I appreciate your effort but as per opinion, this will not have any
effect until u quote some of the judgements. a useful judgement is
appended. Please quote this judgement in your request.
regards
sandeep
On 6/26/11, Pradip Pradhan <pradippradhan63@gmail.com> wrote:
> * *
> *Dear friends*
> *Orissa Information Commission has adopted illegal practice of arbitarily
> disposing and closing the complaint and 2nd appeal cases without hearing
> which has generated a lot of discontement among the citizens in the state.
> In this context, I have written a ** letter ( mentioned below) in protest
> to Orissa Chief Information Commissioner requesting him to review the
> illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the cases of Complaint and
> 2ndappeal and compelling the complainants and appellants to come
> through 1
> st appeal again. *
> **
> * I request all of you to write the same with modification, if needed to
> the Chief Information Commissioner (scic.or@nic.in) in the following
> address.*
>
> * *
>
> *Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra*
>
> *Odisha Chief Information Commissioner*
>
> *Toshali Bhawan, Satya nagar*
>
> *Bhubaneswar, Orissa*
>
> * *
>
> *Regards*
>
> *Pradip Pradhan*
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> *Odisha Soochana Adhikar Abhijan*
>
> *VIM- 316, Sailashree Vihar, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar*
>
> E-mail-
> odishasoochanaadhikar@gmail.com, Web- www.orissarti.com
>
>
>
>
>
> To
>
> *Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra,*
>
> *State Chief Information Commissioner, Orissa*
>
> *Bhubaneswar*
>
>
>
> Sub- *Request to review the illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the
> cases of Complaint and 2nd appeal and compelling the complainants and
> appellants to come through 1st appeal again*
>
>
>
> Dear Sir,
>
>
>
>
>
> Over a few months now, a good number of Appellants and Complainants from
> across the state including myself have felt surprised after receiving the
> orders of Orissa Information Commission whereby our cases were unilaterally
> disposed and closed by the Commission by way of remanding them back to the
> 1st Appellate Authority along with a direction to the latter to provide the
> information within one month of the order so received. Besides, as per the
> said order, in case the complainants/appellants would fail to get the
> required information from the 1st appellate authority in stipulated time,
> they could again approach the Commission by way of filing a 2nd appeal
> afresh.
>
>
>
> It needs to be mentioned here that to start with the aggrieved RTI
> applicants had lodged their respective complaints or second appeals around a
> year back in the hope of getting justice from the Commission. After the
> said cases remained pending for long in the office of Commission, we find to
> our dismay that the Commission without bothering to hear the concerned
> parties as required under the Act has arbitrarily and unilaterally disposed
> and closed hundreds of such cases by way of remanding them to the
> 1stAppellate Authority. Further it has been noticed that in most of
> such cases
> the concerned appellate authorities have neither cared to hear the cases nor
> ensured the supply of information to the concerned applicants as directed by
> the Commission.
>
>
>
> As a result, a large number of complainants and appellants are now bitterly
> frustrated and hopeless about the role of Orissa Information Commission. The
> alternative option of approaching the Commission through a 2nd appeal again
> as suggested by the Commission is not only costly and time consuming, but
> also highly uncertain since they do not know when the repeat of their
> 2ndappeals would be taken up by the Commission for hearing and
> disposal.
>
>
>
> It is pertinent here to visit Section 18 (1) of the RTI Act, as per which
> any person being aggrieved by non-supply of information or by supply of
> false, incomplete or misleading information is entitled to directly lodge a
> complaint before the Commission. Thus the Commission is duty bound to
> receive the complaints and adjudicate them through a due process of law. The
> RTI Act has nowhere allowed the Commission to remand the complaints for
> decision by the 1st appellate authority, which is covered under Section
> 19(1) of the Act. If necessary the Commission may take up some deserving
> cases for further enquiry as required under Section 18 (3) of the Act before
> taking a decision in the matter.
>
>
>
> Similarly, Orissa Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules 2006 has
> clearly laid down that the Commissions shall issue notices to both parties
> for giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard before pronouncing
> its decision in open proceedings.
>
>
>
> But it is woefully surprising that the Commission without hearing both
> parties adopts the short-circuited path of disposing and closing the cases
> arbitrarily and unilaterally.
>
>
>
> Besides, the Commission's hot-haste manner of closing the cases is not only
> a clear violation of the RTI Act but also an attack on natural justice, to
> which the Information Commissioners of Orissa have been paying lip-service.
> Moreover, the question arises, when the Commissioners provide several
> opportunities of hearing in a row to the defaulting PIOs, why shouldn't they
> hear at least for once the complainant or appellant before remanding their
> cases back to the 1st appellate authority?
>
>
>
> The huge pendency of cases, around 12,000in number in the office of the
> Commission is no doubt a matter of the concern. Presumably it may be a
> strategy of the Commission to dispose the cases quickly in order to reduce
> the pendency. But our experience of last five years tells that it is the
> lack of efficiency, knowledge and forthrightness among the Information
> Commissioners in respect of adjudicating the cases as per the letter and
> spirit of the RTI Act which is mainly responsible for increasing load of
> pending cases in the office of the Commission. Besides, their casual
> attitude towards cases coupled with their temptation to appear as speakers
> and guests in the so-called awareness programmes, which is clearly in
> violation of RTI Act are the additional factors responsible for growing
> pendency of cases.
>
>
>
>
>
> Moreover, as compared to the rate of disposal of the cases by the
> Information Commissioners in different states and at the centre, Orissa
> Commissioners' rate of disposal is very poor, though Orissa Commission is
> more than adequately staffed and funded by the Government compared to other
> Commissions.. I may suggest to you to review the real reasons behind
> pendency of the cases in the office of the State Commission.
>
> .
>
> It is our well considered view that If the Commission at the present
> juncture continues to close the cases in such arbitrary manner as already
> indicated, it will not only destroy the letter and spirit of RTI Act but
> also kill the interest of the people in using it. Thus the dream of ushering
> in of a transparent and accountable system of governance by the use of RTI
> Act shall ever remain a distant dream for the people of Orissa.
>
>
>
> We therefore request you to review once again all the cases arbitrarily
> disposed and closed and stop at once indulging in such illegal practice. May
> we further suggest that the Commissioners should devote more time and
> energy to properly hear and dispose the cases on day-to-day basis so that
> their disposal rate shall register a remarkable increase in days to come and
> the people at large can have a better feel of the Commission as a true
> watchdog of RTI Act in our State.
>
>
>
> *Regards*
>
> *Pradip Pradhan *
>
> * Date- 26.6.2011*
>
--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181
No comments:
Post a Comment