B2 Gokul Apartment, Near Asha Parekh Hospital,Poddar Road, Santacruz (W),Mumbai-400054

Tel: 26001003 , 9820027305; Email: shailesh@satyamevajayate.info

                                                                                                      November 10, 2005

Dear Sir,

        We congratulate you on issuing a fairly comprehensive set of rules with detailed formats for applying under the Right To Information Act. This will facilitate the applicants who wish to requisition information. There are however a few provisions in the rules and the formats where we would like to make submissions as under:

I .Clause 4 (1) on fees: We feel it would make it easier for Citizens if the application fee could be paid by cash,-as provided,-as also by pay orders and postal orders, or court fee stamps.

II. Clause 4 (2) mentions: The Public Information Officer or any other officer authorized by him shall furnish the acknowledgement and after being satisfied with the identity of the applicant shall also intimate in form B. We suggest dispensing with the condition of being satisfied about the identity. There is no such provision in the RTI Act and this proviso will be used arbitrarily and become a tool for harassing applicants.

III. Clause 7 (4) mentions payment of fees with the appeal. We suggest you will consider removing this clause, since there is no provision in the RTI Act 22 for payment of fees for appeals. Thus charging of fees for appeals would be without the sanction of the law.

IV. Clause 10 talks of charging the applicant for  “any damage  caused to the public property in the course of giving any information in the form of samples of materials, the damage caused to such property shall be included while calculating further fees representing the cost of providing the information.” This clause must be removed since it does not appear right or fair to penalize applicants for damage which could occur, of unspecified amounts. It has to be the Public authorities responsibility to judge if any substantial damage is likely to occur. In such a case it is obvious that the method of drawing the sample is faulty.

V. Clause 12 talks of the possibility of charging the applicants for production of witnesses or evidence. In appeals, the only matter which has to be established is if correct information has been provided, or wrongly denied. This does not need production of witnesses. The RTI act has been in fairly extensive use in Maharashtra, without such a need.

VI. Clause 13 also talks of recovery of damages or penalties. This also appears to be designed to overawe applicants and provide a handle to officials to harass applicant Citizens who ask inconvenient questions. Please remove this clause and understand that RTI is a Citizen empowering Act, which can convert India into a land of participatory democracy, if implemented properly. It is not an Act to subjugate them.

VII. Form A in the application to be submitted by the applicant, Clauses 4, 7 and 8 are as follows:

4. Particulars in respect of Identity of the applicant

7. Has the information provided earlier

8. Is this information not made available by the Public authority

There is no provision nor need to ask for identity of applicant, and  Applicants cannot be expected to answer points 7 and 8 with any degree of knowledge or understanding.

Please remove these from the form.

VIII. Form B asking for additional fees to be submitted by the applicant must give the details of the fees being demanded. I quote Section 7 clause 3 a from the RTI Act for your reference: “ the details of further fees representing the cost of providing the information as determined by him(PIO), together with the calculations made to arrive at the amount in accordance with fee prescribed under sub-section (1), requesting him to deposit that fees,…”

IX. Form C: Rejection for information by PIO, gives among others:

 i) It comes under the exempted category covered under sections 8 and 9 of the Act.

It would be in good order to give the exemption clauses and an explanation as to how the exemption clause applies.

(iii) Your identity is not satisfactory.

This cannot be a ground for rejection and will only be used to harass applicants, particularly the poor.

(iv) The information is contained in published material available to Public.

This should give details of where the material is available to the Public.

X. The Schedule of Fees: The provision for fees for appeals is not as per the law and should be withdrawn. The fees of Rs. 5 per page for A4 size Xerox or printed page and Rs.10 per page for Computer printout are completely unreasonable, and appear not to recognize the obligation of Public authorities to make most information available suo moto. Section 7 (5) of the RTI Act states, “Provided that the fee prescribed under sub-section (1) of section 6 and sub-section (1) and (5) of section 7 shall be reasonable”

The fees in the schedule are clearly unreasonable. We suggest a fee of Re.1 per page for A4 size, whether Xerox, printed by computer or typewriter. Giving of information is a fulfillment of the Citizens fundamental rights and is actually an obligation which the Public authorities must fulfil. In doing this, they will also find their journey towards good governance.

     Please consider using the implementation of the RTI Act as a historic opportunity to empower the people of India to achieve true Swaraj and in the process ensure transparency and good governance in the affairs of the State. You have the power to transform India.

       If you need any clarifications on the above, I would be glad to provide them.  

 Thanking you in anticipation,

Yours truly,

Shailesh Gandhi

NCPRI 

Please join
National Campaign for People's Right To Information -NCPRI
Mera Bharat Mahaan...
                     Nahi Hai,
Per Yeh Dosh Mera Hai.