Dear Friends,
The conspicuous dismal performance of the West Bengal Information Commission
is a known fact to all, by now. Hopefully due to this, as expected, we are
regularly receiving complaints in writing from different parts of West Bengal,
that the Government Officials are threatening the RTI Applicants (mostly the
BPL Community)of dire consequences if they file RTI applications. Some senior
bureaucrats even went on showing visiting cards of the Honble SCIC & the
Secretary, claiming them to be their old friends/batchmates & went on saying
that nothing will happen to them even if the Applicant complaints u/s 18 to the
Commission against them. In many cases inspite of that, as persuasively advised
by us, few individuals lodged complaints too before the WBIC u/s 18 regarding
the trouble faced by them while filing RTI Applications at different PAs. But
most interestingly, the concerned government officials were somehow informed
the very next day about such Complaints against them
(presumably over the phone), alongwith the details of the Complainant. The
open brow-beating and every possible harassments were meted out then with the
Complainant(s) by the said officer(s). Common rural/urban mass in West Bengal
are already getting cynical about the effectiveness of the Act & I hope you
will appreciate that they are not the one to be blamed. When the Honble CIC is
referring to the U.K. Data Protection Act, 1998 and the U.S. Law of Torts etc.
for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens, the
West Bengal Information Commission is poignantly promoting secrecy in the garb
of transparency. If the Commission does not work in accordance with the Act, I
most humbly feel it is useless for us to arrange these Awareness Drives within
the state, especially in the rural belts, since they are most worried about the
next round. Only two penalties were imposed since its inception & most
astoundingly numerous SPIOs go scot-free with
exactly similar follies.
Please go through the Order of WBIC pasted below, delivered as on 1st
February 2008 instant, for a Complaint filed by the undersigned U/s 18 as on
06-06-2007. The hearing was held as on 09-01-2008. Few guiding principles of
the Hearing Procedure at WBIC: (i) No minutes are recorded by anybody, by any
means, during any Hearing. (ii) The Secretary & the SCIC conduct the
Hearings (iii) The Secretary presumably memorises the proceedings of the
Court & reduces the same in writing, aftermath. (iv) In the Order pasted below,
the Commission admits the blatant violation of the Act, but still refuses to
penalise the SPIO.
I most humbly request you to go through the ORDER & comment on the same.
I also most humbly request you all to kindly advise/comment on how to counter
this nonchalant, predisposed attitude of the WBIC with very minimum resources.
Respondent: The SPIO, Bidhannagar Municipality (Appeared before this
Commission several times for deemed refusals, denials etc. for several Appeals
filed by different appellants, at different times, but never penalized. One
such is available, in my case at www.wbic.gov.in) Appellant: Malay
Bhattacharyya.
As the proceedings of the Court were not recorded, I facsimiled and
simultaneously speed posted a brief, the very next day, that was supposedly
established and agreed by the Commission before the Respondents & Appellants at
the stated Hearing , for their kind perusal.
SHRI. ARUN BHATTACHARYA,
THE HONBLE STATE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
KIND ATTENTION
SHRI. NANDAN RAY
THE HONBLE SECRETARY & REGISTRAR
Sir,
Kindly refer to the hearing held as on 9th January, 2008, MALAY BHATTACHARYYA
vs THE SPIO, BIDHANNAGAR MUNICIPALITY, regarding which the undersigned most
humbly requests the Honble Information Commission, to kindly consider the
following, if it deems fit:
It was established through the proceedings of the Honble Court on the
above-mentioned date, that the information sought by the Appellant at the POINT
NUMBERS 16 and 17 amongst others, were incorrect, contradictory and misleading,
knowingly served, as transpired from Annexures provided by the SPIO only.
If it was established then the Law says that the Honble Information
Commission QUOTE SHALL impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each
day till application is received or information is furnished, so however, the
total amount of such penalty SHALL NOT exceed twenty-five thousand rupees.
UNQUOTE.
The incorrect, contradictory and misleading information so provided was not
by Sri. Debashish Dey, the present SPIO of the Organisation concerned, but
the then SPIO, Sri. Tapas Choudhury.
Kindly also recall that during the hearing as on 09-01-2008 instant, Sri.
Krishnamoy Ghosh and Sri. Debashish Dey representing the Public Authority
concerned, stated that Sri. Tapas Choudhury informed them over the phone
instant, that the information provided by him to the Appellant under the Right
to Information Act 2005 are correct and he intends to stick to it. Thus
validating the incorrect, contradictory and misleading information provided by
him to the Appellant thrice; Once, when providing the Information to the
Appellant against the RTI Application. Secondly, when admitting the inadvertent
error in the dispatch date but validating the information provided before, by a
letter dated 26-09-2007, bearing Memo No: 1160/BM and lastly but certainly not
the least through his Representatives before the Commission as on
09-01-2008.
