Many times, when we file an RTI application seeking crucial information from government departments, we encounter delays or outright refusals. What happens when the First Appellate Authority (FAA) doesn’t follow the proper procedure? This case highlights a critical aspect of the RTI Act: the importance of a proper written order, especially when refusing information. It clarifies that a hearing alone is not a substitute for a legally mandated order, empowering citizens to demand transparency and accountability from public authorities.
Background: What Information Was Sought
In this case, an applicant had filed an RTI application with the Andaman Public Works Department (APWD) seeking specific details about the leave taken Engineers. The applicant requested certified copies of leave applications, a list of officers who held charge during the Executive Engineers’ absence (including their names, designations, and the periods they held charge), copies of letters attesting the signatures of officers who handled and handed over charges, and copies of the note sheets that sanctioned the leave. Unfortunately, the Public Information Officer (PIO) failed to respond to this application within the stipulated time frame, leaving the applicant in the dark.
How the Public Authority Responded
The situation became more complicated when the matter reached the First Appellate Authority (FAA). Instead of issuing a formal written order, as required RTI Act, the FAA reportedly held a hearing. During this hearing, the FAA allegedly stated that the requested leave records could not be provided, citing a previous order from the Central Information Commission (CIC). The FAA also expressed concern that while the leaves were sanctioned competent authority and paid for funds, the information was not considered to be in the public interest. This refusal to provide information, without a proper order, led the applicant to file a second appeal before the CIC.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
During the CIC hearing, the Deemed PIO submitted that since the FAA had indicated during the hearing that the information was exempt, they did not proceed to send any information to the appellant. However, the Central Information Commission (CIC) took a strong view on the FAA’s conduct. The Commission pointed out that the FAA had failed to issue any formal order as mandated RTI Act. The CIC found the FAA’s contention that the information was exempt, made verbally during the hearing, to be flawed because it lacked the backing of a proper written order. The Commission emphasized that the information sought pertained to the leave of public servants, which generally cannot be considered as private information of public servants. The CIC also issued a stern warning to the PIO, reminding them of their obligation to provide information within 30 days and to clearly state the reasons and applicable exemptions if any information is to be withheld.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC’s order in this case is significant because it reasserts the importance of due process under the RTI Act. The Commission held that the FAA’s action of holding a hearing and verbally stating that information was exempt, without passing a formal written order, was contrary to the provisions of the RTI Act. The CIC directed the PIO to provide all the requested details to the appellant. This decision underscores that mere verbal pronouncements or informal discussions cannot substitute for the legally required written orders, which are crucial for transparency and for the appellant to understand the basis of any refusal. It also clarified that information regarding the leave of public servants is generally not considered private and can be disclosed under the RTI Act, provided no specific exemption under Section 8 or Section 9 applies and is duly justified in a written order.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: The Importance of a Written Order: Always remember that an FAA is legally bound to provide a written order, whether they grant or deny your appeal. A verbal statement or a hearing without a formal order is not sufficient under the RTI Act.
- Lesson 2: Information on Public Servants’ Leave is Generally Disclosable: Unless specific exemptions under the RTI Act can be clearly justified with a written order, information about the leave taken servants is typically considered disclosable. The CIC has reiterated that such information does not fall under the privacy concerns of public servants.
- Lesson 3: PIOs Must Respond Within Time or Justify Exemptions: Public Information Officers have a strict timeline of 30 days to provide information or reject the request with valid reasons. Failure to do so can lead to penalties under Section 20 of the RTI Act. The PIO in this case was fortunate not to face a penalty, but this is not always the case.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which department or office is responsible for the information you need.
- Draft Your RTI Application Clearly: State precisely what information you are seeking. Be specific and avoid vague language. Mention the relevant period if applicable.
- Submit Your Application and Fee: Pay the required RTI fee and submit the application to the PIO of the concerned department. Keep a copy for your records.
- Follow Up on the First Appeal: If you do not receive a response within 30 days, or if the response is unsatisfactory, file a First Appeal with the FAA within 30 days of the PIO’s response (or the expiry of the 30-day period). Ensure your appeal clearly states your grievance and what you expect from the FAA.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide certified copies of all leave applications submitted by [Designation of Officer, e.g., Executive Engineers] during the period from [Start Date] to [End Date], along with the details of who held charge during their absence, and copies of the note sheets that sanctioned these leaves.
Conclusion
This case serves as a vital reminder for both RTI applicants and public authorities. Applicants should be aware of their rights and insist on proper procedure, especially regarding written orders from appellate authorities. Public authorities must adhere strictly to the timelines and procedural requirements of the RTI Act. and utilizing the provisions of the RTI Act effectively, citizens can continue to drive transparency and accountability in governance, ensuring that information is accessible to all.
