Friday, March 23, 2018

Haryana info panel issues show cause to PWD officers for asking resource charges

Times of India: Chandigarh: Friday, March 23, 2018.
The Haryana State Information Commission (SIC) has issued show cause notice to the officials of state PWD department for asking an applicant to pay disproportionate resources charges to get information under the RTI Act. The applicant was asked to pay Rs 5,000 as disproportionate resources charges for the services of one clerical person and one peon for two days in lieu of providing information.
“The commission is shocked to observe that the SPIO has sought disproportionate resources charges  Rs 3,000 for one clerical person for two days and Rs 2,000 for one peon for two days besides postal and other charges. When asked, the representative of respondent SPIO had no clue as to how this fiasco of disproportionate charges of Rs 5000 was created. The commission is pained to observe that the respondent SPIO seems to be not only careless and arrogant, but has no knowledge of the RTI Act even after more than 12 years of its inception,” observed state information commissioner Hemant Atri in his orders.
Atri further ordered Bhim Sain, SPIO-cum-executive engineer (electrical division) to explain as to why Rs 250 each day, subject to maximum of Rs 25,000 for wrongly seeking the fee which is not mandated in the RTI Act, 2005 which amounts to denial of information, be not imposed upon him.
SIC has also directed Sain and R S Seharawat, first appellate authority-cum-superintending engineer (Electrical Circle) of the department to appear in person before the commission on May 1 with all documents.
The commission has passed the orders while hearing an appeal filed by Sudama Aggarwal of Hisar. The appellant had sought certain information from the department on August 29, 2017 under the RTI Act. On August 29, 2017, SPIO directed him to deposit Rs 5300 on account of documents fee, postal charges and disproportionate resources charges.
An appeal was filed on September 21, 2017, before the First Appellate Authority, which also failed to provide him any information. Aggrieved from the officials’ attitude, the applicant had approached the SIC with the prayer to provide requisite information to him and initiate penal action against the respondent SPIO. He has also prayed for compensation.