Landmark Judgement by Information Commission
Govt official fined under RTI:
Imphal, Dec 26: The Manipur Information Commission has for the first time imposed a stiff monetary penalty upon a senior official of the state government for failing to furnish information sought by a member of the public under the provisions of the Right to Information Act.
The Information Commission has ordered IAS officer S Budhachandra to pay a total amount of Rs. 9250 as fine within a period of 30 days for his failure not only to furnish the information sought under the RTI Act, 2005, but also to respond to orders issued by the Commission in connection with the matter, while he was serving as State Public Information Officer, SPIO, Directorate of Education (Schools).
The order was issued on December 22, in connection with an application made by Prof Akham Biradhwaja Singh to the SPIO, Directorate of Education (s) in October 2006 seeking disclosure of certain information.
The Commission, in its order imposing monetary penalty on the officer, noted that its orders dated April 4, 2007 directing the latter to provide the requested information was not complied with till he left the office on April 19, 2007.
A show cause notice was issued on May 5, 2007, asking as to why recommendation for disciplinary action or penalty should not be imposed on him for his failure.
In his reply, dated May 18, 2007, the officer responded that the orders of the Commission, dated 4.4.2007, 18.4.2007 and 5.5.2007 were never brought to his notice while he was SPIO, Directorate of Education (Schools), and hence he should be exempted.
The Commission, however, did not accept the contention, that the then SPIO was not aware of the orders in question as they were received by his office.
Moreover, it noted, at the relevant time he was functioning as the Commissioner, Education (Schools), as well as ex-officio Director of Education (Schools) and copies of the Commission’s orders were also served to these offices.
As a Commissioner, there is no reason why he should not have processed the matter, it commented, and further noted that over and above this, during hearing on the main case (appeal case no. 1 of 2007), the respondent never responded nor turned up despite notices for five times, ‘which itself shows how indifferent the respondents are in this case’.
The application of the present appellant was first filed on October 10, 2006, to the SPIO. Till then to the disposal of the second appeal stage, the respondent never responded in connection with the case. Therefore he is liable for penalty as prescribed under section 20 of the RTI Act 2005, the Commission ruled.
Budhachandra has accordingly been directed to pay Rs. 9250 by depositing the amount in form of treasury challan under major head of account -0070- other administrative services, within a period of thirty days, through the GAD, Government of Manipur.
The Commission has also directed the DDO of the GAD to submit a compliance report within 45 days from the date of issue of the order.
Source: The Imphal Free Press
Imphal, Dec 26: The Manipur Information Commission has for the first time imposed a stiff monetary penalty upon a senior official of the state government for failing to furnish information sought by a member of the public under the provisions of the Right to Information Act.
The Information Commission has ordered IAS officer S Budhachandra to pay a total amount of Rs. 9250 as fine within a period of 30 days for his failure not only to furnish the information sought under the RTI Act, 2005, but also to respond to orders issued by the Commission in connection with the matter, while he was serving as State Public Information Officer, SPIO, Directorate of Education (Schools).
The order was issued on December 22, in connection with an application made by Prof Akham Biradhwaja Singh to the SPIO, Directorate of Education (s) in October 2006 seeking disclosure of certain information.
The Commission, in its order imposing monetary penalty on the officer, noted that its orders dated April 4, 2007 directing the latter to provide the requested information was not complied with till he left the office on April 19, 2007.
A show cause notice was issued on May 5, 2007, asking as to why recommendation for disciplinary action or penalty should not be imposed on him for his failure.
In his reply, dated May 18, 2007, the officer responded that the orders of the Commission, dated 4.4.2007, 18.4.2007 and 5.5.2007 were never brought to his notice while he was SPIO, Directorate of Education (Schools), and hence he should be exempted.
The Commission, however, did not accept the contention, that the then SPIO was not aware of the orders in question as they were received by his office.
Moreover, it noted, at the relevant time he was functioning as the Commissioner, Education (Schools), as well as ex-officio Director of Education (Schools) and copies of the Commission’s orders were also served to these offices.
As a Commissioner, there is no reason why he should not have processed the matter, it commented, and further noted that over and above this, during hearing on the main case (appeal case no. 1 of 2007), the respondent never responded nor turned up despite notices for five times, ‘which itself shows how indifferent the respondents are in this case’.
The application of the present appellant was first filed on October 10, 2006, to the SPIO. Till then to the disposal of the second appeal stage, the respondent never responded in connection with the case. Therefore he is liable for penalty as prescribed under section 20 of the RTI Act 2005, the Commission ruled.
Budhachandra has accordingly been directed to pay Rs. 9250 by depositing the amount in form of treasury challan under major head of account -0070- other administrative services, within a period of thirty days, through the GAD, Government of Manipur.
The Commission has also directed the DDO of the GAD to submit a compliance report within 45 days from the date of issue of the order.
Source: The Imphal Free Press