Many Indian citizens approach the President of India with their grievances and representations, hoping for swift action and resolution. But what happens after you submit your plea? Can the RTI Act help you track the progress and understand the outcome? This case explores how an RTI applicant sought clarity on his representation to the President and what the Central Information Commission (CIC) had to say. Understanding this can empower you to effectively use RTI for similar situations.
Background: What Information Was Sought
An RTI applicant filed an application with the President’s Secretariat. The core of his request was to find out the specific action taken on a representation he had previously submitted to the President of India. He wasn’t just asking for a generic update; he wanted to know the concrete steps that had been initiated following his appeal to the highest office.
How the Public Authority Responded
The Public Information Officer (PIO) of the President’s Secretariat provided a response to the RTI application. The PIO stated that the applicant’s representation had been forwarded to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for further necessary action. This indicated that the matter had been escalated to another agency for investigation or follow-up.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The matter eventually reached the Central Information Commission (CIC) for further adjudication. During the hearing, it became clear that the appellant had also sent some documents along with his representation to the President. He desired these specific documents to be examined Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) to ascertain their correctness. The crux of the dispute was the appellant’s expectation that the President’s Secretariat, through its PIO, should facilitate this forensic examination and report the findings back to him. The CIC considered whether it was incumbent upon the PIO to undertake such an investigative task.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC made a significant observation regarding the role of a PIO. The Commission ruled that it is not the duty of a Public Information Officer to get documents examined laboratories and then apprise the information seeker about the outcome. The CIC clarified that the CFSL, being a part of the CBI, is expected to examine documents only when they are referred to it investigating agency or a court of law. The Commission rejected the appeal, emphasizing that the President’s Secretariat, and its PIO, was not the appropriate channel for facilitating forensic examination of documents submitted with a representation. The appellant was advised to directly approach the relevant laboratory for such examinations, rather than expecting the President’s Secretariat to act as an intermediary for this specific purpose.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understand the PIO’s Role: A PIO’s primary duty under the RTI Act is to provide information that already exists and is held public authority. They are not obligated to conduct investigations, create new information, or facilitate third-party examinations of documents.
- Lesson 2: Differentiate Between Information and Investigation: The RTI Act is about accessing information, not about compelling public authorities to conduct investigations or forensic analyses on your behalf. Your request should be for existing records or details of actions already taken.
- Lesson 3: Direct Approach for Specialized Services: If your grievance involves the need for specialized services like forensic examination, it is often more effective and appropriate to approach the relevant service provider directly, rather than expecting a government department to facilitate it through an RTI application.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which department or office originally received your representation. In this case, it was the President’s Secretariat.
- Draft Your Application Clearly: State your request precisely. Mention the date of your representation and the subject matter.
- Specify the Information You Need: Clearly ask for details about the action taken on your representation. For example, “Please provide the details of the action taken on my representation dated [Date] concerning [Subject Matter].”
- Be Realistic with Your Expectations: Understand the limitations of the RTI Act. Do not ask the PIO to conduct investigations or forensic tests. If you need such services, pursue them separately.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide the details of the action taken, including any correspondence or official decisions, on my representation dated [Date of your representation] submitted to the President’s Secretariat regarding [Briefly mention the subject of your representation].
Conclusion
While the RTI Act is a powerful tool for transparency and accountability, it’s crucial to use it judiciously and within its defined scope. This case highlights that you can indeed inquire about the action taken on your representations through RTI. However, you cannot compel a public authority to undertake investigative or forensic examinations for you. Always tailor your RTI requests to seek existing information and understand the specific responsibilities of the Public Information Officer. so, you can maximize the effectiveness of your RTI applications and get the information you are rightfully entitled to.
