Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Aug 30: Three years after the State Information Commission (SIC) came into being, the Government has ‘suddenly’ realized that several rules governing the functioning of this constitutional body were beyond the mandate of the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009. In order to undo these grave mistakes, the State Cabinet, which met under the chairmanship of Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah, today approved deletion of such several rules and soon after the decision General Administration Department (GAD) issued a notification.
Modeled on the pattern of Central Right to Information Act, 2005, the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act came into force on March 20, 2009 and subsequently, the Rules of the Act were prepared by the General Administration Department and then vetted by the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs under Sub-Section (2) of Section 24 of the Act.
However, while framing Rules neither the pattern of Central Right to Information Act nor the mandate of Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act was taken into consideration by the GAD and Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Department and due to this the mandate of Sub-Section 2 of Section 24 of the Act got exceeded in respect of incorporating provisions like establishment of some institutes/wings in the State Information Commission, initiation of criminal proceedings by the Commission while conducting an inquiry, institution of a criminal case against the Public Information Officers (PIOs), preparation of annual reports/ performance budget and performance audit documents by the Departments/ Public Authorities, creation of Endowment Fund by the SIC, summoning of public authorities and higher rates of fee for seeking information.
“The Rules beyond the mandate of the RTI Act remained in force for three years and suddenly the State Government in the recent past realized the grave mistakes and accordingly decided to take corrective steps”, official sources told EXCELSIOR. The Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah, while reviewing the implementation of the Act about two months back, issued directions for revision of the RTI Rules 2010 in order to model these on the pattern of the Central Information Commission (Regulation of Free and Cost) Rules and Central Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules, 2005.
Accordingly, the revised draft RTI Rules were prepared by GAD and vetted by Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Department. After completion of entire exercise, the draft was placed before the State Cabinet, which gave nod to the notification of J&K Right to Information Rules, 2012, and soon after the decision GAD issued SRO No.279.
According to the details available with EXCELSIOR, Sub-Rule (3) and (4) of Rule 31, which gives powers under Ranbir Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code to the SIC for forwarding a complaint to Magistrate to proceed to hear the complaint against the accused and states that every proceeding before the SIC shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228, was neither in consonance with State RTI Act nor the Central Rules contain such a provision.
Similarly, the provisions under Sub-Rules (6) and (8) of Rule 36, which state that in case of non-compliance of the orders of Commission by a public authority or any of its officers regarding deducting and crediting of the amount of penalty or compensation, disciplinary action shall be initiated forthwith (including suspension) against the defaulting officer and the amount of penalty or compensation not deducted by the officer shall be deducted from the salary of such officer besides Commission may also direct institution of a criminal case against such officer, were not mandated by the State Act.
Even Rule 45, which empowers the Commission to authorize the Registrar to file a complaint before a competent Magistrate under appropriate provision of RPC and impose a penalty on head of the public authority for non-compliance of the directions of the Commission, was out of the mandate of RTI Act.
Rule 11, which provides that the Commission shall comprise of the Registry, Legal Cell, Monitoring and Reporting Wing, Right to Information and Transparency Institute, Administration and Human Resource Development and Public Relations Wing, was also beyond the mandate of the Act. Moreover, the Central Rules don’t provide such institutes/ wings in the Central Information Commission.
Similarly, Rule 37 and Rule 38, which empower the SIC to proactively engage with the stakeholders to provide for standardization of data and record management and lay down standards for rating of public authorities on the basis of transparency index and Rule 39, which provides for preparation of annual reports by each department of public authority, Rule 40 and 41, which provide for preparation of performance budget document and performance audit document by each department, Rule 42, which empowers the SIC to sanction projects, research studies, training programmes and assistance to other organizations, conventions and conference and Rule 43, which provides for creation of an endowment fund by the Commission from the grants received from the Government, contributions from multilateral agencies, corporate entities pursuing the vision of corporate social responsibility identical to the objectives of the Act and such other stakeholders in the civil society as per law, were not within the mandate of the Act.
