Block-level Interactive Workshop on RTI Act 2006 held at Paikmal Block Headquarters,
Baragarh District under the joint aegis of Padampur Sub-divisional administration and
Samuhik Marudi Pratikar Udyam Network, Padampur on 18th Nov. 2006
As per the instruction of Orissa Information Commission, Bhubaneswar the Sub-Collector Padampur decided to organize a series of Interactive Workshops on RTI Act at the level of each of the 6 Blocks involving the officials, PRI leaders, journalists, lawyers and NGOs with a view to provide the participants with an in-depth operational knowledge about the RTI Act and Orissa RTI Rules. Further it was decided that such workshops were to be organized under the joint aegis of Padampur Sub-divisional administration and Samuhik Marudi Pratikar Udyam, Padampur a network of civil society groups working for the empowerment of marginalized sections of society.
The fifth one in the series of such Workshops was held at Paikmal Block Meeting Hall on 18th of November 2006 at around 11.30 pm and it continued upto 2 pm, followed by mid-day lunch. It was attended by about 100 participants including guests and resource persons. Seated in the dais were Bargarh Zilla Parishad Chairman Sri M.R.Singh Bariha, Member Zilla Parishad Sri Chandulal Pradhan, Chairman Paikmal Panchayat Samiti Sri Binod Kumar Kalia, BDO Padampur Sri Damodar Sahu, BDO Paikmal Sri Khageswar Patra, Sub-divisional Information and Public Relations Officer-cum-APIO Padampur Sri Sarat Chandra Sethi and Sri Chitta Behera Advisor to Orissa Campaign for Right to Information. Other notable persons present in the Workshop were Additional BDO Paikmal Sri Shashi Bhushan Patnaik, SEO-cum-PIO Paikamal Block Sri Narayan Sahu and Coordinator SMPU Network Padampur Sri Fakir Charan Rout.
The session was started with a note of welcome by BDO-cum-Appellate Officer of Paikmal Block Sri Khageswar Patra, who observed in course of his brief talk made in English that the RTI Act has given power to each citizen to access official information, and the resource persons who have already received training on operationalisation of the Act are present in the Workshop to speak at length on various provisions made under the Act.
He was followed by Sri Sarat Ch. Sethi, SIPRO-cum-APIO Padampur who briefing about the agenda of the Workshop told that it would consist of 3 components, namely self-introduction by the participants, talks by resource persons and a question-answer session. He then requested the participants, each to introduce himself/herself in a few words mentioning their name, organization and post if any held by him/her in the organization. Then each participant introduced himself/herself.
Following the self-introduction by the participants, Sri Sarat Ch. Sethi, SIPRO Padampur resumed his talk on preliminaries about RTI Act. The RTI Act came into effect on 15 June 2005, the day when President of India signed the RTI Bill that had been passed in both houses of Parliament. But it acquired full force 120 days thereafter i.e. on 12th of Oct 2005 throughout the country including Orissa, except of course the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The RTI Act is a unique law, in the sense that it puts a compulsory obligation on both Central and State Governments to propagate and popularize the provisions of the Act among the public at large. Moreover the Act seeks to put an end to the era of official secrecy which had hitherto prevailed owing to Official Secrets Act of 1923. As such the Act has 3-fold objectives, namely to bring about transparency in the system of governance, penalising the Government officers for not disclosing information as per the mandate of the Act and above all eradication of corruption at various levels of administration.
Then Sri Sethi speaking on the definition of information as provided under the Section 2(f) of the Act observed that it included inter alia the information about a file and its notings that contained the opinions and advices of the concerned officers, information in the form of a sample or the information stored in electronic media like CD, Cassette or Floppy. As regards who are obligated to provide information, he said that all public authorities recognized by Constitution or any law of the country are bound by this Act to provide the information held by them.
As to who are entitled to ask for information under this Act, Sri Sethi said, every citizen of India and that is why he/she has to provide the proof of his/her citizenship along with the application for information. Again, it means that any person as a citizen can apply, but not as a holder of any post or designation. Then, as to how to ask for information, he said that one has to fill up an application form called Form-A for receiving any information under Section 6(1) of the Act. The applicant has to pay an application fee of Rs.10/- (Rupees Ten only) while submitting the filled application.
