Dear Col Kurup, Please dont distort what I am communicating to this group.
We are examining a serious issue of usage of Complaint u/s 18 vis-a-vis Appeal u/s 19. I am not concerned about overloading of CIC/SICs and what they like or dislike. Our sole concern is using every available tool of RTI Act to its maximum advantage. Unfortunately with Yahoo groups its quite difficult to implement a flow chart for RTI'ing so this skeleton must suffice. STEP 1: a) Re-Read "Code for Responsible RTI" b) Research PA's website /Internet c) Draft RTI request d) Slip into PIO mode and review / rework Draft for exemptions. (THIS IS THE MOST CRUCIAL STEP) e) Check if "larger public interest" is well covered. f) Check that information sought is SPECIFIC and with sufficient PARTICULARS to identify the information (preferably records/documents) desired. g) Check that "opinion" is not being sought. h) Ensure to extent possible that PIO cannot transfer u/s 6(3) or invoke third party u/s 11. (IF STEP #1 is fully complied with, then 50% of the battle is over) STEP 2: a) File RTI to PIO of concerned PA. (Ensure that application fees are paid in a prescribed mode). b) Wait for 35 days or till reply is received. STEP 3: (COMPLAINT ROUTE IS PREFERABLE TO APPEAL, so we must carefully see if section 18 may be easily invoked. We must keep in mind that CIC is not bound to take up Complaints - so our grounds for complaints must be clear and directly applicable. IF CIC rejects / avoids here then it is straight onto the High Court against CIC AND the PA.) a) IF no reply is received THEN File COMPLAINT u/s 18(1)(c) to CIC. b) IF a reply is received which you are not satisfied with THEN carefully evaluate if 18(1)(e) should be used "who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act". Every word in this phrase must be well understood. This clause is best used by people who already have the information and are trying to trap the PA. STEP 4: a) If no complaint u/s 18 then File FA well in time. b) After FA go for 2nd Appeal if you are still not satisfied or information is not provided by PIO despite direction of FA. (NB: Do not ask for Penalty in Appeals, only ask for information) STEP 5: a) If after a favourable decision of CIC/SIC the PIO gives you incomplete/false information, file section 18 Complaint seeking PENALTY. Sarbajit PS: Please improve this. PPS: Please be satisfied if you received 70% information of the information sought. File another RTI for the balance 30% which is better fine-tuned. RTI'ing is an adaptive process - be flexible and acknowledge that citizen is a)not perfect b)shooting in the dark. --- In [email protected], "colnrkurup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thank you Mr.Sarbajit, > Though this case does not pertains to me, NOW YOU GOT IT. This > exactly was the gist of my plea. The CIC/SIC does not like the extra > load and we should avoid unnecessarily overloading them. In normal > cases, as a policy, when a first appeal can solve a problem easily, > why should one resort to second appeal especially the Act does not > secifically debar it ? Thank you once again. > > With reards > Col Kurup > > --- In [email protected], "sroy1947" <sroy1947@> wrote: > > > > Dear Rakesh, > > > > Your case clearly falls u/s 19. You file RTI and PIO promises to > give > > information although belated. After 45 days of RTI you file FA, > > Appellate orders PIO to give information. Even after 6 months you > dont > > get information so you file COMPLAINT which is converted to 2nd > Appeal > > by CIC. You are still awaiting date at CIC. At *present time* your > > case falls under section 19. > > > > Had you filed a Complaint instead of First Appeal, your case would > > have been different. What is clearly emerging from these discussion > > (your case / Col Kurup's matter) is that Complaint should be made > > immediately after expiry of about 35-40 days of filing the RTIO > > request. By scheme of RTI Act Section 18 Complaints are the > PREFERRED > > route vis-a-vis Section 19 Appeals. However, the CIC/SIC will not > like > > this (extra load on them), so they will do their best to divert > > citizens to file First Appeals INSTEAD. > > > > Sarbajit > > > > --- In [email protected], RAKESH GUPTA <snehcs2@> wrote: > > > > > > dear sir, > > > kindly note , my case does not fall any sub section section 19 of > > appeal. > > > because no decision is made for denial, and they had promise to > > provide the information. > > > although no information is provided till date.However it fala in > > section 18(1) of the RTI ACt. > > > with regards > > > rakesh gupta > > > > > > sroy1947 <sroy1947@> wrote: Hi > Rakesh, > > > > > > Your case is very different from Col Kurup's. > > > > > > Neither PIO nor AA has denied you information or cited any > exemption. > > > In fact the intention is clearly to give you the information. > since > > > you were late in filing 2nd Appeal you filed complaint probably > > > relying upon the clauses 18(1)(c) and/or 18(1)(e). CIC has > converted > > > this to appeal and registered it. > > > > > > Since delay in filing seems condoned, and for Central matters > there is > > > not much difference between Complaint and Appeal, all that > remains now > > > is for your appeal to be disposed of in the normal course - CIC > is > > > running late by 6/9 months now. The only alternative you have is > to go > > > to High Court in Writ jurisdiction asking for supervision of CIC > u/a > > > 227. If there are some compelling grounds for urgency, you can > inform > > > these to C'IC or CIC Registry asking for early date BEFORE going > to > > > High Court. > > > > > > Sarbajit > > > > > > --- In [email protected], RAKESH GUPTA <snehcs2@> wrote: > > > > > > > > DEAR SIRS, > > > > KINDLY SUGGEST WHAT ALTNATIVE I HAVE, IN PRESENT SITUATION. > > > > i filed RTI request. No information is given. However, LD > CPIO had > > > inform me that he will shortly supply the infomation . after 45 > days > > > of RTI , i had filed first appeal. A A directed