KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION - KIC Report/Annual Report...5 8/8/2012 Bangalore Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bangalore North Division. 6 18/8/2012 Bangalore Karnataka Government

KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION

ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

1. This is the eighth Annual Report of Karnataka Information

Commission. The data for preparation of this report is collected from

Government Departments of the State. According to the information

provided by the departments, the total number of Public Authorities

in the State is 60,663 and the total number of Public Information

Officers is 81,210.

2. Our sincere thanks to the Chief Secretary to the Government of

Karnataka and all the Principal Secretaries and Secretaries to the

Government for their contribution in providing the required inputs

for this report.

3. Officers of National Informatics Centre contributed by not only

developing a dependable data-base, but also assisted the Commission

by providing the desired output tables.

4. We also acknowledge the contribution of Director, Department of

Translation, Government of Karnataka, and his staff for their

assistance in preparing the Kannada version of the report. Our thanks

to the Director, Department of Printing and Stationery, Government

of Karnataka, and his staff for their role in bringing out this report

in a most presentable form.

5. The Commission wishes to express special thanks to the Secretary,

Law Officer, other officers and staff of the Commission, who have

contributed in preparing this report.

(J. S. VIRUPAKSHAIAH)(J. S. VIRUPAKSHAIAH)(J. S. VIRUPAKSHAIAH)(J. S. VIRUPAKSHAIAH)(J. S. VIRUPAKSHAIAH) (D THANGARAJ)(D THANGARAJ)(D THANGARAJ)(D THANGARAJ)(D THANGARAJ) (A K M NAYAK)(A K M NAYAK)(A K M NAYAK)(A K M NAYAK)(A K M NAYAK)STATE INFORMATION STATE INFORMATION STATE INFORMATION

COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER

(M R PUJAR)(M R PUJAR)(M R PUJAR)(M R PUJAR)(M R PUJAR) (T RAMA NAIK)(T RAMA NAIK)(T RAMA NAIK)(T RAMA NAIK)(T RAMA NAIK) (Dr. SHEKHAR D(Dr. SHEKHAR D(Dr. SHEKHAR D(Dr. SHEKHAR D(Dr. SHEKHAR DSTATE INFORMATION STATE INFORMATION SAJJANAR)SAJJANAR)SAJJANAR)SAJJANAR)SAJJANAR)

COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER STATE INFORMATIONCOMMISSIONER

CONTENTS

Chapter Page

Nos. Nos.

I Introduction 1-2

II Events 5-19

III General Information 23

Outstation sittings 23

Cases heard through Video Conferencing 24-25

Penalties imposed and Compensations

awarded by the Commission 26-28

IV Implementation of the RTI Act 31-55

V Implementation of Sections 4(1)(a) and

4(1)(b) of the Act 59-61

VI Accounts of the Commission 65-66

VII Recommendations 69-71

Annexure i-xiii

CHAPTER - I

INTRODUCTION

1

CHAPTER - I

Introduction:

“An Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for

citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in

order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public

authority.”

(Preamble to the RTI Act, 2005)

1.1 The Right to Information Act, 2005 (the Act), which fully came into effect

on the 12th October, 2005, has become one of the most significant

legislations enacted by the Parliament of India. The Act has overridden

the “Official Secrets Act” and similar laws/rules striking at the heart of

the standard practice of Government officials and public functionaries

that “confidentiality is the rule and disclosure, an exception”. The Act

has come to establish “transparency as the norm and secrecy as an

exception” in the working of every public authority.

1.2 Information does not belong to the Government - it belongs to everybody

and any information gathered by the Government is for the benefit of

the public.

1.3 The Right to Information has thus placed the obligation on the

Government to store and organize information in such a way that makes

it easily accessible to the public, to provide information proactively by

responding positively to all such requests for information.

1.4 The system that was put in place has provided the public access to

information and is a positive step taken by the Government to achieve

economic and social goals, poverty alleviation and reduction of corruption.

2

1.5 The Public Authorities, having realized the effect of the Act, are responding

positively in catering to the needs of the people by providing the required

information.

1.6 Further, the Commission is mandated to submit its Annual Report to

the Government under section 25(1) of the Act. In pursuance to this, the

Commission is presenting an overview of the status of implementation

of the Act in 2012-13.

1.7 This report contains analysis of the data received from State Government

departments in accordance with the responsibility cast on them under

sections 25(2) and 25(3) of the Act.

1.8 The report includes:

(i) Number of officials designated as PIOs and First Appellate

Authorities.