The RTI Act in its Section 8 has exempted certain categories of information from disclosure, which pertain to sovereignty and integrity of the country, and information received in fiduciary capacity etc. Exemplifying the term ‘fiduciary’, he referred to the information received by a lawyer from his client, or by a doctor from his patient and the like. However, despite such exemptions, a PIO can disclose any piece of information, if in his opinion the public interest would better be served by such disclosure than by withholding it.
Then Sri Sethi observed that the PIO shall give the information in 30 days of the receipt of application, but if the information pertains to one’s life and liberty, then it has to be disclosed in 48 hour.
Then the BDO-cum-Appellate Officer, Bodasambar (Padampur) Sri Damodar Sahu, who had received the training on RTI Act from a training programme organized by State Information Commission recently in Bhubaneswar, gave a brief talk dealing with various aspects of the new law. He further said that he would explain some important provisions of the Act, while the other speaker of the day Sri Chitta Behera, who is a specialist on RTI would respond to the questions likely to be raised by the participants. Then dealing with the unique significance of the new law, Sri Sahu said that RTI Act is a revolutionary law, which overrides the long-prevailing Official Secrets Act 1923 that legally debarred any employee of the Government from disclosing official information to the public. And as for the background of the OS Act of 1923, he told that when the Civil Disobedience Movement was going on in the country against the British rule in early 20s of the last century, the Satyagrahis and other people started asking for various kinds of information from the offices run by the British Government. The British rulers who were unwilling to share official information with the people of India brought about this draconian law in 1923, just to deny information to Indians on matters relating to governance of the country. The RTI Act which overrides the provisions of Official Secrets Act confers now a constitutional right on every citizen of the country to seek information from any public authority.
As regards who are bound by this law to provide information, he said that all kinds of public authorities, from Panchayat to Parliament, from SDJM Court to Supreme Court and from the office of RI to Rastrapati Bhavan are covered under the ambit of the Act. The NGOs, which are funded by the Government are also liable to disclose information about themselves under the Act.
As regards who is entitled to apply for information under this law, he mentioned ‘every citizen’. But the law doesn’t accord any special status to an applicant holding any post or designation in some office or organization. Therefore a Government servant, for instance, while applying for information under this Act needn’t mention his/her post or designation in the application, but he/she is entitled to receive the desired information as a citizen of the country.
As regards who shall provide the information, every office needs to appoint a Public Information Officer for the purpose, along with an Appellate Officer, whose duty is to sort out the grievance of the citizen arising out of denial of information by the PIO. And a citizen has to apply for information in Form-A prescribed for the purpose, as provided under Section 6(1) of the Act.
The PIO is bound to respond to the applicant in Form-B mentioning the cost of information to be paid by the citizen applicant before procuring the information. If, however, the PIO on receipt of an application for information think that the requested information is exempt from disclosure by the Act itself, then he/she is required to mention it in Form C (intimation of rejection) while rejecting the application. Further, if a question appears to the PIO to be of absurd nature, then he might also reject the application.
If the PIO fails to discharge his/her duty to provide the information in a time-bound manner, or if the applicant is not satisfied with the information given by the PIO, then the aggrieved applicant might prefer his/her first appeal within 30 days in Form-D against the decision so taken by the PIO before the first appellate authority of the said office. The fee for 1st appeal is Rs.20/-, to be paid through court fee stamps. The 1st appeal shall be disposed of within 30 to 45 days. If the aggrieved appellant is not satisfied even with the decision of the 1st appellate authority, then he/she might prefer a second and final appeal within 90 days in Form-E against the same before the State Information Commission, whose decision shall be final and binding on all parties. The fee for the 2nd appeal is Rs.25/- to be paid through court fee stamps.
Based upon the hearing of the appeal by the State Information Commission, if the PIO is proved a defaulter, then he/she can be penalized by the Commission at the rate of Rs.250/- against every day’s delay in providing information upto a maximum of Rs.25,000/-. And further, the Commission may order disciplinary action as per the Conduct Rules to be initiated against the PIO for violation of the provisions of RTI Act. The objective behind such penal provisions made under the RTI Act is to enhance the sense of responsibility and accountability among the public servants.
