State Information Commission raps Corporation for RTI replies

The records sought for are sealed and in a box locked; accessing it will, therefore, be difficult, was the Coimbatore Corporation's response to a Right to Information application.

The records the applicant has asked for are over 20 years old. If the applicant desires, he or she can visit the Corporation to peruse the same, was the civic body's response to another RTI application.

For the two responses, the State Information Commission has rapped the Corporation, asking why it should not initiate action against the public information officers concerned and fine them as well.

In the first case, advocate M. Loganathan had written to the Assistant Commissioner, West Zone, the public information officer (PIO) seeking copies of the nomination papers and affidavits filed by R. Gayathri, who contested the local body election in Ward 12, and R. Mylsamy, who contested in Ward 19.

Mr. Loganathan first wrote to the PIO on November 17, 2011 and thereafter on appeal to the deputy commissioner on December 19.

Records

After a series of correspondences, the PIO on January 4, 2012 wrote to the applicant saying that the records could not be shared because they were sealed and in safe custody.

In response to an appeal from Mr. Loganathan to the State Information Commission, the latter asked the Corporation to respond why it should not initiate action under Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act for a delayed and improper response.

It asked the Corporation to do so within a month of issuing the latter, which is March 13, 2012.

The Commission also asked the deputy commissioner for his failure to act on the appeal and forwarding the same to the PIO.

In the second case, Tatabad resident R. Subramanian sought information from assistant commissioner, personnel, Coimbatore Corporation, regarding the appointment and promotion of record clerk V. Jothimani.

After similar delays and series of correspondence, the SIC asked the Corporation why it should not initiate action under Section 20 (1) against the public information officer, who had sought to know from the applicant the reason for seeking the details.

The SIC has also asked why it should not slap a fine of Rs. 25,000 on the officer concerned.