news details |
|
|
| Was PSA record damaged in floods? CIC seeks evidence from HC | | | Early Times Report
Srinagar, Nov 12: J&K’s Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) G R Sufi has sought evidence from the High Court to substantiate the plea of Public Information Officer (PIO) of the court that vital record about quashing of orders issued under Public Safety Act was damaged in last year’s floods.
Details available with Early Times reveal that an RTI applicant Abdul Manan Bukhari had sought information from the PIO of the High Court on 27-01-2015 about the total number of PSAs quashed by the court from 1988 to December 2014.
Bukhari had also sought the following information: Total number of PSAs against women quashed by the court from 1988 to December 2014, excluding the PSAs quashed under NDPS Act or Forest Act; total number of PSAs against minors quashed by the court from 1988 to December 2014.
As the information sought was pertaining to both Jammu and Srinagar wings of the High Court, two separate second appeals were filed before State Information Commission (SIC) by the appellant, which was disposed of in a single order of the Commission.
The PIO (Registrar Judicial) said that no such information was available or existing in the form of any data or analyzed data or abstract or statistics in the Jammu wing of the court. The PIO of Srinagar wing also responded to the request of the appellant vide his order dated 07-03-2015, saying that as the records lying in the record room got damaged during the floods of September 2014, no information could be provided up to the period of flood. The PIO further informed the appellant that efforts were being made to locate and retrieve the record, which would take a considerable time.
Later, the RTI applicant filed two separate first appeals before Registrar General-cum-First Appellate Authority (FAA), High Court, on 24-02-2015 and 11-03-2015 respectively.
In his first appeal, the appellant contended the finding of PIO, Jammu wing and said number of petitions have been filed by many persons through counsels pertaining to the subject. Hence, he said, the information would be available with the PIO but same is denied to him.
With regard to finding of the PIO, Srinagar wing, the appellant sought direction from FAA to PIO for providing him information. As the appellant did not receive any response from the FAA, he approached the SIC with his two separate second appeals on 12-05-2015, contending therein that non-disposal of first appeals by the FAA is deemed denial of information, which otherwise is givable under the provisions of the J&K RTI Act, 2009.
He requested the Commission for issuing a direction to the PIOs to provide him information and also necessary penal action be taken against the authorities responsible for denying the information.
In his order on 7.10.2015, the CIC said: “The Commission heard the representatives of the PIOs/FAA, High Court from time to time. The PIO, Jammu wing, as noted above has informed the appellant that the said information was not available and existent in the records at the time of filing of RTI application. However, appellant contended this finding of the PIO by stating that there might be a number of petitions filed by persons through counsels regarding the information under consideration, meaning thereby that there must exist the proper record in the court, viz-a-viz said subject, but the refusal on the part of concerned PIO amounts to the violation of the rights of the appellant under the relevant provisions of the Right to Information Act.
“The Commission has considered this submissions, which have been made before the FAA by the appellant. It was statutory duty of the FAA, as per Section 16 of the J&K RTI Act, 2009 to adjudicate the first appeal after going through the facts and circumstances of the case. The FAA should have sought evidence from the appellant to support his contention that said information was available and existed in the records.”
The CIC further said: “During the proceedings before the Commission, appellant was under obligation to come up with evidence to prove that PIO, Jammu wing’s response was incorrect and incomplete. Appellant failed to produce any evidence before the Commission to substantiate his contention. Therefore, Commission is constrained for not issuing any direction to PIO, Jammu wing for providing information, which the PIO has already stated as not available and not existent in the records on the date of filing of RTI. However, Commission would like to apprise appellant about his right to file a complaint before this Commission under Section 15, if he is convinced that said information was available with the PIO and has been deliberately denied to him. The PIO, Srinagar wing of the High Court while disposing the RTI application has taken the plea that the entire record got damaged due to the flood of 2014. Appellant did not produce any evidence before the Commission to substantiate that record containing the information was not damaged by the flood.
“Taking into consideration the submission of PIO, Srinagar wing, the fact remains that information would be available in some rudimentary manner, provided record is not totally washed away in the floods. The PIO, Srinagar wing has also submitted before the Commission that High Court has started the process of retrieval/resuscitation of the record under the expert advice of Archeology Department and it will take some time. Commission accordingly sought evidence from the PIO, Srinagar wing of High Court of writing to the Archeology department for their expert advice, but nothing was produced before the Commission. Though in principle, it is accepted that PIO is under legal obligation to provide such information which is available on record on the date of filing of RTI application, the very spirit of the Act is that information has to be disseminated, if the PIO himself admits that there are basis of information. In this situation, only time period of 30 days might be extended but it will be totally against the spirit of law to totally deny the information.
“Therefore, PIO, Srinagar wing of High Court is directed to ensure that information is given to the appellant within reasonable time. PIO to act seriously and sincerely to ensure that retrieval of record for extracting information be done in the reasonable time. Appellant is at liberty to take further action under Section 15 of J&K RTI Act 2009 if deemed fit.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