Sri Sahu then concluded his talk with the request to Sri Chitta Behera, the next speaker to deal with other provisions of the Act in detail for the benefit of the participants.
Sri Chitta Behera started his deliberation by expressing his sincere gratitude to both Sub-divisional administration Padampur and SMPU Network for having given him the opportunity of speaking on RTI Act and Orissa Rules before an informed assembly that consisted of PRI leaders, Govt officers, media persons and NGO functionaries. Further he expressed his satisfaction at the fact that unlike the awareness events being organized elsewhere in the State at the behest of State Information Commission, where only a few provisions of the Act and Rules are merely parroted out and that too, in a one-sided manner, the Block-level RTI workshops being organized by Padampur Sub-divisional administration in collaboration with SMPU Network are more lively and participatory ones, infused with a genuine spirit of debate and dialogue. He further observed that the RTI Act being altogether a new and different sort of law is bound to give rise to confusions and contradictory views at various levels, and as a matter of fact, even the interpretation of the law given by Central and State Information Commissions are not free from blemish and criticism. It is worth recalling the episode that took place in Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi where the ‘National Conference on One Year of RTI’ was being held during 13-15 October 2006. When on the first day the President rose to deliver his inaugural address, a group of RTI activists holding the banner ‘Sack Central Information Commission’ shouted slogans of protest. They were instantly arrested. But the positive result that came out of this incident is that the President in his speech offered to hold talks with the persons whosoever wanted to ventilate any grievance about the manner of implementation of RTI Act. Since then quite some RTI activist groups have already met the President and presented their respective memoranda on how the operationalisation of the new law could be improved upon. And the President gives half an hour for discussing with each group. And we should remember that though Information Commissioners are supposed to be the highest forum under the RTI Act, they are also not immune to disciplinary action. As per Sections 14 and 17, they can be sacked by the President and Governor respectively on the ground of inefficiency.
Sri Behera then informed that as pr the latest report of Berlin-based Transparency International which conducts annually a global corruption perception index, India stood at 88 out of 159 countries in 2005, whereas it has come down to 70 among 153 countries in 2006. And this is all due to enforcement of the RTI Act a year ago. The BBC of late broadcast a similar kind of news too. In view of this, the word patriotism has now received a new connotation. The people who once fought against the British were then called patriots. Now there being no alien rulers, a true patriot is the one who stands for a radical change in the status quo which is based upon official secrecy. From this perspective every RTI activist is the patriot of the day, and every status-quoist is the enemy of the country.
Speaking on the unique significance of the Act, Sri Behera said, prior to enactment of RTI, there existed no legal scope even for a Government employee to ask for any information from his/her own office, and relating to his/her own service. A Government employee had no power to make a representation before a higher authority, or even before a people’s representative, without taking the permission of his/her immediate boss. Now that the RTI Act is in force, a Government servant too can apply for information, without any fear, before the appropriate authorities about any matter permissible under the Act, and the latter are bound by law to give a time-bound reply to his/her queries. Thus with the enforcement of RTI Act, an office of Government shall henceforth remain transparent not only to the citizens at large, but also to its own officers and employees, - a reality which didn’t exist earlier.
Taking the cue from the observation made by the previous speaker that a Government employee while applying under RTI Act shouldn’t use his/her official designation but do so only in the capacity of an individual citizen, Sri Behera opined that if a Government servant by chance used his/her designation in the application, the concerned PIO should not reject the application on the said ground. To illustrate the point, he showed two decisions of Orissa State Information Commission announced on 5th Sept. and 10th October 2006 respectively, in which the Commission imposed penalty on the concerned PIOs and in both cases the applicants used their official designation (one is an ex-IPO in District Industries Centre, Rayagada and the other one a Retd. Reader in Commerce). Thus if an application is signed by a person as per Section 6(1) of the Act, the PIO should entertain it, even if the applicant mentioned his/her existing or past designation.
