In an important verdict, Madhya Pradesh State Information Commission (MPSIC) has ordered all the district collectors to ensure proactive compliance and suo motu disclosures provided under the RTI Act pending for 17 years.
Late on Friday, state information commissioner Rahul Singh in an order stated that these disclosures will also help to combat allegations that RTI is being misused as a tool for blackmailing public authorities.
Singh said it had been 17 years since the RTI Act was enacted, but public authorities were yet to prepare the 17-point manual of suo motu disclosures under the Act. The Supreme Court, in Kishan Jain vs Union of India, had issued a notice for non-compliance of mandatory disclosures by public authorities under Section 4 of the RTI Act so that it did not become an “ornamental legislation”, he added.
In his order, Singh further stated that it is disappointing to see that all the DC offices in Madhya Pradesh had continuously violated Section 4 of the RTI Act for almost two decades. According to the Act, the proactive disclosures of the 17-point manual that had to be made within 120 days of enactment, were still missing after 17 years.
He pointed out in the order that “Section 4 of the RTI Act obligates every public authority to keep all records properly catalogued and indexed in a manner and form that facilitates the right to information, so that citizens have to minimally file RTI applications. Every public authority shall ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are computerised within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources”.
The SIC has passed this order after an appellant, Shivanand Dwivedi, filed an RTI application with the office of collector and district magistrate, Rewa, seeking the 17-point manual and, subsequently, a complaint for non-compliance of obligations under Section 4(1) of the RTI Act by Rewa DC office and, similarly, all other DC offices.
Deciding the appeal and the complaint together, the SIC initiated an inquiry using powers vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as provided under Section 18(3) of the RTI Act to examine the websites of all districts in Rewa division and verify them physically.
The SIC also noted the unavailability of the “17-point manual” mandated under Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act, in the DM office. The public information officer of Rewa collectorate stated about the unavailability of the 17-point manual and, henceforth, it became clear that this information that facilitates transparency and reduces burden of RTI applications in government offices and of appeals in the SIC is unavailable and inaccessible not only at the DC office, Rewa, but across DC offices in the state.
The inquiry found that the Rewa DC office and other DC offices were in blatant violation of Section 4 of the RTI Act. The SIC, after taking a considerate view, decided not to levy a penalty and gave time to the Rewa DM office to comply. The SIC also directed the then Rewa district collector Dr Ilayaraja T to go through the 17-point manual uploaded on the website of the general administration department and, accordingly, prepare the information and manual to be uploaded on the district website.
The information commissioner, in his order, also explained how voluntary disclosure would lead to good governance. The order reads, “A good governance is one which enables citizens to be informed so that they can participate in processes of governance to make it better for themselves and society at large however in the absence of transparency and accountability mechanism, governance becomes opaque, exclusionary and loses the public trust of citizens in the state.”
The SIC said during the course of hearing in many appeals, it has been found that the information sought in the RTI application belong to the category of disclosures under Section 4 and, therefore, should have been publicly available. The DC offices established for directly connecting with people and working for them are putting their citizens through a tedious process of filing RTI applications.
Singh also suggested in his order that proactive disclosure will serve as safeguard against any allegation of RTI being misused as a tool for blackmail. The SIC observes in the order that recently Indore district collector Manish Singh raised concerns about the RTI Act being misused and has become a means of blackmail.
The order reads, “The SIC is of considerate view that by complying with Section 4 of the Act and disseminating most of the information widely and in such a form that is easily accessible to the public, as provided under Section 4(1) and Section 4(2) of the Act, would not only reduce blackmailing but will also ensure limited usage of RTI Application by the public to obtain information. Also, as per DOPT Circular F No.1/1/2013-IR dated 23 March 2016, all the public authorities are required to proactively disclose RTI applications and their responses on the websites maintained by the Public Authorities with search facility based on keywords.”
Ball has started rolling
Following Singh’s order, Rewa became the first district in Madhya Pradesh to successfully comply with the provisions under Section 4 of the RTI Act. Singh, in his order, lauded the efforts of Dr Ilayaraja T, who took proactive measures to ensure compliance of Section 4.
He said, “Rewa serves as an example and a model for all other districts in Madhya Pradesh to take proactive steps in making their offices transparent and accountable to it’s citizens.”
MPSIC issues warning
The commission has granted three months for the compliance. However, the information commissioner warned that in case of non-compliance, the SIC can receive complaints under Section 18 against the concerned public authority and take disciplinary action. The SIC has directed principal secretary of the GAD to take necessary steps to ensure compliance in all DC offices.
Read all the Latest News India and Breaking News here
Comments
0 comment