

clearly ultra vires the provisions of the RTI Act and is liable to be set aside.

Karira