Then Sri Behera dealt with some salient features of the Act. To facilitate the discussion, he requested Sri Fakir Charan Rout, Network Coordinator of SMPU to read out the concerned provisions from the Act, Rules and guidelines etc. as and when required from the book supplied to each participant as a reading material, He further said that as per Section 27(1), every rule made by an appropriate Government under the Act should be notified in its official Gazette. So in order to ascertain what provision has been made by the Rules of the Centre or of a State under the Act, we should always refer to and rely upon the text from authentic sources such as notification in the Official Gazette, and never quote second-hand sources like anonymous brochures written on the subject by whosoever.
As regards the title of the book, ‘The Orissa RTI Rules 2005: Why absurd and illegitimate even after Amendment of 29 May 2006?’, Sri Behera explained that like any other Act the RTI Act has a built-in provision (vide Section 30), that entrusts the Central Government to plug in the loopholes, if any found in the process of operationalisation of the Act within two years of its enactment. Various civil society groups within and outside Orissa including Mrs.Aruna Roy’s MKSS, which pioneered the campaign for introduction of RTI Act at national level felt that the Rules made by Government of Orissa under the Act were ultra vires on many counts, and they therefore have been campaigning for reform of the Orissa Rules in tune with the letter and spirit of parent Act. The above titled book, which is a bilingual compilation (in Oriya and English) of the text of the RTI Act, Central and Orissa Rules along with a select number of memoranda and articles critiquing the Orissa Rules is now a tool in the hands of the civil society activists in their ongoing campaign for reforming the Orissa RTI Rules along the desirable lines.
Then taking the cue from definition of ‘information’ given by the previous speaker, Sri Behera drew the attention of the participants to the definition of ‘right to information’ as mentioned under Section 2(j) of RTI Act. Such right includes above all the right to inspect a ‘work’. For instance, if the people of a village suspect that a road sanctioned under Panchayat funds is being constructed in a haphazard manner with materials of inferior quality, they can demand inspection of the work site and moreover, if they demand such inspection under Section 4 (vide Explanation) of the Act, the concerned public authority is bound to allow such inspection to be held instantly. And again, unlike the Section 6, which requires a single citizen to apply for information which includes obviously his/her right to inspection, the Section 4 talks in a plural sense and requires the dissemination of information by each public authority to the members of public. Thus the people of a village can go en masse and demand instant inspection of any information including a work in the presence of the concerned officers of a public authority.
Again taking the cue from the observation made by the previous speaker that anybody seeking information is bound to apply in Form-A and may wait upto 30 days for getting the information, Sri Behera said that the Act provides for another and altogether different mode of accessing official information i.e. instant access to 17 categories of information supposed to be disseminated suo motu by every public authority as mentioned under Section 4 of the Act. And in fact, the Section 4(2) emphatically says that each public authority should provide these information to the public in such a manner that a citizen won’t feel the need at all for making an application under the Act to get a piece of information. Further the Section 4(4) says that every information is to be disseminated in local language and in a manner easily intelligible and accessible by the common people, the bulk of whom are illiterate and poor.
At this point, Chairman Bargarh Zilla Parishad Sri Mano Ranjan Singh Bariha wanted that all the 17 points covered under Section 4(1b) of the Act be read out for the knowledge of all. Accordingly, Sri Fakir Charan Rout read out each such point loudly. Then Sri Behera added that under Section 4(1b) one can among other things ask for information about the progress of any scheme, amount of money sanctioned, disbursed and utilized, the details of beneficiaries under any scheme, mode of their selection, decision-making process followed in each matter and moreover the pay and allowance received by each employee of a public authority. He further told that the Orissa RTI (Amendment) Rules 2006 vide its Rule 2(2) has also made a clear provision for a citizen’s right to inspection under Section 4 of the Act and mandated all the public authorities working under Government of Orissa, each to maintain a register for recording the details of the citizens visiting an office for inspection under Section 4 of the Act.
Then Sri Behera dealt with the previous speaker’s remark that the BPL persons are exempt only from paying the application fee, but bound to pay other kinds of fees such as towards cost of information and electronic media. He showed the FAQ on RTI Act published on the website of Orissa Soochana Commission (http://orissasoochanacommission.nic.in), where at point 15, the answer has been given to the question ‘What is the fee?’ The said answer after describing various kinds of fees chargeable under the Act mentions at sub-point 4, ‘No fees will be charged from people living below poverty line.’ He further added that nowhere in the Act nor in Orissa Rules, it has been mentioned that the fees other than application fee shall be charged from the BPL persons. Thus the very statement that the BPL persons have to pay the other kinds of fees towards the cost of information, not only militates against the letter and spirit of RTI Act, but also against that of Orissa RTI Rules.
Sri Behera then said that the previous speaker has already dealt with how an aggrieved citizen can go for 1st and 2nd appeals against the denial of information by PIO and upholding of the said denial by the 1st appellate authority respectively as provided under Section 19 of the Act. But as a matter of fact, the procedure of making appeals under Section 19 is not only complex and costly, but also time-consuming and vexatious. Like the two modes of accessing information i.e. application mode and suo motu mode, there are two modes of airing a citizen’s grievance against denial of information, such as through a two-stage appeal process under Section 19 and through a direct complaint to be lodged before the Information Commission as provided under Section 18 of the Act. At this point, the Section 18(1) was read out for information of the participants. As per this provision, no form nor any fee is required on the part of an aggrieved citizen to lodge a complaint directly before the Commission. Not only that. The Section 5(2) obligates a PIO or APIO to write and forward any appeal/complaint of the aggrieved citizen to the 1st appellate authority or to the Information Commission, as the case may be. If the concerned PIO/APIO fails in discharging this duty, that can be mentioned by the complainant as an additional ground of grievance against them, to be looked into by the Commission. The Orissa Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules 2006 in its Rule 6 has also mentioned clearly the 5 nos. of items, which should be covered in a letter of complaint to be addressed to the Commission under Section 18 of the Act.
It is of course a fact that the RTI Act 2005 doesn’t provide for a time-limit for disposal of either an appeal under Section 19 or a complaint under Section 18. But the Act vide its Sections 14 and 17 provides for expulsion of the Central and State Information Commissioners on the grounds of inefficiency by the President and Governor respectively. If an appellant or a complainant face an exasperating delay in disposal of his/her appeal or complaint by the respective Commission, then he/she may put forth his/her grievance before the President or Governor, as the case may be, who on receipt of such a grievance may order an enquiry into the same by a Judge of the Supreme Court and if the veracity of the said grievance is proved, the President or Governor, as the case may be, order the expulsion of the concerned Commissioner/Commisioners. Thus the Act has empowered the citizens to keep watch over the activities of the Central or State Information Commission.
Talk by Sri Binod Kalia, Chairman Paikmal Panchayat Samiti
Sri Kalia opened his talk with thanks to the organizers for holding the workshop on RTI Act. He said that as per the RTI Act, the local administration is supposed to provide all sorts of information to the public as and when needed. Sri Kalia appealed to the participants to ensure that the message of RTI reach to the common people living in villages.
Talk by Sri Manoranjan Singh Bariha (Chairman Zilla Parishad)
Sri Bariha first welcomed all the participants for attending and keenly listening to the deliberations being made in the workshop on an important theme like RTI. Then he said that the right to information is now a constitutional right, and except the exemptions from disclosure as provided under the Act, all sorts of information can now be provided to the people.
Speaking on the background of this Act, Sri Bariha reminded the participants about a significant remark made by the then Prime Minister late Rajiv Gandhi, who went on record to say that out of every rupee sanctioned from Delhi, only 16 paise reach the people at Panchayat level. And it happened so because of pilferage through intermediary agencies down all the way from Delhi to Palli. As a remedy to such distressful phenomenon, 73rd Amendment of the Constitution was effected. And as per the ideal of Panchayati Raj, the Panchayat functionaries are supposed to remain self-vigilant about how they conduct themselves among the people who have elected them.
The next milestone in India’s march towards good governance is the RTI Act 2005, the topic of today’s Workshop. The principal objective of the RTI Act is how good governance can benefit the people at grassroots level. And this would be achieved only when the people themselves become aware about this new Act.
