Mal-functioning of Odisha Information Commission (6)
Mr. Jagadanand, State Information Commissioner disposed and closed a Complaint Case No. 2532/10 on dt. 23.3.2012 taking into granted the submission Note filed by the PIO that the complete information supplied to the Complainant. But the information supplied by the PIO is found incomplete. Now the question arises what the Complainant will do and how will he get the complete information. In Odisha , State Information Commissioners never reopen the case once it is disposed and closed. Thousands of RTI Users are the victims of such nefarious practice of Odisha Information Commission and deprived of getting complete information.
Dear friends
Mr. Motilal Mishra, RTI Applicant ( Mobile No. - 8908934368) of Bolangir district had submitted RTI Application on 5.10.2010 to the Public Information Officer, office of Community Health Centre / Primary Health Centre, Jamgaon , Bolangir seeking some information about functioning of Rogi Kalyan Samiti. Getting no response from PIO, Mr. Mishra made a Complaint to Odisha Information Commission on 27.12.2010.
After more than one year, Mr. Jagadanand, SIC(J) heard the case on 19.1.2012, directed the PIO to provide the complete information within 15 days to the Complainant free of cost and fixed date 27.2.2012 for another hearing. The copy of order was received by the Complainant on 19.2.2012.
On 27.2.2012, Mr. Jagadanad heard the case. Finding no compliance report of his order dated 19.1.2012, he against instructed to the Head of Public Authority i.e., Medical In-charge of CHC to ensure furnishing information and issued show cause notice to the PIO to explain the delay caused in this case and put up the case for further hearing on 23.3.2012.
In the meantime, the PIO supplied the information to the Complainant which are found incomplete. On 12.3.2012, the Complainant informed to the Commission about the information supplied by the PIO and demanded penalty under section 20 of the RTI Act.
0n 23.3.2012, The PIO making his appearance before the Commission submitted that he had not received the RTI application and however supplied the information to the Complainant through registered post at the direction of the Commission. Mr. Jagadanand did not verify the document to examine the allegation of the Complainant and submission of the PIO that
a. Whether RTI application was submitted
b. Whether the information supplied are complete
c. Whether the PIO deserves to be penalized. Because in the earlier order, the Commission has issued show cause notice to the PIO.
It was found that there is no mention of penalty issue in the final order of the Commission. Though Mr. Jagadanand disposed the case on 23.3.2012, the copy of the decision was sent to the Complainant after 20 days i.e., on 12.4.2012 which was received by the Complainant on 25.4.2012. Getting terribly disturbed having seen the copy of final disposal of the case and getting no complete information from the PIO, the Complainant out of disgust has requested the Commission on 2 9.4.2012 to reopen the case and ensure complete information and impose penalty on PIO under section 20 of the RTI Act for causing long delay in supplying information
Let us see how Mr. Jagadanand will give justice to the Complainant. This is not a single case but one of thousand of cases in which the Mr. Jagadanand has disposed the cases without ensuring the information.
Wait for more stories.
Regards
Pradip Pradhan
M-99378-43482
Date-4.5.2012
No comments:
Post a Comment