(ii) Number of requests for information received and disposed by the

Departments and the Commission.

(iii) Details of number of appeals received and disposed by the First

Appellate Authorities and the Commission.

(iv) Amount collected as application fee and further fee collected by

the Public Information Officers.

(v) Amount of penalty imposed on Public Information Officers and

compensation awarded.

(vi) Analysis of information furnished by departments.

1.9 Accounts of the Commission and Recommendations also form part of

this report.

3

CHAPTER - II

EVENTS

4

5

CHAPTER - II

Events:

2.1 The Commission actively participated in Right to Information awareness

programs organized by the Government Departments and other

organizations.

2.2 During the year, two Special Events took place viz., Meeting of the

Board of Governors of the National Federation of Information

Commissions in India (NFICI) in Bangalore and Laying of Foundation

Stone of its own Building in Bangalore.

2.2(a) Meeting of the Board of Governors of the National Federation of

Information Commissions in India (NFICI):

The Karnataka Information Commission assisted in organizing the

Meeting of the Board of Governors of the Federation on 14th and 15th

July, 2012.

2.2(b) The following dignitaries participated in the meeting.

Board of Governors:

Sri Satyananda Mishra, IAS (Retd.), Central CIC & President

Sri Jannat Husain, IAS (Retd.), CIC, A.P & Vice President, NFICI

Sri A.K. Choudhary, IAS (Retd)., CIC, Bihar

Sri K.S.Sripathi, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Tamil Nadu

Sri Bhim Sen, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Himachal Pradesh

Sri S. Minj, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Chattisgarh

Sri Lalhuma, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Nagaland

Members:

Sri A.K.M. Nayak, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Karnataka

Sri Tarun Kanti Mishra, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Odisha

6

Sri N.S.Napalchyal, CIC, Uttarakhand

Sri Naresh Gulati, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Haryana

Sri C.D. Kynjing, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Meghalaya

Sri R.I. Singh, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Punjab

Special Invitees:

Sri Ratnakar Gaikwad, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Maharashtra

Sri Sujit Kumar Sarkar, IPS (Retd.), CIC, West Bengal

Smt. Deepak Sandhu, IIS (Retd.) CIC, New Delhi

Justice Dilip Kumar Sinha (Retd.), CIC, Jharkhand

Sri Y.D. Thongchi, IAS (Retd.), CIC, Arunachal Pradesh

Sri G.R. Sufi, IRS., CIC, Jammu & Kashmir.

Sri M.C. Malakar, IFS (Retd.) SIC, (officiating), Assam

Sri J.S. Virupakshaiah, KAS (Retd.), SIC, Karnataka

Sri D. Thangaraj, IAS (Retd.), SIC, Karnataka

Sri M.R. Pujar, IPS, (Retd.), SIC, Karnataka

Also Present:

Sri N. Jayadeva, KAS, Secretary, Karnataka

Sri A.Vijaya Prakash, Executive Secretary, NFICI, Hyderabad

2.2(c) Sri A.K.M.Nayak, State Chief Information Commissioner of Karnataka,

welcomed the guests and invitees. Sri Satyananda Mishra, Chief

Information Commissioner of Central Information Commission and the

President of the Federation, presided over the meeting.

The two day meeting provided an opportunity to the SCIC and SICs of

Karnataka to discuss the issues faced in the implementation of the

RTI Act.

7

Sri A.K.M. Nayak, welcoming the dignitaries on the inaugural day of the Meeting

SICs of Karnataka (From L – R): Sri D.Thangaraj, Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah &

Sri M.R.Pujar participating in the two day meeting

8

A panoramic view of the all the visiting dignitaries

SIC, Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah inaugurating the two day workshop organized by Media

Academy and Information Publicity Dept., at Mysore on 23rd and 24th Feb., 2013.

Mr. Justice Nagamohan Das, Judge, High Court of Karnataka is also seen

9

2.3 The 7th National Convention organized by Central Information

Commission, New Delhi:

The Central Information Commission, New Delhi, conducted the Annual

Convention to commemorate the 7th year of the Implementation of the

RTI Act, 2005 on 12th & 13th October, 2012 at DRDO Bhavan,

New Delhi.

The two day convention, which was inaugurated by the Hon’ble Prime

Minister of India, was attended by the SCICs, SICs, Secretaries, Civil

Society Organizations, Stakeholders, NGOs, and RTI Activists, from all

over India.

SIC, Sri D.Thangaraj, presented a paper on the theme: Compliance,

Lessons learnt – Success and Failures on day one of the convention.

7th National Conference organized by CIC, New Delhi on 12th & 13th October, 2012

Hon’ble Prime Minister at the inauguration of the Conference.

10

SCIC of KIC with some of the Dignitaries

SICs of KIC participating in the National Conference

11

SIC of KIC, Sri D.Thangaraj, along with the Panel members, on the dais

SIC of KIC, Sri D. Thangaraj, presenting his paper at the Convention

12

Secretary of KIC seated alongside the Commissioners in the Convention

State Information Commissioner, Sri D.Thangaraj highlighted the

non-compliance of Section 4 of the Act despite seven years of the

implementation of the RTI Act and expressed the need to bring an

amendment to the Act, for effective implementation of this section of the

Act, by making provision for penalizing the erring Public Authorities.

Sri D.Thangaraj, SIC, cited the example of Karnataka Information

Commission and suggested to hold back closing of cases till the

information sought is furnished and penalty imposed fully recovered

from the PIOs.

Laying the Foundation Stone of KIC Building at Bangalore:

On 20th December, 2012, Sri Jagadeesh Shettar, Hon’ble Chief Minister,

laid the foundation stone of the Commission’s new building proposed to

be built at an estimated cost of Rs.1700 Lakhs. Sri C.M.Udasi, Hon’ble

Minister for Public Works Department and Sri S.Suresh Kumar, Hon’ble

Minister for Law and Parliamentary Affairs, graced the occasion as Chief

guests and Sri R.Roshan Baig, MLA, presided over the function.

13

Laying the Foundation Stone of KIC’s new Building by the Hon’ble Chief Minister of

Karnataka on 20th Dec, 2012

The Hon’ble Chief Minister Sri Jagadeesh Shettar, Hon’ble Law and Parlia-

mentary Affairs Minister, Sri Suresh Kumar, Hon’ble PWD Minister, Sri

C.M.Udasi, Sri R.Roshan Baig, MLA, SCIC and other dignitaries at the venue

of Laying the Foundation Stone of KIC building at Bangalore

Hon’ble Chief Minister along with the guests participating in the pooja

14

The Hon’ble Chief Minister performing “Gudhli-pooja”

Lighting the Lamp by the Hon’ble Chief Minister and guests

15

Unveiling the Foundation Stone by the Hon’ble Chief Minister

Conceptual Elevation drawing of the New Building

16

Other events:

2.4 The RTI programs attended by the SCIC and the SICs are as under:

Sl.

No. Date Place Event Organizer

1 28/4/2012 Bangalore CIVIC, Bangalore.

2 4 to 7/6/2012 Bangalore BBMP, Bangalore.

3 8/6/2012 Bangalore Deputy Commissioner of Police,

Bangalore East Division.

4 14/7/2012 Bangalore Additional Commissioner of

Police, Traffic, Bangalore.

5 8/8/2012 Bangalore Deputy Commissioner of Police,

Bangalore North Division.

6 18/8/2012 Bangalore Karnataka Government

Secretariat Training Institute,

Bangalore.

7 31/8/2012 Dharwar DC Office, Dharwar.

8 2/11/2012 Chamarajanagar DC Office, Chamarajanagar.

9 20/11/2012 Bagalkot DC Office, Bagalkot.

10 30/11/2012 Mysore Karnataka Power Transmission

Corporation Limited Engineers

Association, Mysore.

11 27/12/2012 Bangalore Commissioner of Police,

Bangalore.

12 16/1/2013 Raichur DC Office, Raichur

13 23/1/2013 Bangalore Accountant General Office,

Bangalore.

14 24/1/2013 Bangalore Public Affairs Centre, Bangalore.

15 16/2/2013 Bangalore BESCOM, Bangalore.

16 18/2/2013 Belgaum DC Office, Belgaum

17 19/2/2013 Bangalore DC Office, Bangalore.

18 23/2/2013 Mysore Media Academy, Bangalore in

collaboration with Information and

Publicity Department, Mysore.

19 27/3/2013 Bangalore Secretary, Karnataka Legislative

Council.

17

2.4.1 Sri A.K.M.Nayak, SCIC, participated in the Release of Book on “An

analysis of Pro-Active Disclosure of seven Departments/Service Agencies

Under Section 4(1) of the RTI Act - 2005” and Round Table organized by

Citizens Voluntary Initiative for the City (CIVIC), Bangalore on 28th April,

2012, at Sikshakara Sadana, Opp. Cauvery Bhavan, Bangalore.

