Navigating the Right to Information Act can sometimes lead to unexpected turns, especially when dealing with specialized government departments. This case highlights a crucial point for RTI applicants: when fees prescribed under other specific Acts, like the Patents Act, take precedence over the standard RTI fees. Understanding this distinction can save you time, money, and potential frustration when seeking crucial information. This article breaks down a real RTI case and explains what it means for you.
Background: What Information Was Sought
An RTI applicant was trying to obtain specific details related to a patent. They filed two applications with the Controller of Patents and Designs (CoP&D). The applicant wanted to get a copy of a license agreement and the working statement for a particular patent, covering the period from 1996 to 2010. These documents were submitted patentee or licensee.
How the Public Authority Responded
The Public Information Officer (PIO) at the CoP&D responded that to get any certified copy of a patent document, the applicant needed to apply directly to the Controller of Patents. The PIO also emphasized that the applicant should pay the prescribed fees as per Schedule-I of the Patent Act and Patent Rules. This implied that the standard RTI fee structure might not apply in this specific instance.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
During the hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the applicant clarified that they had already submitted a Demand Draft (DD) for the fees, believing they were complying with the statutory fee requirements. However, the respondent from the CoP&D stated that the DD was never received office. Consequently, they could not issue the certified copy of the working statement. Regarding the license agreement, the respondent explained that it hadn’t been registered or entered into the Register of Patents yet due to certain objections raised office. Furthermore, they contended that under Section 69(4) of the Patents Act, the License Agreement was not open for public access and could only be disclosed under a court order.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The CIC, in its decision, referred to its own previous ruling in a similar matter (case No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00112). In that earlier case, the Commission had established a significant principle: if a public authority is already mandated to disclose information under another Act and has prescribed fees for that disclosure, those fees will supersede the fees prescribed under the RTI Rules. Applying this to the current case, the CIC advised the applicant to obtain the required information the statutory fees as stipulated in Schedule-I of the Patent Act and Patent Rules. They were directed to proceed under the provisions of the Patents Act rather than the RTI Act for the fee structure.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Understand Specific Acts: Always be aware that specialized departments might have their own specific Acts and Rules governing the disclosure of information, which can sometimes override general RTI procedures, particularly concerning fees.
- Lesson 2: Fee Discrepancies: If you are seeking information that falls under a specific Act (like patents, copyright, etc.), research the fee structure prescribed Act. The fees might be different from the standard RTI fees.
- Lesson 3: Importance of Previous CIC Rulings: CIC decisions are precedents. Understanding how the CIC has ruled on similar fee-related issues can guide your RTI application strategy and help you anticipate potential challenges.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Relevant Department: Determine which government department or authority holds the information you need.
- Research Specific Acts: Check if the information you seek is governed specific Act (e.g., Patents Act, Copyright Act, Companies Act).
- Check Fee Structures: Ascertain the fee structure prescribed specific Act and the relevant rules. Compare it with the RTI Rules.
- File Your Application: If the specific Act’s fees apply, pay those fees. If the information is generally accessible under RTI and the specific Act’s disclosure is optional or has no fee, then follow the standard RTI procedure. If the specific Act mandates disclosure and has fees, those fees will likely apply.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Under Section 4(1)(a) of the Right to Information Act, 2005, and any other applicable provisions, please provide a copy of the license agreement and the working statement for Patent Number [Insert Patent Number Here], submitted patentee/licensee for the period from 1996 to 2010, along with the prescribed statutory fees as per Schedule-I of the Patent Act and Patent Rules.
Conclusion
This case serves as a valuable reminder that while the RTI Act is a powerful tool for transparency, it operates within a broader legal framework. When dealing with information governed legislation, understanding those laws and their fee structures is paramount. informed and prepared, you can effectively use the RTI Act to access the information you are entitled to, even in specialized areas like patent documentation.
