Many Indian citizens use the RTI Act to get information about government appointments, seeking transparency and accountability. But what happens when the information you need is held different department within the same organization? This case highlights a crucial aspect of the RTI Act: the transfer of applications. Understanding this can empower you to get the information you’re entitled to, even if the initial Public Information Officer (PIO) doesn’t have it directly.
Background: What Information Was Sought
In this instance, an RTI applicant approached the Bharat Coking Coal Ltd (BCCL) with a specific request. They wanted details regarding the appointment of a particular individual. The PIO at BCCL initially refused to provide the information, citing Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. This section allows for the denial of information that is personal and has no relation to public activity or interest, unless larger public interest justifies its disclosure.
How the Public Authority Responded
During the proceedings before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the BCCL representative argued that their organization is vast, employing around 65,000 people across various locations. They claimed that Section 11 of the RTI Act (which deals with third-party information) could not be completed because the applicant had not provided sufficient details to identify the person in question, such as their employee number, designation, or place of posting. They also mentioned that a significant number of people, approximately 400 per month, were employed under the “Land Losers’ Scheme” in BCCL, making precise identification challenging without more specific data.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The Central Information Commission (CIC) heard the arguments from both sides. The core issue revolved around whether the information sought was personal third-party information and if the PIO had correctly handled the application.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC made a significant observation: information pertaining to appointments made authorities generally cannot be considered purely personal third-party information. This is because appointments are a matter of public record and have a direct bearing on public activity and interest. However, the Commission also acknowledged the practical difficulty in identifying the individual without specific details like their employment number, designation, and place of posting. Consequently, the CIC directed the PIO at BCCL Headquarters to transfer the RTI application to the respective PIOs of the BCCL areas and collieries, as per Section 6(3) of the RTI Act. The Commission further mandated that these concerned PIOs should directly provide the applicant with the information, confirming whether such a person was employed within their jurisdiction and providing details of their appointment.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Identify the right authority for your information: Even if you approach a PIO, if they don’t have direct access to the information, they might be able to transfer your application to the correct department or officer. The CIC’s decision reinforces the idea that information related to appointments is generally disclosable.
- Lesson 2: Provide specific details: While the BCCL argued about the lack of specifics, the CIC also noted its importance. When seeking information about an individual’s appointment, try to provide as many identifying details as possible, such as their name, approximate date of joining, department, or any other relevant information you might have. This helps the PIO locate the correct records.
- Lesson 3: Understand Section 6(3) of the RTI Act: This section is crucial for situations like this. It allows a PIO to transfer an application to another public authority if the information sought is held relates to the functions of another public authority. In this case, it was interpreted to mean transferring within different units of the same large organization.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Draft your RTI application: Clearly state the information you are seeking. Be specific but concise.
- Identify the likely Public Authority: Determine which government department or office is most likely to hold the information.
- Submit your application: You can file it online or offline with the prescribed fee.
- Follow up: If you don’t receive a response within 30 days, or if the PIO denies information, you can file a First Appeal. If still unsatisfied, you can approach the CIC.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide details of the appointment of [Name of person, if known, or description of the position sought, e.g., ‘a person appointed under the Land Losers’ Scheme’] in your department/organization during the period [Specify period, if known]. This should include their designation, date of joining, and place of posting.
Conclusion
This case underscores the power of the RTI Act to bring transparency to government functioning, even in complex organizational structures. the provisions like Section 6(3) and clear, specific requests, citizens can effectively navigate the RTI process to obtain information about appointments and other matters of public interest. Remember, the goal of the RTI Act is to empower citizens, and this case is a testament to that principle.
