Many citizens wonder if government offices, especially those at the highest levels, adhere to specific standards of service delivery and public accountability. The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), being a pivotal institution, is no exception. This case highlights how the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, can be used to ascertain whether such high-profile offices have public-facing charters and what their status is. Understanding the process and outcome of this RTI application can empower you to seek similar information from any government department.
Background: What Information Was Sought
An RTI applicant approached the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) with a crucial set of queries. The applicant was interested in the legislative journey and current status of two significant proposed laws: the Citizens Charter Bill 1997 and the Rights of Citizens for Time bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their Grievances Bill 2011. Beyond the legislative aspect, the applicant also sought to know the progress made on these bills and, importantly, requested a copy of the Citizen’s Charter of the PMO itself. The PMO, in turn, transferred this application to the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances (DARPG), which is often the nodal department for such governance-related matters. Subsequently, the Public Information Officer (PIO) from DARPG provided some information in response.
How the Public Authority Responded
The initial response from the PIO of the DARPG was deemed insufficient RTI applicant. During the subsequent proceedings before the Central Information Commission (CIC), the applicant pointed out a significant omission: the PIO’s reply had completely failed to address the existence and status of the Citizens Charter Bill 1997. Furthermore, the applicant did not receive the copy of the PMO’s Citizen’s Charter, which was a direct request made in the RTI application. The respondent, representing the public authority, maintained that whatever information was available had already been provided. This is a common scenario in RTI cases where the applicant feels that the response is either incomplete, evasive, or does not directly answer the queries posed.
The CIC Hearing: What Happened
The hearing before the Central Information Commission (CIC) became the crucial stage for the applicant to press their points. The applicant reiterated their grievance that the PIO had not acknowledged or provided any details regarding the Citizens Charter Bill 1997. This implied a lack of transparency regarding a potentially important piece of legislation aimed at public service delivery. The applicant also emphasized the non-provision of the PMO’s Citizen’s Charter, which they believed should be accessible to the public if it existed. The representative of the public authority, while stating that all available information was furnished, did not offer a concrete explanation for the missing details about the 1997 Bill or the PMO’s charter. The Commission had to carefully examine the arguments and the evidence presented to arrive at a just decision.
The CIC Order and Its Significance
The Central Information Commission, after hearing both sides, delivered a decisive order. The CIC directed the PIO of the DARPG to undertake a thorough investigation. Firstly, the PIO was instructed to ascertain whether a Bill named the Citizens Charter Bill 1997 had ever been introduced or existed. If it had, the PIO was then required to provide detailed information about its subsequent progress or fate. Secondly, the CIC mandated that the PIO should obtain a copy of the Citizen’s Charter of the PMO, if one was indeed adopted office, and provide it to the applicant. This order is significant because it not only ensures that the applicant receives the information they sought but also pushes the public authority to actively seek out and disclose information that might have been overlooked or neglected. It reinforces the principle that public authorities must be proactive in providing information, especially concerning governance and public service delivery mechanisms. This aligns with the spirit of Section 7 of the RTI Act, which emphasizes timely disposal of requests.
Key Lessons for RTI Applicants
- Lesson 1: Be Specific and Persistent: As seen in this case, simply asking for information is sometimes not enough. The applicant was specific about the Bills and the Citizen’s Charter. When the initial response was inadequate, they persisted in highlighting the omissions during the CIC hearing.
- Lesson 2: Understand the Transfer Process: The PMO transferred the application to DARPG. It’s important to understand that applications can be transferred to the department that holds the actual information. If you believe your application has been wrongly transferred or the transferred department is not providing adequate information, you can raise this during the appeal process.
- Lesson 3: The CIC is Your Ally: The CIC is the appellate authority under the RTI Act. If you are not satisfied with the First Appellate Authority’s decision or the PIO’s response, approaching the CIC is the next step. The Commission has the power to direct public authorities to provide information and can even impose penalties under Section 20 of the RTI Act for delays or denial of information without reasonable cause.
How to File a Similar RTI Application
- Identify the Correct Public Authority: Determine which government department or office is most likely to hold the information you need. For matters related to governance and citizen charters, the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances is often a good starting point, but you might also need to approach the specific ministry or office directly.
- Draft Your Application Clearly: State your request precisely. Mention any specific bills, policies, or documents you are interested in. If you are asking for a copy of a charter or policy, state that clearly.
- Specify the Time Period (if applicable): If you are asking about the progress of a bill, you might specify a timeframe, though in this case, the applicant was interested in the overall status.
- Pay the Fee and Submit: Fill out the RTI application form, attach the required fee (usually ₹10 in non-judicial stamp paper or /demand draft/IPO), and submit it to the PIO of the concerned public authority.
Sample RTI question you can use:
Please provide details regarding the current status and any legislative progress made on the Citizens Charter Bill 1997 and the Rights of Citizens for Time bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their Grievances Bill 2011. Additionally, please provide a copy of the Citizen’s Charter, if adopted and in effect, for [Name of the Public Authority, e.g., the Prime Minister’s Office].
Conclusion
This case serves as a powerful reminder that no public authority is beyond the purview of the RTI Act. Citizens have the right to inquire about the policies, charters, and legislative efforts that govern public service delivery. the RTI process and leveraging the powers of the CIC, you can effectively seek transparency and accountability from even the highest echelons of government. Don’t hesitate to use your RTI rights to get the information you are entitled to.
