*Information seeker cheated
Jehangir Rashid
SRINAGAR, Apr 19: Without showing any respect to the provisions and guidelines set out in the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009, the Academy of Art, Culture and Languages (AACL) has provided incomplete information to an information seeker under the RTI Act.
The Academy has also bye-passed directions from Chief Information Commissioner (CIC), G. R Sufi who had asked the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the AACL to provide the information without charging any amount from the information seeker. Although, the PIO agreed in principle to provide the information without any charge the information seeker had to pay Rs 900 as copying charges for 89 pages.
The CIC also took a strong note of the delay resorted by the Academy in providing information to the RTI applicant. He observed that since information has been denied to the RTI applicant he (RTI applicant) should be given benefit of doubt and not a single penny should be charged from him.
Haji Ahsan Ali Gonkhapa resident of Choskor-Kargil had submitted RTI application on September 15, 2011 in which he had sought details about the appointments made on class-IV posts in the Ladakh region.
Under the rules of RTI Act of 2009 the PIO of the AACL was expected to dispose off the RTI application within 30 days. However, he did not do so and the information seeker was denied the information.
Following this development, the RTI applicant approached the State Information Commission and lodged a complaint with the Commission about the denial of information. The SIC took up the matter on March 29 and the CIC himself heard the case.
“This is a complaint filed by Ahsan Ali Gonkhapa before the PIO AACL which was received on 16-09-2011. The order was to be passed by the PIO on or before 15-10-2011. The PIO Dr. Shakeel-ur-Rehman states that the information seeker was informed for the payment of Rs. 680 as copying charges before the time limit of 30 days vide his letter number RTI/Oct/2011 dated 10-10-2011,” said the CIC in his order.
In his decision number SIC/CO/RK-21/Comp/11-2011/88 the CIC said that the complainant insists that he has not received such requisition till date. He said the PIO confirms that this letter was written on 10-10-2011 and sent by ordinary post. The PIO said that the letter could not be diarized due to shortage of staff.
“Though nothing has been brought before this Commission which will irrevocably substantiate that this letter was posted on date, the fact remains that the information seeker has not received this requisition. Therefore, benefit of doubt should be given to him,” said the CIC.
The CIC while quoting the facts and circumstances of the case said that it is proper to pass order under Section 7 of the RTI Act and it is incumbent on the PIO to dispose off the complainant’s request. He said that if the PIO finds that no such information is prohibited under Section 8, the information be given free of cost adding that the PIO has agreed to same.
Following the CIC’s decision, the RTI applicant got the information from the AACL but that was incomplete.
In his application the information seeker had sought details about the details of orderlies/chowkidars and sweepers appointed in AACL from the Ladakh region along with the qualifications of the applied candidates. He wanted to know the details of the applicants who were called for the interview.
The information seeker had also sought details as to how many applicants have driving license. He wanted a list of the candidates who have been appointed on the posts along with their qualifications. The information seeker wanted to know whether the selection list was published in local paper.
The information seeker prayed for the copies of the newspaper that carried the selection list. He wanted to inspect the document of the selected candidates from the Ladakh region.
The information provided by the AACL contains information about the particulars of persons who applied for the posts of orderly and chowkidar however no information has been given with respect to those applying for the posts of sweepers. The Academy did not provide information about the persons who were called for interview for these posts.
The AACL also failed to provide information about the candidates who are possessing valid driving license. The Academy also failed to provide information about the newspaper that carried the list of the selected candidates. Under the RTI Act although the information seeker has a prerogative to inspect the document the RTI applicant in this case was denied the opportunity.
The RTI applicant has moved an application on April 2 addressed to Secretary, AACL in which he has mentioned that the information provided is not up to the mark.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel