Our group member RTIwanted (C.K.Jam) and another
have analysed CIC's penalty record from data 
given (very grudgingly) to them under RTI.

This is the sort of scientific and empirical
data we must generate and utilise. The first
thing that springs to mind is the tremendous
INCONSISTENCY here. With IC(SG) this is going
to be even more skewed.

What are the NORMS for the CIC in this behalf?

We need more information on this. For example I could
disgree with Mr Karira that GoNCTD P/As are the worst
violators of RTI Act. An alternative hypothesis is
that being "favourably" located at Delhi and with
benefit of 4 years of Delhi RTI Act, Delhi Appellants
are better equipped to extract penalties from CIC.

Sarbajit

ANALYSIS OF CIC PENALTIES

1. The highest number of penalties (in number and value) has been
imposed by CIC WH. This could be due to the large number of
departments he was handling before the 4 new IC's joined the CIC. It
could also be that he was handling a large number of departments
from New Delhi/Delhi Government who are generally the ones violating
the RTI Act. Without further information on the number of hearings
held by CIC and each of the IC's it is difficult to draw a conclusion.

2. 52% of the penalties imposed have been recovered or are in the
process of being recovered. In value terms, this is about 47%.
However, CIC WH has the largest percentage of penalties whose "status
is unknown". Once again this could be because of the larger number of
cases heard by him or because these penalties have been imposed
recently or simply because there is no follow up by someone in his
office to check on the status.

3. IC OPK has the best "recovery" rate but also has the highest number
of his penalties being challenged in the HC.

4. IC MA has imposed the lowest number of penalties (5) out of which
only one penalty has been recovered.

5. IC ANT has a very low rate of recovery of penalties. Nearly 50% of
the penalties imposed by him have either been set aside or the status
is not known. Amongst the penalties set aside by IC ANT, there are 2
which he himself has "stayed" and another 1 which he himself has "waived"

6. IC PB has imposed only 1 penalty of Rs. 7000/- which also has been
set aside by her at a later date since new facts came to light.

7. Only 5% of the penalties imposed by CIC have been challenged in
court. Although most of the writs are still pending, the one writ that
has been decided has been in favor of the CIC. No penalties have been
dismissed by the HC.

8. Only one disciplinary action recommended by CIC WH. None by the
other IC's have recommended any disciplinary action under Sec 20(2).

9. Please remember that the total number of cases disposed by the CIC
till August was 16,357

10.Another RTI application to DoPT by another applicant, revealed that
DoPT has spent a total of Rs. 2.00 Lakhs in publicity for RTI in the
last 3 years. The least that could have been done was at least spend
the total amount recovered from the penalties imposed by CIC till date
– Rs. 6.29 lakhs.

11.The CIC does not seem to set aside a large number of penalties it
imposes – only about 8% have been set aside.


Reply via email to