|
RTI
Act in J&K; ignorance is bliss, stonewalling
at every land
By Ravi
Krishnan Khajuria
JAMMU, May 21
Perceived
to be a revolutionary act in the Indian democracy
directly associated with the people to empower them and
to bring transparency and accountability in the system,
the Jammu and Kashmir Right To Information (RTI) Act
2004 has so far been a casualty in this strife-torn
state.
Though a handful of RTI crusaders in the state have been
trying hard to extract information via J&K RTI Act
2004 from various government departments including the
General Administration Department (GAD) but their
endeavours so far have gone down the drain.
Further, what makes things worse for such RTI crusaders
is virtually no publicity to the Act and rules framed
there under for its implementation. The dilly-dallying
tactics of government officials on false pretexts and
sometimes distorted information adds to their mental
agony.
Though people seeking information under the state RTI
Act from different departments can be counted on finger
tips but even they do not know about the prescribed
format to move the application and treasury head under
which fee has to be remitted.
However, talking to the Kashmir Times, State Law
Secretary AH Kochak said, "In the rules framed
under the J&K RTI Act 2004, Form 'A' has been
appended. An applicant seeking information has to apply
on this form along with a nominal fee."
Rejecting the claims that government has not done enough
for generating awareness among the people, he said,
"A lot of exercise was done through print and
electronic media."
To another question, he said, "Applicant can also
affix Rs 5 revenue stamp on prescribed format and it is
not mandatory that he or she has to remit treasury
receipt."
State Advocate General Mohammed Altaf Naik said,
"Once an act comes into force, rules are framed
subsequently for its implementation and the state
government responsibility is to publish them in
government gazette."
"There are several laws enacted for the welfare of
people and once the rules to an act appear in government
gazette, the responsibility of the state government
ceases," Naik added.
The Advocate General further said, "Similarly,
centre's RTI Act 2005 and its rules framed there under
too have not received wide publicity."
However, a state high court lawyer admitted that the
J&K RTI Act has been rendered ineffective because of
widespread confusion among the people, government
officials and even the legal fraternity owing to less
publicity given to it and its rules by the state
government.
"State government in the interest of people can go
for wide publicity of this act and its rules so as to
remove their apprehensions," he said.
He further said, "Applicants, who muster the
courage to use the Act for seeking information, submit
simple applications only to be informed by the concerned
department head after 30 days or even more that he or
she has to move the application on prescribed Form 'A'.
"Applicants also face another problem when
officials at the government treasuries ask them about
account head for nominal fee, which has to be
entertained under J&K RTI Act 2004," he said,
adding "the Act so far has been a casualty to
confusion and red-tapism."
Nonchalant attitude of those at the helm of affairs in
government can be gauged from the fact that after an
e-mail of Dr Raja Muzaffar Bhat was entertained by the
State High Court as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) on
March 30, 2007, the General Administration Department on
April 4, 2007 responded to his (Bhat's) application
submitted to it under J&K RTI Act on March 1, 2007
only to say "applicant has to apply on prescribed
format and also deposit fee under rules."
The e-mail was sent to the State High Court after
various government departments including the GAD either
provided imperfect information or simply did not deem it
fit to respond to his applications.
Accepting the e-mail as PIL, Division Bench of the State
High Court on March 30 this year issued a notice to the
Chief Secretary C Phunsog asking him to explain why the
RTI Act has not been implemented in the state in letter
and spirit.
In instant case of GAD, the applicant-Dr Raja Muzaffar
Bhat from Budgam vide his application number
DO/CC/15-2007 dated March 1, 2007 had sought information
under the state RTI Act about action taken by the
government for sanction to prosecute corrupt ministers,
politicians and bureaucrats under section 6 of
Prevention of Corruption Act.
However, no information whatsoever was provided to him
within fixed time frame of 30 days prescribed under the
Act and it was only after the Division Bench comprising
the then Chief Justice Bashir Ahmed Khan and Justice JP
Singh accepted his e-mail as PIL, GAD (Vigilance)
hurriedly dashed off a letter number GAD (Vig) 50/Misc/2007
dated April 4, 2007 to the applicant.
Exactly after 34 days of his application submitted to
GAD and four days after State High Court entertains his
e-mail as PIL, Dr Bhat gets an official letter from GAD
(Vig) on April 4 that says "you have to apply on
prescribed format and also deposit fee under
rules."
It may be mentioned here that under the state RTI Act,
information sought has to be furnished within 30 days
after receipt of the application along with fee under
rules.
In a fix he says, "after over one month I get a
letter from GAD telling me in not more than three lines
to apply on prescribed format besides depositing the fee
under rules."
Showing receipt of money order worth Rs 5 as fee
remitted under rules to the Commissioner Secretary GAD,
he says, "GAD (vigilance) has not apprised me about
prescribed format."
Dr Bhat vide his application number DO/CCC/10-2006 dated
October 12, 2006 addressed to Commissioner Secretary GAD
Khurshid Ahmed Ganai, application number DO/CCC/42-2006
dated November 24, 2006 addressed to Chief Secretary C
Phunsog and application number DO/CCC/42-2006 dated
November 24, 2006 addressed to the Chief Minister Ghulam
Nabi Azad had requested them to furnish information
under the RTI Act about action taken against corrupt
ministers, politicians and bureaucrats.
He had specifically demanded the information after State
Vigilance Oragnisation and State Accountability
Commission named some ministers, politicians and
bureaucrats in different scams like jute mat scam, rural
electrification scam, Sidhra land scam, rural sanitation
scam.
Disappointed over apathetic attitude of state
authorities, he then approached Chief Information
Commissioner of India Wajahat Habibullah, who in his
reply dated December 17, 2006 explained that he has
jurisdiction over central government organizations in
the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
It may be recalled here that Finance, Law and
Parliamentary Affairs Minister Tariq Hamid Qarra on
January 6 this year had assured framing of a committee
under law secretary.
He had assured that changes recommended by the
committee, if needed, in J&K RTI Act 2004 would be
made to make the Act an effective tool to ensure
accountability and transparency in the state
administration.
|