Akshat ShrotryRTI Law is the first revolutionary law in the country that gives power to all the citizens of India who do not give any other law. Transparency is the only way in which work is done to prevent corruption in government, governance and administration. To improve the official functioning, RTI is a weapon. This law has been for 14 years. There is debate over its misuse, whereas no authentic data of misuse of this law is yet public. The result of the same thinking of officers is that it is very difficult for those seeking information under this law, it is very difficult to get information. Getting more information in 30 days is even more challenging. The idea of the government system towards this law can be judged by the fact that in Uttar Pradesh Information Commission alone, 52,000 appeals and complaints were pending till May this year, whereas in May last year it was 42,000. It shows that the people responsible for the effective implementation of this law are depressed. RTI provides punishment to the guilty in the law if the applicant is not given proper and timely information. It is prescribed in Section 20 of the Right to Information Act that when there is a resolution of the decision of the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission regarding any libel or appeal that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, without any reason, Has refused to accept the request or has deleted the content of the information requested or has been obstructed in any way, if it is obstructed in any way. Ratyek is obtained according to Rs 250 a day to day requests when the total fines will, but the entire amount of the penalty will not be twenty-five thousand rupees. In addition to the above, the Commission can also recommend disciplinary action under service rules applicable to the public information officer. Regardless of these stringent penal provisions, it is clear from the applicants that the law can not be executed even after 14 years of being formed. For this, the body is more responsible, which has the right to punish the culprits under the law. In this case also, the Punjab-Haryana High Court has given its order in one of its decisions that the DDO should not be allowed to issue information within the stipulated time, the commission should decide under Section 20 of the Act. Most of the bureaucrats run their service almost on this path, but in the information commissions, there may be a lot of bureaucrats on the posts of Chief Information Commissioners and State Information Commissioners. This can be seen in many states especially when the officers who retired from the post of Chief Secretary have been made Chief Information Commissioners. There are also states where the Retired Chief Secretary has been the Chief Information Commissioner. It is not that there are some obstacles in the making of the Chief Information Commissioner or Information Commissioner of the bureaucracy. It is presumed in section 15 (5) of the Right to Information Act for appointments in Information Commissions that the State Chief Information Commissioner and State Information Commissioner are in the process of law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, public relations, or administration and governance There will be eminent persons in the society with knowledge and experience. This statement further strengthens the notion that the people responsible for the effective implementation of the law are somewhere downright nonsense and RTI In the settlement of appeals and complaints, instead of fully legal action, the intervening routes are open.
Religion and science don’t have to be divorced: Vidya Balan
Making ‘Mission Mangal’ was a big risk: Akshay Kumar
Walkathon held on ‘Healthy Aging, Strong Bones’
‘Sridevi: Girl Woman Superstar’: Penguin announces book on Indian cinema legend
‘Change is inevitable’: Miley addresses split from Liam
© 2017 State Times Daily Newspaper