Did you know that historical monuments, even those under the care of the Indian Army, can have their possession and management details clarified through the Right to Information (RTI) Act? This case highlights how citizens can use RTI to understand the authority behind the occupation of protected sites and hold relevant departments accountable. It’s a powerful reminder that transparency extends to our nation’s heritage.
Background: What Information Was Sought
An RTI applicant approached the Ministry of Culture with a crucial query. They wanted to know who had authorized the Indian Army’s possession of the Old Fort, attributed to Mughal Emperor Akbar, and the Ashok Pillar in Koshambi, Allahabad. These historical sites, located near the Sangam, are under the Indian Army’s custody. The applicant sought to understand the basis of this possession, who would be responsible for any loss incurred Ministry of Culture, and whether any rent was being paid for this occupation. The Public Information Officer (PIO) initially acknowledged the application and then transferred it to the PIO of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), who provided a point-wise response.
How the Public Authority Responded
The initial response from the PIO, after the application was transferred to the ASI, did not fully satisfy the applicant. During the subsequent hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the applicant expressed dissatisfaction, stating that they had not received proper and complete information. The PIO from ASI maintained that all available information on record had been provided. They further clarified that while the Indian Army is the custodian of the Fort at Sangam, Allahabad, the Ashoka Pillar within the Fort has been officially notified as a protected monument Government of India. Consequently, the Archaeological Survey of India, under the Ministry of Culture, bears the responsibility for its maintenance.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC) became a pivotal moment for the RTI applicant. The applicant reiterated their grievance about the inadequacy of the information received. The PIO presented the department’s stance, explaining their role and the existing custodianship. A key development during the hearing was the applicant’s request for a copy of the official notification that declared the Ashoka Pillar a protected monument. Additionally, the applicant urged the CIC to direct the PIO to transfer relevant parts of the RTI application to the Indian Army, as certain information directly pertained to their responsibilities under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The Central Information Commission, after hearing both sides, delivered a decisive order. The Commission directed the PIO to provide the applicant with a copy of the notification that declared the Ashoka Pillar a protected monument. This was a crucial step in providing documentary evidence to support the PIO’s claims. Furthermore, the Commission acknowledged the applicant’s request regarding information held Indian Army. Therefore, the PIO was instructed to transfer such portions of the RTI application that directly related to the Indian Army to their respective PIO. This ensures that the applicant can obtain complete information from all relevant authorities, upholding the spirit of the RTI Act.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Persistence Pays Off: Even if an initial RTI response is unsatisfactory, don’t give up. Pursuing the matter to the CIC can lead to better outcomes and the disclosure of crucial information.
- Lesson 2: Understand Section 6(3) of the RTI Act: This section is vital. If your RTI application contains information that falls under the purview of another public authority, the PIO is obligated to transfer that part of your application to the correct authority. This was key in getting the Indian Army involved in this case.
- Lesson 3: Document Everything: Always request copies of official notifications or documents that are referenced public authority. This provides concrete evidence and helps you understand the legal basis of their actions.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Ministry/Department: Determine which government ministry or department is primarily responsible for the heritage site or the issue you are inquiring about. In this case, it was the Ministry of Culture and ASI.
- Clearly State Your Query: Formulate your questions precisely. Specify the monument, the authority you are questioning, and the type of information you seek (e.g., authorization, responsibility, payments).
- Request Relevant Documents: If applicable, ask for copies of any official notifications, orders, or agreements related to the possession or management of the site.
- If Necessary, Request Transfer: If you believe parts of your query fall under the responsibility of another department, specifically mention Section 6(3) and request the transfer of those parts of your application.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide details regarding the authorization for the possession of [Name of Monument/Site] by [Name of Authority/Department]. Also, please provide copies of any official notifications or orders that govern the custodianship of this site. Furthermore, if any financial arrangements such as rent or usage fees are in place between the custodian and the Ministry of Culture/Archaeological Survey of India, please provide details of these payments and the authority responsible for them. If any part of this application pertains to the responsibilities of another public authority, please transfer the relevant sections under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Conclusion
This case serves as an encouraging example for every Indian citizen. It demonstrates that the RTI Act is a potent tool for seeking clarity on matters of public interest, even when dealing with sensitive areas like the possession of historical monuments armed forces. your rights and utilizing the provisions of the RTI Act effectively, you can contribute to greater transparency and accountability in governance, safeguarding our nation’s heritage for future generations.