As for the origins of RTI Act, the V.P.Singh Government at the Centre had first initiated the process of legislating right to information in our country. Then Mrs.Aruna Roy, an erstwhile IAS Officer, who had resigned from her job and founded an NGO called MKSS led a vigorous movement in the State of Rajasthan in 90s demanding enactment of right to information. Her main concern was, why the muster roll kept at Gram Panchayat level be considered as an official secret and therefore protected from disclosure? The campaign started by her in due course engulfed the whole country, and what we have as RTI Act 2005 was its net result. Sri Bariha then observed that the RTI Act, if properly implemented by the Government and exercised by the people, can bring about the much needed transparency in all the affairs of administration, and consequently the people shall get all their entitlements due to them and Government can project a clean, corruption-free image before the people too. The RTI Act is no doubt a revolutionary law. But there is also the possibility that the RTI Act can be abused by the mischievous minded people in the society. Just as a knife serves different purposes depending on who uses it, a doctor or a dacoit, the abuse of RTI can also lead to unwarranted consequences. And all of us should remain aware about this lesson. With the hope that the RTI Act would be properly implemented by the local administration in the genuine interest of the public at large, Sri Bariha concluded his talk.
Question-Answer Session
Q-1 by Sri Dhiren Mohanty, Convenor Gandhamardan Yuva Parishad, Paikamal:
The offices were mandated to properly document 17 categories of suo motu information within 120 days of enactment of RTI Act, but till date this has not been done. Why?
A- by APIO (Sri Sarat Chandra Sethi)-
The operationalisation of the Act is still in the stage of childhood. Gradually it shall mature. We have however instructed each office to prepare the manuals as per Section 4 of the Act.
Q-2 by Sri Rabi Narayan Mohanty, Retd. Teacher and Journalist Paikamal:
The dealers of PDS items like kerosene and rice should publicise the quantity and price of each item available with them. If they don’t do that, what can be done about it under the RTI Act?
A- by APIO (Sri Sarat Chandra Sethi) –
All these data available at each Block, which the citizens can access under the Act.
Supplementary Answer by ZP Chairman:
Every dealer must display the rate and quantity chart.
Q-3 by Sri Rabi Narayan Mohanty, Retd. Teacher and Journalist Paikamal:
The very language of this law is difficult for the common man to understand. What to do?
A- by Sri C.Behera, Advisor to Orissa Campaign for Right to Information
The language of any law is difficult as such, which we can’t help. However continuous efforts should be made to present its provisions in a simplified manner.
Q-4 by Sri Satpathy Padhan, Sarpanch, Jhitki GP:
Why is it that the word ‘may’ in stead of ‘must’ or ‘shall’ is used frequently in the RTI Act?
A- by Sri C.Behera, Advisor to Orissa Campaign for Right to Information:
This is not peculiar only to RTI Act, but can be found in most of our laws as a matter of convention. However it hardly matters, since the word ‘may’ usually means ‘shall’ in legal parlance.
Q-5 and Q-6 by Sri Pradip Mohapatra, AJKA (NGO) and Sri Adikand Biswal (MASS) Paikamal:
Which information are exempted from disclosure?
A- by APIO (Sri Sarat Chandra Sethi) –
Section 8 of the Act deals with exemptions from disclosure. One important item of exemption i.e. information received in fiduciary capacity needs some explanation. For instance, the information received from a patient by the doctor or that received from a client by the lawyer are to be protected from disclosure.
Supplementary A by Sri Chitta Behera, Advisor to Orissa Campaign for RTI:
Ordinarily, the information of fiduciary nature shall not be disclosed to another citizen other than the client or patient, as the case may be. A more pertinent instance of fiduciary information pertains to the bank account of a person kept in a Bank. The Bank is supposed not to disclose the bank account of a person to another person. But say for instance, the person dies and his son or wife wants to know that bank account. The Bank shall normally disclose it.
About the exemptions under Section 8(1), one should remember that there is a rider over these exemptions as mentioned in the Proviso to Section 8(1), which says that whatever can be disclosed to Parliament or a State legislature, can be disclosed to a citizen.