Ignorance of law is no excuse for breaking it goes an old
dictum of criminal jurisprudence. The undersigned hopes that this Commission
would appreciate that Sri. Tapas Choudhury was only rebuked and not penalised
by the Commission before, (in a separate issue) for the blatant
non-compliance of the RTI Act 2005 over the hearing held as on 15-05-2007, Case
No. 647(2), MALAY BHATTACHARYYA vs BIDHANNAGAR MUNICIPALITY. As being the
deemed SPIO of the stated Organisation he pleaded ignorance of the Act, then.
The very basic rights of a citizen granted under the Right to Information Act
2005 are being repeatedly infringed by Sri. Tapas Choudhury, willfully after
the preliminary warning of this Commission also. I strongly feel that unless
he is immediately censored and penalized by the Information Commission, as
prescribed under the Act, he would not amend himself and indulge in similar
anti-RTI activities in each and every other Public Office he will be working in
the near and far future.
So, I most humbly implore before the Honble SIC, to kindly penalize the
Executive Officer and the SPIO, Sri. Tapas Choudhury, u/s 20 who repeatedly
furnished incorrect information and mislead the appellant, again and again.
Thanking you in anticipation,
Sincerely Yours,
(MALAY BHATTACHARYYA)
PLEASE CHECK THE ORDER OF THE SIC INSPITE OF THE HUMBLE PLEA.
WEST BENGAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Appeal/Complaint No.
1955(4)-WBIC/RTI/57/06(Pt.II)
Date of hearing: 09.01.2008
ORDER
The Commission heard both the parties in detail.
In his reply the Executive Officer of Bidhannagar Municipality informed
Shri. Bhattacharyya that the Municipality did not have any administrative
machinery to monitor daily progress of any complaint made by the citizens
neither the Municipality had any rule to deal with such cases and therefore
responsibility, if any, of a so called delinquent official for his apparent
inaction could not be fixed. Sri Bhattacharyya has questioned this very
attitude of the Public Authority. He has also stated that after the enactment
of RTI Act 2005 in particular, every Public Authority should have such methods
so that the spirit of the Act is upheld and prompt actions are taken.
On his query about the number of encroachments removed/demolished on
08-04-2007 the Executive Officer had mentioned that only a few jhupries located
behind HSBC Bank at Karunamoyee were removed without specifying any number. But
Shri. Bhattacharyya has furnished quite a few number of news clippings which
show that nearly 1100 encroachments/jhupries were removed on that day spread
out in different blocks of the Municipality. Shri. Bhattacharyya, therefore,
has submitted before the Commission that this is a malafide intention on the
part of the Executive Officer in not providing the truth.
Further, on the query why illegal or unauthorized structures of FD Block
were not demolished on that day, the Executive Officer mentioned that the
question did not arise as the Municipality had already decided to provide trade
licenses in such cases and enclosed a copy of the resolution in this regard.
But interestingly, the resolution so enclosed (dated 16.7.06) did not mention
any thing about the grant of license to unauthorized structures, rather at
point nos. 4 & 5 the resolution specifically resolved to remove encroachments
from the footpaths of the entire Municipal area.
In reply to query no 17 the Executive Officer mentioned that the
Municipality has no right to remove encroachments from any plot of land in
Bidhannagar Municipal area as all such lands belong to Urban Development
Department. The Municipality only provides infrastructural support if such
department wants to remove encroachments. Shri. Bhattacharyya has pointed out
that the replies are contradictory on one hand and false on the other.
The Commission after hearing both the parties in detail observes that the
public authority appears to be loackadaisical in dealing with RTI application
which goes against the spirit of the Act. The Commission feels that even
hundred percent satisfaction may not be achieved in this regard, public
authority must appear to be sincere in dealing with RTI application by
furnishing replies sincerely and honestly. Whatever infrastructure is
available, the same must be used to achieve at least partial result.
The Commission hereby orders that the Executive Officer, Bidhannagar
Municipality shall within one month from the date of this order furnish report
to the Commission on the following two aspects:
(a) What are the actions taken by the public authority of Bidhannagar
Municipality to deal with the RTI applications effectively?
(b) The apparent contradictions in the reply on point Nos. 9, 16 and 17
shall have to be explained.
Date: 21.01.2008
Sd/-
Arun Kumar Bhattachary
State Chief Information Commissioner, W.B.
JUSTICE 4 ALL !
---------------------------------
Why delete messages? Unlimited storage is just a click away.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
