news details |
|
|
| Seeking reasons from officials out of RTI ambit: SIC | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Feb 12: The State Information Commission (SIC) in its order has said that asking reasons from officials under Right to Information Act (RTI) is not an information which could be sought under this law. The commission gave this order while disposing off an appeal titled Nazir Ahmad V/S SDM Vijaypur, Tehsildar Bari Bharamana. The information seeker wanted to know the reasons about a land mutation, and that was denied by the tehsildar and the SDM. The SIC has upheld the orders of the Tehsildar who is also the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the concerned tehsil office.
Details available with Early Times reveal that one Nazir Ahmed, S/o Siraj Din, a resident of Greater Kailash, Jammu filed second appeal before the State Information Commission (SIC) on 13.11.2015 stating that he filed an application under RTI Act to get some details about an alleged illegal mutation of land in the Bari Bharamana tehsil. The application was sent through registered speed-post on 11.09.2015 before PIO/Tehsildar, Bari Brahmana, District: Samba, but the concerned PIO failed to give response within the stipulated period.
Thereafter, the appellant filed First Appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA)/SDM, Vijaypur on 20.10.2015. That during hearing before FAA (SDM) on 04.11.2015, PIO submitted reply dated: 31.10.2015. That PIO forwarded the reply of Patwari written in "Urdu", whereas as reply should have been in English as RTI application was drafted in english . Being aggrieved by the reply of PIO and FAA , Nazir Ahmad filed second appeal before the State Information Commission (SIC).
During course of proceedings held at SIC on 12.1.2016 , the RTI application of the information seeker was discussed threadbare by the commission. It was found that S.No. 1 & 2 of the RTI application are statements made by the information seeker and he has not sought any information on these two points. As regards point 3, Tehsildar in his reply vide No. TBB/OQ/2015- 16/35/Reply/RTI dated: 31.10.2015 has stated that vide mutation No. 118(Jeem) Khasra No. 300,12 Marlas "Mera Doyam" land has been mutated in favour of one Daljit Singh, S/o. Rubail Singh. The information seeker sought reasons for transfer of this land out of 17 Marlas?
"As per definition of information as contained in section 2(d) of the Act, giving reasons or justifications, is outside the scope of the definition of "information". For this the appellant shall have to approach the appropriate competent authority" reads SIC order.
Response to para 4 has been given and again information seeker has sought reasons which is not covered under the definition of information as per SIC order . At point 5, the information seeker has sought the name of Patwari, who has changed the type of land. This has been responded by the Tehsildar stating that no such record is available in Patwar khana, which will indicate the name of the concerned Patwari.
Tehsildar (PIO) however, stated that mutation No. 118(Jeem) has been authenticated on 08.02.2009. Thus information as per records has been furnished. At points 6 and 7 also, the appellant has sought names of Patwari, Girdawar and Naib-Tehsildar who entered, verified and attested the Fard/Inteqal. This has been responded to by the PIO/Tehsildar, Bari Brahmana, by stating that no such records are available and on the basis of signatures on the documents it is not possible as to who has signed it, as they have not indicated their names.
SIC's order further reads: "This plea of respondent is upheld. FAA/SDM, Vijaypur and PIO/Tehsildar, Bari Brahmana further submitted that recently the system of indicating name against the signatures is adopted strictly, as per which, all the officers of the Revenue Department are required to indicate their names. As evidence thereof, respondents referred to revenue documents enclosed with the information, wherein the Patwari has indicated his name against the signatures. From the perusal of the information provided vis a vis information sought, the Commission is of the considered view that Tehsildar has responded to all the points of the RTI application on the basis of records. As regards the grievances of the appellant, he was informed that it is outside the scope of the J&K RTI Act, 2009 and for redressal of grievances/complaints, he is advised to approach the concerned competent authority. Further, PIO/Tehsildar, Bari Brahmana is directed to attest the documents provided to the appellant. With the above directions, the appeal filed before the Commission is disposed of". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
