news details |
|
|
| IC puts Shopian official on notice for refusing information | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Mar 19: The Information Commission has taken strong note of PIO/ACD Shopian's failure to furnish information sought under the RTI Act 2009 by Abdul Hamid Paul.
The commission has put him on notice seeking reasons why penalty should not be imposed on him for not furnishing the information.
He has been further directed to show cause as to why disciplinary action under service rules should not be recommended against him for his failure to appear before the Commission in person.
The above orders were passed by the commission on a complaint filed by Abdul Hamid Paul. The complainant exercising his right under Section 3 of the State RTI Act, 2009 had filed an application under Section 6 of the Act before the Assistant Commissioner Development Shopian Rafiq Ahmad Fafoo.
The complainant had sought list of job card holders who have been provided the jub under the said MG Nrega scheme; use of material with its ratio/labour utilized for each work; details of material purchased from which agency; details of banks from which the workers/labourers got their wages;list of BPL beneficiaries who have been provided the assistance under IAY from last ten years and under new construction and upgr adation provisions with their photographic evidence.
Under the provisions of Section 7 of the Act Rafiq Ahmad Fafoo PIO/ACD Shopian was under legal obligation to pass an order as expeditiously as possible but not later than 30 days. To make things clear, the information seeker could have insisted he could have been well within his rights to seek information even within 8 days time.
As the nature of information sought is such which requires a transparency and accountability which is the basic mandate of this Act as per its preamble, therefore, PIO should have himself offered the disclosure of such information.
The information seeker informed this Commission that till date no order has been passed by the PIO, not to talk of passing an order even before 30 days.
The information seeker in the complaint to this Commission has written that he had repeatedly reminded the PIO for disclosing this information which is not hit under any limb of prohibitory provisions of Sections 8 & 9 and on 23.2.2011 at 12.30 the PIO was contacted on landline phone who responded in a very rough tone refusing of having received such application.
The information seeker therefore he inquired from branch post master Mamender namely Mushtaq Ahmad who confirmed of having handed over the application to the PIO against proper receipt which was shown to the Commission.
On receiving the complaint, this Commission sent a copy of the same to the PIO vide this Commission's No. SIC/ICK/Comp-49/2011-3203-4 dated 06-01-2012 and has asked for his comments / counter statement as provided under Rule 24 of the J&K RTI Rules 2010 within 7 days time. All the necessary enclosures were sent to him. The Commission has been informed by the office that this communication has not been responded and no reply has been received by the Commission.
Accordingly, the Commission sent another notice for personal appearance of the PIO before this commission on 15.3.2012 vide this Commission's No. SIC/ICK/Comp-49/2011-3203-4/3203-04 dated:6/3/2011. Enough time was given to the PIO to attend this Commission. However, he failed to make
personal appearance before this Commission and respond to the complaint of the complainant. Hence it can safely be observed that the PIO is deliberating trying to avoid following the statutory duty cast on him under this Act. The repeated failure to provide the information smacks of non-transparency in the disbursement of funds under this scheme to the needy people.
The Commission holds that the application of the complainant filed under Section 6 of the Act has been received by the PIO and he has failed to provide the information within maximum time of 30 days. He has, therefore, attracted the provisions of Section 17 of the State RTI Act, 2009 which provides for imposition of penalty on the defaulting PIO from the date when information was to be given till the date when information is actually provided.
He is, therefore, directed to give his reasons, if any, for not imposing penalty on him. His reply should reach this Commission within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The Registrar of this Commission is also directed to issue notice under Section 33/34 of CPC read with Section 15 of the State RTI Act, 2009 to the defaulting PIO for not responding to this Commission's notice i.e. for failing to appear in this Commission personally. The PIO is also required to explain why Commission may not consider recommending of initiation of disciplinary action against him under the service rules applicable to him as provided under Section 17(2) of the State RTI Act, 2009. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
