Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Aug 23: Division Bench of High Court comprising Justice Virender Singh and Justice Janak Raj Kotwal today directed the State Government to repeal the existing RTI Rules and frame the fresh ones to make various provisions of the Act workable and achieve the very purpose envisaged in enacting the legislation.
The direction was passed in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocate B R Manhas challenging the J&K Right to Information Act (RTI) Rules 2012 and seeking restoration of RTI Rules 2010.
“A bare look at Rules 20 to 36 comprised in Chapter VI of the Rules of 2010 and Rule 45 gives an impression that the powers given to the Commission under these Rules in some areas traveled beyond the limits and purpose envisaged under the Act”, the DB said after hearing Advocate Manhas for the PIL, Senior AAG Gagan Basotra for the State and Advocate S K Anand for the State Information Commission.
“The opinion rendered by Commissioner Secretary GAD in the ‘memorandum’ submitted to the State Cabinet was not wholly correct. It was not correct to say that all the Rules pointed out in the ‘memorandum’ did not have mandate of the Act. Also it was out of the context and illogical to say that the Rules of 2010 were not modeled on the pattern of Central Information Commission (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005 and Central Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules, 2005”, the DB further said, adding “we have rather found that majority of the Rules of 2010 were within the limits of authority conferred under the Act and were indispensable for implementing and supplementing and to carry out the provisions of the Act”.
The DB wondered as to how the State Information Commission constituted under the Act is expected to function after the Government having divested itself even of the power to provide the Information Commission a working Secretariat/Registry, necessary man power and monetary grants. “How the ultimate object of setting out the regime of right to information to the people of the State can be achieved if the Commission is not aptly empowered within the ambit of the Act to ensure that directions issued by it are implemented”, the DB further wondered.
“We, however, hasten to add that excessive empowerment, like power to initiate criminal action may not be required and may amount to excessive delegation of power. This aspect calls for consideration of the Government”, the DB said, adding “impression discernible from the manner in which en-masse repeal of the Rules of 2010 has been done would indicate that the Government has exercised its important delegated function with less sensitivity and has arbitrarily relied upon the ‘memorandum’ submitted by the Commissioner Secretary GAD”.
“The matter in our considered view requires in-depth study and anxious consideration and not the inclusive repeal of all the important rules”, the DB said while directing the Government to have a re-look and accord reconsideration to the repeal of the Rules of 2010 and frame fresh rules so as to make various provisions of the Act workable to achieve the very purpose envisaged in enacting of the Act.
Follow our WhatsApp channel