Q-7 by Sri Ranjit Pradhan, SDO Electrical (PIO)-
Through which media we are supposed to disseminate information?
A- by APIO (Sri Sarat Chandra Sethi) –
Through PIO and APIO of the concerned office, and also through Website.
Supplementary Answer by Sri Chitta Behera, Advisor to Orissa Campaign for RTI: Dissemination to be made through various media as mentioned under Explanation to Section 4, which includes inspection of the concerned office by the citizens too.
Q-8 by Sri Shovam Ku. Nayak Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, Paikmal:
We are maintaining voluminous information on the services and beneficiaries dealt with by our office? Suppose, somebody wants to inspect all those information at a time and instantly. Can we afford to show him all such information in the limited time available with us?
A- by Sri Chitta Behera, Advisor to Orissa Campaign for RTI
The RTI Act vide Section 4(1b) had given 4 months time (15 June to 12 October 2005), within which every office was supposed to catalogue and index all their information in a systematic manner, so that any citizen approaching the said office thereafter would be enabled to inspect the information he or she wanted to see. And the Govt of India has also brought about a Template for Information Handbook under Section 4 of the Act as a guidebook for all the pubic authorities of the country. That time-limit has already elapsed since a year back. Those public authorities who have not complied with this provision yet, should immediately complete the work.
Q-9 by Sri Shovam Ku. Nayak Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, Paikmal –
Information about a long past incident about which there is no information available , how to give?
A- by BDO Padampur Sri Damodar Sahu-
As per Orissa Records Manual, the records of an office are classified into A, B and C classes. Each class of records is given a definite period of longevity, after which it is destroyed. If somebody has applied for a record, which has been duly destroyed, it can’t be given.
Q-10 by Hrusikesh Pradhan, Chetana Shramik Sangh:
If both PIO and APIO of an office are absent, how to get information?
A- by BDO Padampur Sri Damodar Sahu –
Somebody else would be in charge to give the information.
Supplementary Answer by Sri C.Behera, Advisor to Orissa Campaign for RTI –
The head of the concerned public authority is to ensure such arrangements as per Section 5 of Act.
Q-11 by Sri Bhimsen Biswal, WDT (Watershed Development Team) :
Why J&K is not covered under the Act?
A- by BDO, Padampur Sri Damodar Sahu –
Almost every law passed by Indian Parliament excludes J&K from its purview.
Supplementary Answer by Sri C.Behera, Advisor to Orissa Campaign for RTI –
In fact, India has two Constitutions, one for India excluding J&K, and the other for J&K. Their Assembly enacts the laws for their State. And moreover, J&K has already enacted an RTI Act in 2004.
Q-12 Sri Jayant Sahu, Life Instructor, Office of VAS, Jharbandh:
If govt officers themselves become proactive in implementing the Act, then the Act shall soon be successful in its mission. Whether it can happen so?
A- by Chairman Zilla Parishad, Bargarh:
Now every Panchayat is empowered like our Parliament. The Panchayat can oversee the implementation of the Act. It is a fact that some officers are corrupt. But if the well-meaning govt officers come forward to help out the people who lack voice, then the Act shall achieve its goal soon.
Supplementary Answer by APIO (Sri Sarat Chandra Sethi)-
It has come to our knowledge that, of all people who have used and availed benefits of RTI Act 75% are govt servants and remaining only 25% are common citizens. Now let us resolve to reverse the scenario in one year, when 75% of RTI users would be the common men and women whereas 25% would be government servants. Everybody in the house cheered Sri Sethi for this optimistic statement.
Vote of thanks-
At the end, BDO Paikmal Sri Khageswar Pradhan extended a cordial vote of thanks on his behalf and on behalf of the Block office to all the official and non-official participants, invited guests and resource persons for having made the Block level Interactive Workshop on RTI Act a grand success. He also invited everybody to join in the midday lunch kept ready to be served. Then the Workshop came to a formal close.
Minutes prepared by:
Fakir Charan Rout
Network Coordinator, SMPU
Padampur