The Information Commissioner Mrs. Padma Balasubramanian humiliated and insulted me during a hearing on 14.06.08. From the outset, she adopted an intimidating and highhanded approach, a strategy clearly deployed to hide the failure of Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti, of which the Prime Minister is the chairman but which is being run by its Director Dr. Savita Singh like a personal fiefdom and with an iron hand. Nothing moves in the organization without her approving nod or raised eyebrows.
No sooner had I taken my seat than the I.C. chided me for putting in an application which was in bad taste. She said that I cannot ask for so much information in a single application. Gandhi Darshan has not so much as cared to appoint a PIO or comply with section 4 of the Act. Padma Balasubramanian repeatedly defended the Gandhi Darshan, without the latter making such a submission, by stating that it is a small organization which cannot have the resources to display section 4 disclosures or provide all the information. She added that had I asked for this information of an MNC or public company, then she would have been happy to provide it. This, when the allegedly small organization has a 36 acre fully developed campus with an array of imposing buildings in the heart of Delhi next to Rajghat and a whole Birla House where Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated at its disposal. So much for being small! More than six months had gone by since my application but Gandhi Darshan had not bothered to provide any information at all - not even a copy of its Memorandum and Rules and Regulations. Instead of proceeding with the issue of delay, Padma started questioning my bona-fide and motives behind asking for information. She did not pay any heed to my protests. During the first 5 minutes itself of the hearing, to my polite but firm objections, she challenged me to go to "appeal" (she meant "writ"). This happened at least thrice, without any provocation. I had requested copies of accounts of Gandhi Darshan for all financial years since 1984-85, however, Padma Balasubramanian said that she will only allow 3 years accounts. She refused to allow me to make any submissions and further refused to direct Gandhi Darshan to provide information to all queries/points. She said she will not address every point of request for information. Clearly, it was a farce. Since I did not want to be a part of it, I got up, collected my papers and left the room. On an earlier occasion too, she had imposed a condition in her order which the PIO himself had not asked for. The said appeal has been under review for long. In the light of these circumstances and quite a few of my earlier experiences, I wrote to Shri Wajahat Habibullah that I have no faith left in the impartiality, motives and calibre of Mrs. Padma Balasubramanian as an Information Commissioner and have requested him to transfer all of my cases to another Information Commissioner or place it before the Full Bench. I have also requested him to forward my complaint to the President of India so that she may refer the matter to the Supreme Court for an enquiry on the allegations of misconduct against Mrs. Padma Balasubramanian. RAKESH AGARWAL (NYAYABHOOMI) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
