Ever wondered how top government officials are selected for crucial roles? The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 empowers you to seek such information. This article delves into a case where a citizen sought details about the selection of the Chairperson for the Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) or Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT). Learn how the RTI Act can be used to uncover the processes behind high-level appointments and what to do when faced with delays or fees.
Background: What Information Was Sought
An RTI applicant approached the Ministry of Finance and the CBEC with a specific request: to obtain information regarding the selection process for Members and Chairpersons of the CBEC and CBDT over the past five years. This kind of information is vital for understanding transparency and accountability in public appointments. The application was initially sent to the Department of Financial Services, which then transferred it to the Public Information Officer (PIO) (CX-9) at the CBEC. The PIO (CX-9) informed the applicant that the information could be provided upon payment of Rs. 402/-, which could be submitted via Demand Draft, Banker’s Cheque, or Indian Postal Order payable to the P&AO, Department of Revenue, or deposit.
How the Public Authority Responded
The journey of this RTI application was not entirely smooth. While the PIO (CX-9) eventually provided a reply, there was a significant delay in the process. The applicant argued before the Central Information Commission (CIC) that the information should be provided free of charge due to this considerable delay. The public authority, represented PIO, countered that the initial application was misaddressed to the Department of Financial Services instead of directly to the PIO (CX-9) at CBEC. They argued that the CBEC website clearly lists the kind of documents held PIO, and that the application should have been directed to the correct PIO from the outset. The application was eventually transferred through the Department of Revenue to the concerned PIOs, including PIO (CX-9), who then responded without further delay to the applicant.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
During the hearing at the Central Information Commission (CIC), the applicant emphasized the undue delay experienced in receiving the information and therefore claimed a waiver of the prescribed fees. The respondent, on the other hand, highlighted that the PIO (CX-9) had acted promptly once the application reached them. They pointed out the initial mistake in addressing the application, which they argued was the cause of the delay, not their own inaction. The core of the dispute revolved around who was responsible for the overall delay and whether the applicant should bear the cost of information due to an initial misdirection of the application.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The Central Information Commission (CIC) acknowledged the validity of the respondent’s argument that PIO (CX-9) had indeed replied within the stipulated 30 days as per Section 7 of the RTI Act. However, the Commission also critically observed a significant and unexplained delay of over three months between the date the RTI application was initially filed and the date the Department of Revenue issued a directive to PIO (CX-9) to provide the information. Crucially, in light of this substantial delay that impacted the applicant, the CIC directed PIO (CX-9) to provide the requested information to the appellant free of cost. This decision underscores that while PIOs must act within timelines, the overall timeliness of the RTI process, including inter-departmental transfers, is also scrutinized. The Commission also took the opportunity to advise the applicant to ensure future RTI applications are addressed to the correct public authority to prevent similar delays.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Accuracy in Addressing Applications is Crucial: While PIOs are obligated to transfer applications to the correct authority within five days (Section 5(5) of the RTI Act), a misaddressed application can still lead to significant delays. Always try to identify the most appropriate PIO or public authority to ensure your request reaches the right hands quickly.
- Lesson 2: Delays Can Lead to Fee Waivers: If you experience an unreasonable delay in receiving information, you can argue for the information to be provided free of charge, especially if the delay is not attributable to your own actions. The CIC’s decision in this case demonstrates that substantial delays can be grounds for waiving fees under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act.
- Lesson 3: Understand the Scope of Information Available: The RTI Act allows you to seek information on the selection processes of public officials. This means you can inquire about the criteria, committees, and procedures involved in appointments to key positions within government bodies.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which government department or organization is responsible for the selection process you are interested in. Refer to their official websites for PIO details.
- Draft Your RTI Application Clearly: State precisely what information you are seeking. Be specific about the period and the nature of the details required.
- Pay the Prescribed Fee (if applicable): Submit the RTI application fee of Rs. 10/- through IPO, DD, or cash, unless you are applying for Below Poverty Line (BPL) status exemption.
- Follow Up and Escalate if Necessary: If you do not receive a response within 30 days or if the response is unsatisfactory, file a First Appeal under Section 19 of the RTI Act. If still unresolved, a Second Appeal can be filed with the CIC.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide the details of the selection process, including the criteria used, the names of the selection committee members, and the dates of meetings held for the selection of the Chairperson of [Name of Board/Department] for the period from [Start Date] to [End Date].
Conclusion
This case highlights the power of the RTI Act in bringing transparency to even the highest levels of government appointments. While initial missteps can occur, the RTI Act provides recourse and ensures that citizens can hold public authorities accountable. the nuances of filing and persistent, you can effectively use RTI to access valuable information and contribute to a more informed and accountable governance system in India.