to supply the > > > information. > > > > However, after 6 months of AA order no infomation is > supplied. > > > > After this, i had filed complaint with CIC. CIC had > registered as > > > appeal, and no date of hearing is fixed till date although three > > > months are over. > > > > Is CIC is right to register complaint as appeal , when F AA > order > > > is direction to CPIO to supply the infomation. > > > > Is it not delay tactis by CIC. > > > > with regards > > > > rakesh gupta > > > > > > > > sroy1947 <sroy1947@> wrote: > > > > Dear Col Kurup, > > > > > > > > You are too emotionally attached to this matter to debate > > logically. I > > > > am only debating this academically (for further education) > since I > > > > have high regard for you. > > > > > > > > 1) It is very well settled that when there are multiple > remedies for > > > > granting a particular relief, the litigant may only agitate > one of > > > > them. This is allied to the legal concept of "res adjudicata" > or "a > > > > thing once decided cannot be reagitated again (and again)". So > you > > > > must choose to use 18(3) or 19(1) but not both. This principle > is so > > > > well settled that it is not inserted into the laws of India. > > > > > > > > 2) 18(3) is the specific provision in the RTI Act for your > lis - > > > > namely deemed refusal of the PIO. You failed to use it at the > right > > > time. > > > > > > > > 3) Having chosen the route of 19(3) which is ALSO permissible, > you > > > > should have followed it up with a 2nd Appeal rather than going > for > > > > 18(3) complaint after the avenue was closed. > > > > > > > > 4) S'CIC very kindly allowed you to continue on to 2nd Appeal, > but > > > > you chose not to pursue it. > > > > > > > > 5) A bad carpenter blames his tools. Either be a bad carpenter > with > > > > better tools OR become a good carpenter who will be able to > work with > > > > the very poor tools of RTI Act. > > > > > > > > Sarbajit > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "colnrkurup" <colnrkurup@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I repeat that this may kindly be considered only as an > accademic > > > > > discussion clarifying a very vital factor to prevent > hijacking > > of the > > > > > RTI Act by some of the corrupt and influencial officials > with the > > > > > connivance of the Commissions. > > > > > 1. There is absolutely no provision anywhere in the Act that > > > > > stipulate that a First Appeal under 19(1) bar a complaint u/s > > 18(1)(c) > > > > > 2. In fact one is not expected to approach SIC/CIC as and > when > > with > > > > > the deemed refusal of the PIO lest the Commission is > > over-burdened. > > > > > It is normal protocal to approach the Commission only when > an > > > > > aggrieved exhaust all other opportunitiesstipulated in the > Act. > > > > > Naturally when the PIO refuces, one should approach his AA > by the > > > > > only means of approach viz., first appeal. In majority of the > > cases > > > > > the AA will direct the PIO to furnish the reply - it maynot > be the > > > > > information sought; but one will get a reply as the PIO will > > not have > > > > > any reason for not replying.I donot find anything wrong in > > making one > > > > > more first appeal based on the reply if required. In case > this > > > > > second "first appeal" is rejected, it is good enough reason. > > > > > 3. Section 19(1) is very specific. Any person not receiving > a > > > > > decision ....may file an appeal. IT DOES NOT SAY SAY that on > > deemed > > > > > refusal one should not file first appeal but should resort > to > > > > > complaint only. > > > > > 4. Sec 19(3) is too specific. A SECOND APPEAL SHALL LIE ONLY > > AGAINST > > > > > THE DECISION UNDER 19(1). This means that there could be no > Second > > > > > Appeal unless there is a DECISION of first appeal. If there > is NO > > > > > DECISION or NO REPLY, there cannot be a Second appeal. The > Act > > does > > > > > not allow it.Of course anything can happen in "KHANSI RAM KA > > > > > PALTAN ".Thjat is a diferant matter altogether > > > > > 5. Kindly forget the number of days or delay aspects. That > is not > > > > > the issue > > > > > 6. Can anyone quote the relevant Section of the Act which > says > > that A > > > > > SECOND APEAL SDHALL LIE without a First Appeal ? > > > > > 7. Can any one quote the Section which bar a complaint when > first > > > > > ppeal is made or rather where does it state that a first > appeal > > > > > disqualify the appellant from making a complaint. > > > > > 8. Kindly leave aside the somersoult of First appeal, Second > > appeal > > > > > and complaint. Let us examine the ground realities. A cityzen > > make an > > > > > application seeking an information falling under the > defenition of > > > > > information given in Section 2(f). The information is held by > > the PA > > > > > and not falling under any of the exedmptions or > disportionately > > > > > divert the resosurces nor spoil the record. Can anyone, PIO > or > > AA or > > > > > the SIC, deny it and dismiss the case just because the > > information if > > > > > given will expose serious corruption which the PIO, AA and > SIC > > does > > > > > not want to disclose. By converting the Complaint suo motu > into a > > > > > Second appeal the sIC has barred the appellant's chance to > > prefer the > > > > > second appeal with relevant provisions which does not suit > the > > PIO,AA > > > > > and SIC. With such a disposal how can one approach > judiciary ? > > These > > > > > are all deliberate hy-jacking theRTI Act. I feel that forums > > likeRTI- > > > > > india should stand for that. Can anyone justify the above > > > > > actofSIC,Kerala ? It is an open challenge > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > > Why delete messages? Unlimited storage is just a click away. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > Chat on a cool, new interface. No download required. Click here. > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > >
