It refers to CIC-verdict directing Allahabad High Court to modify its rules in conformity with various provisions and sections of RTI Act. It may be recalled that earlier the Commission had declined to direct Delhi HC.
IT REFERS to CIC-verdict directing Allahabad High Court to modify its rules in conformity with various provisions and sections of RTI Act. It may be recalled that earlier the Commission had declined to direct Delhi High Court (HC) for such ambiguity in rules holding that Chief Justice of Delhi in its capacity as Competent authority had powers to frame its own rules under section 28 of RTI Act had right to frame its own rules, even though rules were changed later when Justice AP Shah assumed charge as Chief Justice of Delhi.
But such ambiguity in rules in other High Courts and some states still exist. Central Information Commission should direct all such public-authorities and states to rectify their rules in conformity with provisions of RTI Act, without waiting for any petition coming up before the CIC.Central Information Commission should take up the matter with Department of Personnel & Training to repeal sections 27 and 28 of RTI Act which give undue powers to states and public-authorities to frame their own rules. ‘One nation One Act’ motto should be there so that rules and fees may be exactly same and alike for all states and public-authorities throughout the country for implementation of RTI Act exactly as passed by the Parliament.
Your comment has been submitted to moderator for approval.
mAHARASHTRA IS A PRIME EXAMPLE WHERE rti ACT HAS BEEN UNILATERALLY AND ILLEGALLY ALTERED AND 1ST AND 2ND APPEAL FEES HAS BEEN INTRODUCED. POSTAL ORDER IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. EVEN THE CHARGES FOR PERSONAL PERUSAL OF DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN ENHANCED AND TIMES REDUCED. CIC NEEDS TO INTERVENE IN ALL CONTRARIAN STATES......