One may not believe it; but it is true incident. The SPIO of the Village
Office, Tellichery, Kerala made his own  interpretation that the Rs.10/-
prescribed is for providing information is only orally and if an applicant
want this information in writting he has to pay the additional charges of
Rs.2/- prescribed in the Rules for providing it in an paper failing which
the applicant can get the information only on oral communication from the
SPIO. In the entire state of Kerala no one make such an interpretation and
this was an isolated case. None of the PAs  including District Collectorate,
Government Secretariate or even the SPIO of SIC, Kerala  make any such
claim.

The issue was reported to Ms Ishitha Roy, IAS District Collector, Kannur
whom I have not seen disagreeing with the plea of her subordinate staff in
any issue - even in serious case of corruption with documentary evidences .
As expected  she has sided with the above PIO affirming that his
interpretation was correct though the Collectorate itself did not resort to
such unlawful method.

On seeing such gross failure of District Administration, I had reported this
in person to Sri.Palat Mohandas, SIC, Kerala when he visitted this place. As
usual he could not answer this. Fully anticipatting this habit of his I was
ready with a written plea.  He had promissed to reply me soon when he reach
back at Trivandrum. .To day I received his reply in his No1112/SIC-Gen2/2009
dated 20-3-2009. It says that:

*"Vide letter cited you have informed the Commission that the Village
Officer, Tellicherry has demanded Rs.12/-instead of Rs.10/- as fee to
provide the informatrion if the applicant need the information in writting,
contray to the provision of the Right to Information Act.  In this instance
the said demand though unlawful, Commission cannot take up the issue until
and unless it is challenged either in a Complaint petition or in an Appeal
Petition and only when it comes up for the consideration of the commission.
Only the appropriate government can take steps to curb these kind of
practices*. "

The pity is that he accepted it as unlawful but plead that  he is helpless.
I feel pity that a former Chief Secretary of this State(more or less the
highest office)  is so helpless to initiate action against a Village Oficer
(the lowest head of office) despite provisions contained in Section
18(1)(f) and  18(2) of the Act. More than 20 second appeals/complaints  of
mine including  PIOs not obeying SICs orders etc being pending with him
since 2 years, I delibertely did not make a complainant in the prescribed
format as it was not likely to be considered in 2 years. I was wanting
urgent action . One should remember that this is a complaint I made to him
in open assembly  when he has asked the cityzens in public meetting to
project problems if any faced in connection with RTI and I have projected
the above problem.

I had followed it with a written a DO letter to him with copy to Ms. Ishita
Roy, IAS District Collector.  I think this  should be good enough for him to
apprise the correct cituation to the District Collector and sort out the
guilty. But either he is ignorant or scared . IThe  SIC is not able to sort
out such basic issues, the District Collector in person is not able to do
and thye want to approach government directly for such a simple unlawful
butchery of the RTI Act by the lowest government servant. , Of cource our
media like "The Hindu" does not care about such complaint but only
interestted in repeating that "The RTI Act is being misused" and "The public
neeedawarenes of RTI Act.

Any solution ?


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to