Uttar Pradesh CIC , Ranjit Singh Pankaj denied information to Nine
Year old Lucknow based Aishwarya Sharma on the pretext that she is a
minor .
Aishwarya sent a letter dtd. 26-10-09 to the UP CM by speedpost ( annex. 1 )
The PIO of CM office denied receipt of the said letter dtd. 26-10-09 (
annex. 2 )
Aishwarya used RTI act and sent letter of section 6 dated 15-03-10 to
the PIO of CM office to search her lost letter .
The PIO of CM office sent letter dtd.08-04-10 ( annex. 3 )
Aggrieved by the above order of PIO dtd.08-04-10 , Aishwarya sent
First Appeal dtd. 26-04-10 U/S 19(1) of RTI act to the Appellate
Authority of CM office . The same was returned in original to
Aishwarya , by Navneet Sehgal the Appellate Authority of CM office (
annex. 4 ).
The covering letter of returned first appeal ( annex. 5 )
Returning an appeal was gross violation of RTI act 2005 by navneet sehgal .
Aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Authority of CM office ,
Aishwarya moved UPSIC where case no. S1-1460/C-10 got registered and
heard on 06-09-10 by UP CIC R. S. Pankaj. The order ( annex. 6 & & )
UPSIC dispatched order on 26-10-10 and asked Aishwarya to present
before UPSIC on 23-11-10 but the letter has visible post office date
stamp of 25-11-10 emphasizes that UPSIC had foul play in mind and
wanted to ensure that Aishwarya should not be present in hearing to
press her point.
A perusal of order of UP CIC shows it grossly violates the RTI act 2005.
For reference one can see –
1) section 3 which says "Subject to the provisions of this Act, all
citizens shall have the right to information." Aishwarya is very
much a citizen of INDIA.
2) section 6(1) which says "A person, who desires to obtain any
information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through
electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language of
the area in which the application is being made, accompanying such fee
as may be prescribed, to— ( a) the Central Public Information Officer
or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of the
concerned public authority;(b) the Central Assistant Public
Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as
the case may be,specifying the particulars of the information sought
by him or her:Provided that where such request cannot be made in
writing, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public
Information Officer, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable
assistance to the person making the request orally to reduce the same
in writing."
Aishwarya is a person who sought info under RTI act 2005.
3) section 6 ( 2 ) which reads "An applicant making request for
information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting
the information or any other personal details except those that may be
necessary for contacting him."
It's a folly that UP CIC is asking about age of Aishwarya .
4) section 22 which reads "The provisions of this Act shall have
effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in
the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being
in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other
than this Act. "
means the RTI act 2005 shall have overriding effect over any other
law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by
virtue of any law other than this Act. The UP CIC had denied info to
minor Aishwarya on the pretext of " INDIAN MAJORITY ACT " & " CIVIL
PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 " . As is clear from section 22 of
RTI act , RTI act shall have overriding effect over " INDIAN MAJORITY
ACT " & " CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 "
hence another wrong decision of UP CIC Ranjit Singh Pankaj.
-
Urvashi Sharma
RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com
Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )
No comments:
Post a Comment