2.4.2 The Commissioner, Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike, organized a

four day workshop at IPP Office, Malleswaram, from 4th June to 7th

June, 2012. Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah, SIC, addressed about 600

participants.

2.4.3 Sri M.R.Pujar, SIC, participated in the workshop organized by the Deputy

Commissioner of Police, Bangalore East Division, on 8th June, 2012. A

total of about 120 Police officers and staff of the Division participated in

the workshop.

2.4.4 The Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic), Bangalore, had organized

a workshop on RTI in the Police Guest House conference hall on 14th

July, 2012. Sri M.R.Pujar, SIC, addressed about 100 participants

including staff and officers of the City Traffic Police, Bangalore.

2.4.5 The Karnataka Government Secretariat Training Institute, Bangalore,

had organized a training programme on RTI Act- 2005 for Public

Information Officers and First Appellate Authorities, Heads of

Departments on 18th August, 2012. Sri A.K.M.Nayak, SCIC and

Sri D.Thangaraj, SIC, addressed the trainees.

2.4.6 Sri M.R.Pujar, SIC, participated in a one day workshop organized by the

Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bangalore North Division, on 8th August,

2012. About 100 Police officers and staff of the Division participated in

the training.

2.4.7 Dr. Shekhar D. Sajjanar, SIC, participated in the workshop-cum-training

program organized by the Deputy Commissioner, Dharwar District, on

31st August, 2012 for the Assistant Commissioners, Tahasildars, and

Executive Officers of taluk Panchayaths. In addition to the above officers,

about 200 Public Information Officers of other departments also

participated.

18

2.4.8 Dr. Shekhar D. Sajjanar, SIC, participated in the workshop-cum-

training programme organized by the Deputy Commissioner of

Chamarajanagar District and addressed about 300 PIOs & FAAs of

the district on 2nd November, 2012.

2.4.9 Dr. Shekhar D. Sajjanar, SIC, addressed a gathering of about 250

Public Information Officers of various departments of Bagalkot District

on 20th November, 2012, organized by Deputy Commissioner, Bagalkot

District.

2.4.10 Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah, SIC, addressed a gathering of about 750

Engineers and Public Information Officers at Conference Hall, Mysore

Medical College, Mysore, organized by the Karnataka Electricity Board

Engineers’ Association, Mysore, on 30th November, 2012.

2.4.11 Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah, SIC, participated in the workshop organized

by the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore, on 27th December, 2012.

About 250 Police officers and Public Information Officers participated.


Public Information Officers of various departments of Raichur District

on 16th January, 2013, organized by Deputy Commissioner, Raichur

District.

2.4.13 In a workshop, organized by the Accountant General’s office, at Audit

Bhavan, Bangalore, on 23rd January, 2013, Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah,

SIC addressed about 50 officers of the department.

2.4.14 Sri A.K.M.Nayak, SCIC and Sri D.Thangaraj, SIC, participated in the

Round Table discussion conducted by the Public Affairs Centre at the

Central Training Institute, Karnataka Milk Federation Complex,

Bangalore, on the subject “Suo-Motto disclosure under RTI” on 24th

January, 2013.

19

2.4.15 Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah, SIC, addressed a gathering of about 50 officers

of the Bangalore Electricity Supply Company (BESCOM) organized at

BESCOM Auditorium, Ananda Rao Circle, on 16th February, 2013.


Public Information Officers of various departments of Belgaum District

on 18th February, 2013, organized by Deputy Commissioner, Belgaum

District.

2.4.17 On 19th February, 2013, Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah, SIC, addressed a

gathering of about 300 Public Information Officers and other officers

at the Deputy Commissioner’s Office, Bangalore.

2.4.18 Sri J.S.Virupakshaiah, SIC, participated and addressed a gathering of

about 600 journalists at the Mysore University auditorium, organized

by Media Academy, Bangalore, in collaboration with the Information

and Publicity Department, Government of Karnataka, on 23rd February,

2013.

2.4.19 The Secretary, Karnataka Legislative Council, had organized a training

program for the benefit of 50 of its officers at the conference hall in the

Legislator’s Home on 27th March, 2013. Sri J.S. Virupakshiah, SIC,

participated in the programme.

2.4.20 In addition to the above, the Administrative Training Institute, Mysore,

as the nodal agency of the Government of Karnataka for imparting

training on the RTI Act, has trained 4224 Public Information Officers

of various departments in 42 training programs across the entire State.

The details are given in Annexure.

