This is what Arvind Kejriwal's survey claims
http://rtiawards.org/release.html

"Effectiveness

The next metric is the effectiveness of the Commissions in getting its own 
orders implemented. It was found that 39% of the pro-disclosure orders were 
complied with on a national level. This means that despite a favorable order, 
61% people still do not get satisfactory information. Unfortunately, these 
people made several rounds of the Commissions, wrote many letters and made 
repeated phone calls but do not receive information as the case was closed 
after the order is passed. RTI Act gives powers of summons, penalties, arrests, 
production of documents etc. Barring penalties, these powers were never invoked 
by any commissioner. However, some Commissions like those in Punjab and 
Karnataka follow an interesting practice. They do not close a case and keep 
having repeated hearings till the appellant reports satisfaction, which perhaps 
is one of the reasons for their high rankings on this parameter."

He has then gone on to find that IC (M L Sharma) of CIC has the worst ranking 
in terms of non-compliance and follow up.

My Observations: This is sheer nonsense. I have been going through the CIC's 
website and find that IC (M L Sharma) is the only IC at CIC who is ensuring 
that information reaches (deserving) applicants by holding repeated hearings 
till the information is delivered. He also does not tolerate non-compliance of 
his orders, and uses language like this

"The matter is adjourned to XX.XX.2009 at 1200 hrs for further hearing on the 
issue of compliance of above directions."

For Arvind's information here are a few such orders

http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/LS-16062009-01.pdf
http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/LS-17072009-09.pdf
http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/LS-23042009-01.pdf



Reply via email to