How many times have you petitioned a government department, for a ration card or a house site patta and encountered only stony silence? In spite of giant advances such as e-mail, web-based submission of forms and leaps in productivity achieved through mobile communications, our government machinery exists in a time warp.
The Right to Information Act, 2005 has brought about some change, and those who are aware of the potential of the law often use it to good effect. While awareness of the RTI Act is growing, what is not so widely known is that there is another tool in the citizen’s kit to make the government accountable. That is a Government Order directing bureaucrats to acknowledge and address all grievance petitions submitted personally to the department concerned, in a time-bound manner.
The order dates back to the Administrative Reforms Committee headed by Justice A.K. Rajan, which resulted in the Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department issuing an order two years ago. That order, G.O. (MS) No. 24 of the P and A.R., Department dated February 17, 2010 (available here) requires all government departments to acknowledge every letter or petition received from the public within a stipulated time. If you look up the related G.O. No. 114 of 2006, this means: acknowledge the petition immediately, or within a maximum of three days. Equally important, the maximum time allowed for redress of a grievance is two months.
The Tamil Nadu government has accepted the Justice A.K. Rajan panel’s recommendation, and laid down that if a file is not cleared within the stipulated period, and there is no officially sanctioned delay, it will be presumed that there is an “ulterior motive” on the part of the staff concerned (the committee actually recommended that it should be treated as a demand for illegal gratification by the employee and departmental action initiated).
Imagine what this means for all the services that the government has to deliver. Topping the list of grievances is corruption involving the issue of certificates and papers at the Revenue, Civil Supplies, Registration and Transport departments, besides services to be rendered by government-supervised agencies including local bodies, water and electricity supply and so on. Applied vigorously, such orders could reverse pervasive bribery and sloth. What is more, the RTI Act is available to pursue the fate of grievance applications, prising open obstinate or corrupt doors.
But is it all really that simple? The erstwhile DMK government did not do much to make the G.O. Nos. 114 and 24 actually deliver. There is little evidence to show that its successor has galvanised official machinery say, by opening Vigilance police desks in highly corrupt departments to pursue the “ulterior motive” mentioned in the G.O. Citizen bodies, such as residents’ welfare associations, have not pursued the possibilities vigorously either. Few associations are familiar with the working of the RTI Act, although there are exceptions. The bigger question is, why shouldn’t it be easier to petition the government in the first place? After all, the Income Tax department has demonstrated how to use a spreadsheet to submit data in a standardised format. and generate an acknowledgement. Using web-based forms should be an option for state government services.
The more immediate issue is whether all government departments can be compelled to take the state orders on reform seriously, until major changes now awaiting legislation in Parliament – such as the Citizen’s Right to Grievance Redress Bill – become law.
Keywords: Tamil Nadu government, red tapism, bureaucracy, RTI Act, government offices, Right to Grievance Redress Bill, TN administrative reforms
Why do we need to jump through legal hoops of RTI to get information? Is it really
that difficult to streamline government departments with computerized systems that
does not need the discretion of the officer to decide whose file goes first? Point is
that as long as a govt. official will have discretionary power over the proceedings of
the services I am being provided, there will be a scope of that person being corrupt.
The main reason for delay is due to the government failure to fill up clerical staff in all department. In the past ten years recruitment was not done by the successive governments which resulted 70percent of clerical staff posts are vacant in almost in all departments.
There are many things TN Govt has done to improve the functioning of its deaprtments. But nothing is working on ground. For exanple Govt has spent millions of rupees in computeraisation of Revenue dept but geting patta from this dept is herculian task. If you want to remove or minimise the corruption it should be done from top to bottom. The ministers and their party men are openly taking 2 to 3 lakhs for a post of Sathunavu Amaipalar(mid day meal organaisor) what RTI will do in this case. Until unless peoples in top like Ministers, IAS,IPS and IRS peoples sent to jail no system will improve in the govt machinery.
Recently I had to apply for a change of address in my ration card.
There was no demand for money or any such a thing. Having said that I must add that it took me (and my famiy members)over 10 visits to the various offices (original office, the original rationshop, the new office, the new ration card store etc).
Besides the cost of travelit is the number of mandays that was frustrating. There should be a simple drop box and only one person to deal with.
Every thing is fine , who is the appellate authority ? is it Ministry of
personal and public grievance or the Information officer of the
department concerned or the Chief Information officer of the state?
Please Email the Editor