19 (1) Any person who, does not receive a decision within the time specified in sub-section (1) or clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 7, or is aggrieved by a decision of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may within thirty days from the expiry of such period or from the receipt of such a decision prefer an appeal to such officer who is senior in rank to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer as the case may be, in each public authority:
1.Provided that such officer may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of thirty days if he or she is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.
19 (2) Where an appeal is preferred against an order made by a Central Public Information Officer or a State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, under section 11 to disclose third party information, the appeal by the concerned third party shall be made within thirty days from the date of the order.
19 (3) A second appeal against the decision under sub-section (1) shall lie within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made or was actually received, with the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission:
1.Provided that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission, as the case may be, may admit the appeal after the expiry of the period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.
19 (4) If the decision of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, against which an appeal is preferred relates to information of a third party, the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to that third party.
19 (7) The decision of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall be binding.
19 (8) In its decision, the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, has the power to
a.require the public authority to take any such steps as may be necessary to secure compliance with the provisions of this Act, including
i.by providing access to information, if so requested, in a particular form;
ii.by appointing a Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be;
iii.by publishing certain information or categories of information;
iv.by making necessary changes to its practices in relation to the maintenance, management and destruction of records;
v.by enhancing the provision of training on the right to information for its officials;
vi.by providing it with an annual report in compliance with clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 4;
b.require the public authority to compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered;
c.impose any of the penalties provided under this Act;
d.reject the application.
19 (9) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall give notice of its decision, including any right of appeal, to the complainant and the public authority.
19 (10) The Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, shall decide the appeal in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed.
Kindly follow these guidelines for filling Second Appeal at Central Information Commission.
1. Fill in the above appeal/complaint form, index and chronological order of progress. If you are filing appeal remove ‘complaint/complainant’ words. If complaint is being filed, cut words “second appeal/appellant”
3. Get one photocopy of:
o Original application under RTI with its enclosures
o First appeal with its enclosures
o Bank demand draft/pay slip/postal order/cash receipt used for paying filing fee of Rs.10/-and other charges
o Copy of demand letter of CPIO for charges if any
o Postal proof of mailing original application and first appeal
o Postal AD slips/official acknowledgement received from CPIO and FAA
o Decisions of CPIO and FAA if received
4. Arrange all papers as per index and then serially number all papers on right hand side top corner. This is one original set of second appeal/complaint.
5. Prepare additional four sets as above by photocopying.
6. Sign each page of appeal, index and chronology chart [all five sets].
7. Self attest all the photocopies by signing under the word “Attested”
8. Send one set by speed/regdad/upc post to each of CPIO and FAA and attach photocopy of proof of mailing to the original, extra copy of second appeal/complaint and your copy after filling details in index/chronology chart.
9. Mail original set and one extra copy of set by registered AD to the commission at the following address:
The Registrar,
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
II floor, August Kranti Bhavan,
Bhikaji Kama Place,
NEW DELHI 110066
10. Avoid courier services.
11. Retain one set for your record and reference, with proof of mailing and AD received from CIC/CPIO/FAA for having received second appeal/complaint.
12. If postal AD card is not received or acknowledgement letter is not received from CIC within 15 days of mailing, it is better to send by speed post copy of only second appeal/complaint [without enclosures] with a request to trace the same at CIC. Photocopy of regd post receipt may also be mailed to CIC.
13. You can consult local NGO/RTI activist for filing first or second appeal to have better result. Services are generally free.
Sir while filing 2nd Appeal with the CIC it is directed to send the entire set of documents including the copy of the 2nd Appeal (before posting it to the CIC) to the CPIO & FAA. Is it not sufficient just to file/post a copy of the 2nd Appeal (addressed to the CIC) to the CPIO & FAA instead of sending once again the copy of the RTI Application, decision of the CPIO, Order of the FAA and all other things which are already with them. Kindly dispense with this system. It is not just sufficient to inform (by the Applicant) the CPIO & FAA that the 2nd Appeal is being made by the Applicant with the CIC because the Applicant is not satisfied with the decisions of CPIO and FAA and just post the copy of the 2nd Appeal to them. Please look into this cumbersome process which is in my opinion subjecting the Applicant to unnecessary inconvenience and may discourage so many people approaching CIC in RTI Act related matters. Just like what has been happening with the Judiciary in our country because of inability to undergo the cumbersome and expensive process of Justice department in our country and most of the ordinary people not being able to approach courts and silently bearing the brunt.
ReplyDeleteSirs, Now-a-days, the RTI related cases have also been piling up with the CIC, like what is happening with regard to our courts, may be, because of lack of infrastructure, staff and Government funding. Kindly look into this aspect and to make the system (RTI Act, 2005) more accessible and less expensive and less cumbersome so that ordinary people who can not afford litigation in the courts owing to their financial and social backwardness. All these section may get remedy in CIC than going to the courts. In my own case, when I approached State Information Commission on behalf of an aggrieved party, justice was meted out to one Old Widow from Eluru, Paleti Kanaka Durga who was abandoned by her husband and wrote his final dues to some other lady instead of the legitimate wife. The lady was ignorant or probably not able to get justice, though the Courts have given order in her favour because of lack of funding to pursue it further and also because of ignorance. Of course, the opposite party came to a compromise and redeemed the son of the old lady to some extent but the lady died and could not reap the fruits.
ReplyDeletethis lady's husband was by name Pandurangarao, (now no more) an Ex-Executive Engineer of the Panchayati Raj and it was a novel case of triumph of RTI Act, 2005 and the RTI Commissioner. The Accountant General who passed the pension to another lady other than the legitimate wife based upon the records submitted by the SE of Panchayati Raj and it was not fault of the Accountant General but he acted swiftly on receipt of RTI Application quoting the copies of the judgement by court and wrote to SE of Eluru and even the Revenue officials who gave Legal Heir Certificate fraudulently to the lady other than the legally wedded wife the late Pandurangarao of Eluru were also taken to task by the authorities. It is a novel case of success of RTI Act, while even the courts could not implement their own judgment as the aggrieved party, the legally wedded wife was ignorant and could not make use of it. So kindly strengthen the State and Central Information Commissions in our country for speedy justice and cheap remedy to common people and reduce the burden not only to the courts but also relieve a lot of poor people who cannot approach courts always.
ReplyDeleteKudos to RTI Act, 2005 and the State and Central Information Commissions of this country and I conclude my sharing of experiences.
ReplyDelete