| TIME MANAGEMENT IN RTI As narrated by author | TIME MIS-MANAGEMENT IN RTI As being mis-managed deliberately |
| It is a general argument with in the Government employees that the Right to Information Act 2005 (RTI) takes away their more productive time on just processing the RTI applications and providing information to the applicant who has sought the information under RTI Act. Similarly no training classes of RTI conclude in the absence of such queries like "Is there any mechanism to protect the public servant from Harassment?" | It is not the argument – it is a brute tactics to avoid giving information. Government is spending millions on training, nut the Government Officers designated as Public Information Officer/FAA are not interested in a task that makes them subordinate to the Citizens. |
| In broader sense, the RTI now a day's became a dominating pressure creating workforce in the Government functionaries but it was not so before seven years and the current scenario prevails from Oct 2005, the effective date of implementation of RTI Act 2005. | a dominating pressure creating workforce in the Government functionaries. But the functionaries consider so. It is a matter of attitude. The decade old habits of red-tap ism will not go so easily. More so when this Act enables the citizens to peep deep inside into their own misdeeds |
| When we raise the question about "why RTI is filed in Government departments?", the first and foremost vital answer to get is that there exists some problem. The citizen now finds filing a RTI is a simple route to resolve their problem. In some cases the general public tries to get the information through the source of RTI and approach to the other available channels to resolve their problems. In most of the cases, grievances will be redressed on receipt of RTI applications. | The situation in the non-government sector is not too rosy. It is as grim as in the government sector. Both are hand in Glove with each other. The governance that is at stake at both level. The RTI is not here because Government wanted it. It is the pressure of Human Rights moment and the to remain in the mainstream, government had to succumb to the pressure of UN and global as well domestic Human Right NGOs. The Courts also pronounced such landmark decisions that made Government to succumb to it and people got a wonderful law. |
| In the other hand, the wastage of time in dealing with RTI is mainly due to the lack of Record Management. More time were spent to trace / locate the records which were not been located due to their own poor management record policy. Now this is the time to set right the records which not only easier to locate the information now but also will be useful in the near future to furnish the same when asked in RTI in an efficient manner even after 20 years. | This is not lack of Record Management. It is lack of will to Record Management. Section 4(a) warrants that "maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated;" If records are maintained as warranted, the (dubious) roll of Government Officer will vanish and the Government job will lose its charm and relevance. |
| To overcome the stress on RTI applications, the Public Information Officer (PIO) should deal the RTI application with little care instead passing down to the lower level subordinates, as normal paper been dealt. The PIO is expected to read the application full in DAK stage itself and the information sought is not pertains to the own Public Authority these can be transferred at that stage itself. Five days time limit has been provided to transfer the RTI to another Public Authorities which could be done within two days. | This, as suggested, should be done, but it will not be done as this will be a hole in the Babudom and every citizen would be peeping in. How a same functionary will allow to their deeds in full public glare. Babudom has exploited lacunae in the Right to Information Act 2005 and using them well to scuttle the Right to Information Act 2005.Section 4, Section 6(3), Section 18 & 19 and Section 24 have already made dead by the goons known as combine of Public Information Officer/FAA/ICs (barring some exceptions) |
| The next step is to locate the desired information and also to work out the cost of the same. If any assistance required from other officers under the same Public Authority, the same could be sought immediately. While seeking assistance from other officials / offices, the PIO should seek the specific information sought by the applicant. PIO also obtain the cost of the same information in order to inform to the applicant. | First PIO has no will to do it. Secondly, PIO has no powers to make the other succumb to his desires. Since everybody is in knee deep in corruption, nobody wants that the forte they are holding to, crumbles under RTI (barring some exceptions). There is a whole lot of difference between "should be" and the actual will to do that "should be". If Public Authority/Public Information Officer does exactly that there would had no appeals/complaints to the commissions. And the situations at the Commissions are no better. Most Commissioners are the erstwhile babus and which babu will like to expose his own deeds in public. |
| Instead, most of the PIO were just forwarding the application received from the applicant for further action and in some cases the PIO's were directing other officials to furnish the information directly to the applicant. In this scenario, the PIO's will be liable for facing show cause notices from Central Information Commission (CIC) in the first instance which creates a panic situation in the working place. The lapses by the defaulting officials will be treated as deemed PIO which is at par with the PIO by the CIC in later stage. | The PIOs are least afraid of the Commissions. First the Commissions are avoiding passing just orders. The appeals / complaints are summarily dismissed. Where there is some directions to PIO, those are not complied with. Commissioners do not penalize the PIOs. FAA is a person with no liability, no accountability and scot-free of any penal action if he does not perform. |
| It is also noticed that the PIO's were intimating the details about the cost of information in the fag end of the stipulated period of disposal (30 days). This leads a very meager time left with for taking huge copies as required in the RTI application and the fees paid. Thus it is advisable to keep a cushion of at least week long duration in hand to take photo copies & provide the information. | Whatever PIOs do, they do with a malafide intention and with a view to avoid giving information. Their acts are deliberate and well planned to achieve their nefarious goals. They very well know that theiractions will be supported by the Commissioners too. They are not afraid of the RTI law. |
| The yet another question in the minds of PIO's is that: "Why 30 Days?; Why not more?" There is no specific reasons were made available for fixation of 30 days target time over the shoulders of PIO. It can be justified with the precedence of the times specified earlier. | Had the Commissions enforced this 30-dy clause strictly, there would had a different scenario at all. But the reality on the ground is that commissions are quite different and quite glaring. |
| To view the said justification, one has to travel in a time machine and move in a backward direction up to the period where Ramayana took place. There was a board meeting going on in the monkey's kingdom. Several crucial Management decisions were arrived in that meeting. The main agenda of the meeting was to locate Sita. | This needs no comments as irrelevant to the present prevailing scenario in the PA. |
| The series of Managerial activities were decided are: a. Task Definition (To search & locate Sita) b. Identify the Team Leader (Hanuman has identified as Team Leader) c. Recourses to the Team Leader (Requires resources allocated to the Team Leader to perform the Task) d. Target time ( Only 30 days allowed). The 30 days time period was thought of sufficient in that era where the whereabouts of Sita was not known. The Team Leader also not fully aware of the identity of the Task. (Source: Kamba Ramayana) | This needs no comments as irrelevant to the present prevailing scenario in the PA. |
| While coming back to the RTI regime, the 30 days time has been provided to locate the information which is very well within the Public Authority and the Public Authority is fully aware of whereabouts the information. Thus the 30 days provision is fully justifiable in my view. | It is well known to the PIOs and the Pas. A deliberate attempt is to hoodwink the public and scuttle the law, by not adhering to this time limit. PIOs even goes to the extent that files/record is missing and even go to the extent filing the FIRs, all the while the work relating to the file goes on unabated in the office. |
| Hope this article may help to reduce the stress over the handling of RTI applications. If you need more details feel free to contact over mail in | Who cares about the RTI and the provisions therein, when there is no one to keep a tab on their activities? |
| tnkdcealhw@gmail.com | bhanot1952@gmail.com |
No comments:
Post a Comment