[HumJanenge] Mal-functioning of Odisha Information Commission (1)

Mal-functioning of Odisha Information Commission (1)

A Case in Point (CC No- 4279/11, 4277/11)

Arbitrary disposal and closure of cases without ensuring information to the Complainants with two types of direction in a similar case.

 

Dear friends

 

Mr. Sanjay Panda of Rourkela had  submitted RTI Application to the PIO, office of Tahasildar, Ghumsar, Bhanjanagar, Ganjam district seeking some information about amount of compensation paid to the farmers on account of crop losses in 2011.  Finding no response,  Mr. Panda lodged  the complaint to the Odisha Information Commission  seeking justice.  His Complaint Case No. is CC No- 4279/11

 

Similarly, Nandita Panda of Rourkela had submitted an RTI Application to the PIO of the self-same office of Tahasildar seeking exactly the same information. Her Complaint case No. is CC 4277/11.

 

On 31.1.2012, Mr. Pramod Kumar Mohanty, State Information Commissioner without hearing either of the complaint petitions so lodged, did simply remand them to the First Appellate Authority of the above office to comply and also closed the cases mentioning "With this  direction,  the matter is closed at the Commission's level."

 

It is strange to learn that though the information sought was same and the office from which it was sought same in both the cases, the Commission on deciding each case separately gave directions which ran contradictory to each other. In the decision on CC No. 4277/11,  the Commission  says " if the complainant is not satisfied  with the orders of the First Appellate Authority , he is free to file a Second Appeal  before the State Commission  once again  under section 19(3) of the RTI Act.  But in the decision on the other case ( CC No- 4279/11) , the Commission says, "  if the complainant is not satisfied  with the orders of the First Appellate Authority , he is free to file a Second Appeal  before the State Commission  once again  under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act.  The Commission further directs  the Appellate Authority  to obtain  the explanation  of PIO in writing  for not providing  the information  in time  and forward the same  to the Commission  with his comments  within a period of  30 days, after which  the Commission  will take a decision  regarding  imposition of penalty  as per Section 20(1) of the RTI Act."

 

Here the question arises, why the Commission gives two contradictory decisions in identical cases? Is it not a glaring instance of arbitrariness and mindlessness on the part of Orissa Information Commission in the matter of deciding the cases?

Thanks

Pradip Pradhan

M-99378-43482

Date- 23.2.2012