Moreover, Rule 44, which provides for making of an annual roaster by the SIC for appearance of public authorities was beyond the purview of the RTI Act and not in consonance with the Central Rules.
Besides deleting these Rules vide SRO 279, the State Government has also slashed the fee for seeking information under the RIT Rules to Rs 10 against earlier prescribed fee of Rs 50. Similarly, Rs 2 for each page (in A-4 or A-3 size paper) created or copied would be charged from the applicant. In case of larger size paper and samples or models, actual charge or cost price will be charged. For inspection of records, no fee for the first hour and a fee of Rs 5 for each 15 minutes thereafter will be charged from the applicant.
For information provided in diskette or floppy Rs 50 per diskette or floppy and for information provided in printed form at the price fixed for such publication or Rs 2 per page of photocopy for extracts from the publication would be charged.
As per SRO-279, the Commission in deciding the appeal may hear oral or written evidence on oath or on affidavit from the concerned person, peruse or inspect documents, public records or copies, inquire through authorized officer further details or facts, hear PIO, APIO or such Senior Officer who decided the first appeal, or such person against whom the complaint is made, hear third party, receive evidence on affidavits from PIO, APIO, who decided the first appeal, such person against whom the complaint lies or the third party.
Moreover, the appellant or the complainant, as the case may be, may at his discretion at the time of hearing of the appeal for complaint by the Commission be present in person or through his duly authorized representative or may opt not to be present. If the Commission is satisfied that the circumstances exist due to which the appellant or the complainant is being prevented from attending the hearing of the Commission then the Commission may afford the appellant or the complainant another opportunity of being heard before a final decision.
The SRO said that the order of the Commission should be pronounced in open proceedings and be in writing duly authenticated by the Registrar or any other officer authorized by the Commission for the purpose, adding if any question of interpretation of these rules arise, the decision of the General Administration Department will be final.
While repealing Rules of 2010, the SRO said, “anything done or any action taken or any order made or any direction issued before such repeal shall be deemed to have been done, taken, made or issued under the corresponding provisions of these Rules”.
As reported exclusively by EXCELSIOR today, the Cabinet also put its seal of approval on the restructuring and unbundling of Power Development Department whereby one State Transmission Company and two Distribution Companies would be set-up to achieve varied objectives including ensuring uninterrupted power supply and improving the financial health of the Department by controlling Transmission and Distribution (T&D) losses.
The restructured companies will strive towards achieving objectives of an uninterrupted supply of safe and affordable power, complying with performance standards as approved by the regulators, a transparent, accurate and timely billing system with proper working meters and convenience payment options and a prompt service in grievance redressal.
Moreover, unbundling of department will help in successful implementation of various schemes like RGGVY, APDRP and R-APDRP. An expenditure of Rs 125 crore would be incurred for incorporation of two Distribution Companies, one Transmission Company and one Trade Company under Companies Act, 1965.
It also put its seal of approval on proposal to establish treasuries at Manjakote (Rajouri), Assar (Doda), Ramsoo (Ramban), Kahara (Doda), Warwan (Kishtwar), Awantipora (Pulwama) and Achabal (Anantnag) and creation of posts for these treasuries.
The Cabinet also gave nod to the upgradation of Sub-Centres of Trigam and Madwa in Bandipora district to the level of Primary Health Centres (PHCs) and creation of posts for medical and para-medical staff. The Health Department was instructed to make an assessment of the medical facilities using geo-mapping techniques.
The construction of 18 hole golf course at Sidhra, Jammu at a cost of Rs. 37.39 crore through Directorate of Tourism Jammu and payment of compensation to the tune of Rs. 14.71 crore for State land measuring 23 kanals and 14 marals for the construction of flyover from Bikram Chowk to Government Women College Gandhi Nagar, Jammu and its transfer to PW (R&B) Department through ERA also received the approval of the Cabinet.
It also approved promotion of In-charge Directors——Gurdev Kour, Fazal Karim and Mushtaq Ahmad Zaroo as Director Prosecutions.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel