PHED official penalised for defying RTI norms
Source: Chronicle News Service

Imphal, August 30 2024: The Manipur Information Commission, on August 22, imposed penalty of Rs 25,000 on PHED superintending engineer (SE) of urban circle Th Babina Devi for failing to furnish information requested under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The decision was made in the appeal case of Rishiku-mar Soraisham versus the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) of Rural Circle II, PHED, highlighting issues of transparency and accountability within public authorities.

The appellant, Rishikumar, had initially sought information related to the recruitment and appointment process for 91 posts of Section Officer, Grade-I, under the PHED.

Despite directives from the Commission, the requested information was not furnished within the stipulated time.

During the hearing of the case, the Commission examined the submissions made by the SPIO, represented by advocate L Rajesh, and the appellant, represented by advocate W Joykumar.

The SPIO defended the delay, arguing that the appellant was offered the opportunity to inspect the records instead of being provided with copies, in an effort to maintain the integrity and security of the information.

The SPIO also claimed that one of the queries was related to an ongoing case in the Court of State Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities, Manipur, and disclosing the information could influence judicial proceedings.

However, the Commission found these arguments unsatisfactory, emphasising that the RTI Act mandates disclosure of such information unless explicitly exempted under Section 8.The Commission noted that the appellant had not requested an inspection but certified copies of documents, including answer scripts, marks secured, cutoff marks for OBC candidates, and other related information.

The Commission cited several precedents, including judgments from the Supreme Court and Central Information Commission (CIC), which uphold the right of candidates to access such information.

In its observation, the Commission dismissed the SPIO's contention that providing copies of the requested information could open a "floodgate" of similar RTI applications, calling it an unfounded and exaggerated claim.

The Commission reiterated that the spirit of RTI Act is to promote.transparency and accountability, not secrecy, and that any obstruction to this objective is contrary to the principles of the Act.

Moreover, the Commission highlighted that there was no stay order from any court preventing disclosure of the information related to the pending case, further undermining the SPIO's argument.

The Commission also criticised the SPIO for confusing the provisions of Section 11, which deals with third-party information, and Section 8(1) (j); which exempts certain personal information from disclosure, noting that the requested documents were not exempt under the Act.

Given the failure to comply with its earlier order and the lack of satisfactory reasons for withholding the information, the Commission decided to impose a penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act.

The penalty of Rs 25,000 is to be deducted from the salary of SE Th Babina Devi within two months, with proof of the deduction to be submitted to the Commission.

The Commission also directed the SPIO to furnish all the requested information to the appellant within one week and scheduled the next hearing for September 5, at 12:30 PM .

Comment