Commission Holds Officials Liable for RTI Delays, Contemplates Penalty The Commission found both the CPIO and Asstt. Registrar responsible for delays in providing information under the RTI Act. They were directed to show ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Commission Holds Officials Liable for RTI Delays, Contemplates Penalty
The Commission found both the CPIO and Asstt. Registrar responsible for delays in providing information under the RTI Act. They were directed to show cause why a penalty of Rs. 250 per day should not be imposed on them for the delays. The CPIO was faulted for delayed action on the RTI application and subsequent delays in providing access to files, while the Asstt. Registrar failed to ensure timely availability of files for inspection. The Commission stressed the significance of prompt handling of RTI requests to maintain transparency and accountability in governance.
Issues: Delay in providing information under RTI Act, Responsibility of CPIO and Asstt. Registrar, Penalty proceedings under RTI Act
In this case, the appellant filed an RTI application requesting inspection of specific files and documents. The CPIO initially permitted inspection but failed to provide the requested records promptly. Despite directions from the FAA, there were delays in making the files available for inspection. The Asstt. Registrar also failed to ensure timely access to the files. The appellant alleged connivance between the CPIO and the Asstt. Registrar, leading to the present appeal before the Commission. The Commission found that both CPIO and Asstt. Registrar were responsible for the delays. They were directed to show cause why a penalty of Rs. 250 per day should not be imposed on them for the delay in providing information. Separate show cause notices were to be issued to the CPIO and the Asstt. Registrar for their actions.
The Commission noted that the CPIO caused delays by acting on the RTI application only after a significant period had passed since its submission. Despite subsequent directions, there were further delays in providing access to the requested files. The Asstt. Registrar, after initially offering the file for inspection, failed to follow up and ensure its availability to the appellant. Both officials were held responsible for the delays in providing information. As a result, they were directed to explain why a penalty should not be imposed on them for their actions under the RTI Act. The Commission emphasized the importance of timely and efficient handling of RTI requests to uphold transparency and accountability in governance.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