CHAPTER - III

GENERAL INFORMATION

22

23

CHAPTER - III

GENERAL INFORMATION

Introduction:

This chapter covers various activities of the Commission during the year. They

are:

Out-station hearing of petitions by the Commission, Petitions heard

through Video Conference; Compensation awarded to appellant

Petitioners, Penalties imposed on PIOs, etc.

3.1 During 2012-13, 4,62,287 persons, from all parts of the State, sought

information from PIOs of various departments in the State and other

authorities under this legislation. Out of this, only 3.41% of the applicants

approached the Commission in the form of 3757 complaints Under

Section 18(1) and 11,470 appeals Under Section 19(3) of the Act.

3.2 During the year, 6 Commissioners have disposed of 12,337 cases.

3.3 Out station hearing of cases during April 2012 to March 2013:

The Commission is hearing and disposing cases by holding sittings

outside Bangalore. The details are as below:

Month Place Total Cases Heard Disposed

June - 2012 Gadag 193 106

July – 2012 Chikkaballapur 60 17

August - 2012 Koppal 145 68

December - 2012 Raichur 31 10

January - 2013 Raichur 114 53

February - 2013 Belgaum 68 23

TOTAL 611 277

24

3.4 Cases heard through Video Conferencing:

The Commission is also hearing cases through Video Conferencing. The

details are as follows:

Month Place Total Cases Heard Disposed

April - 2012 Kolar 66 42

May - 2012 Mysore 16 9

Kolar 35 35

June - 2012 Tumkur 49 42

Chitradurga 29 29

July - 2012 Hassan 18 14

Chikamagalore 12 12

Ramanagara 26 20

Mandya 33 33

August - 2012 Yadagiri 18 13

Bidar 13 5

Dharwar 18 18

Chickballapur 32 31

Bijapur 21 21

Chamarajanagara 11 11

Shimoga 5 1

Mysore 16 16

September – 2012 Gadag 14 9

Bellary 13 13

Belgaum 16 16

Gulbarga 10 10

Bagalkote 6 5

Bidar 32 32

Shimoga 17 17

25

October - 2012 Raichur 16 5

Bidar 13 13

Raichur 17 17

November - 2012 Bellary 16 8

Shimoga 15 8

Davangere 14 14

Raichur 21 21

December - 2012 Chikkaballapur 31 25

Chitradurga 12 7

Shimoga 15 12

Ramanagara 19 19

Yadagiri 11 11

January - 2013 Kolar 11 10

Belgaum 9 8

Ramanagara 13 13

Mysore 20 13

Bellary 14 4

Kodagu 9 4

Bidar 18 14

February - 2013 Yadagiri 13 8

Haveri 10 8

March - 2013 Bagalkote 11 5

Gulbarga 66 13

Bidar 27 19

Belgaum 22 15

Kolar 22 11

TOTAL 991 759

26

3.5 Penalties imposed by the Commission:

3.5.1 Section 19(8)(c) of the R.T.I. Act empowers the State Information

Commission to impose penalties on the State Public Information Officers

as provided in section 20(1) of the Act.

3.5.2 During the year, the Commission has imposed ` 91,20,000/- penalty

on the PIOs of 28 departments.

Department-wise Penalties imposed on PIOs during the year 2012-13

Sl. Penalty

No. Department Name Imposed in `̀̀̀̀

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department 75,500.00

2 Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department 15,000.00

3 Commerce and Industries Department 89,500.00

4 Co-operation Department 1,66,000.00

5 Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms 1,05,000.00

6 Education Department (Primary and Sec, Higher) 3,38,500.00

7 Energy Department 77,000.00

8 Finance Department 63,000.00

9 Food and Civil Supplies Department 21,000.00

10 Forest, Environment Department 35,000.00

11 Health, Family Welfare and

Medical Education Department 1,13,500.00

12 Home Department 9,14,000.00

13 Housing Department 50,000.00

14 Infrastructure Development Department 10,000.00

15 Kannada, Culture, Information, Publicity and

Tourism Department 15,000.00

16 Karnataka Legislative Assembly and Council Secretariats 6,000.00

17 Labour Department 4,000.00

18 Law and Human Rights Department 12,750.00

19 Planning and Statistics Department 10,000.00

20 Public Works Department 58,000.00

27

21 Revenue Department 13,70,000.00

22 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department 22,31,250.00

23 Social Welfare and Backward Classes

Welfare Department 75,500.00

24 Transport Department 1,75,000.00

25 Urban Development Department 29,87,000.00

26 Water Resources Department 58,000.00

27 Women and Child Welfare Department 38,500.00

28 Youth Services Department 6,000.00

TOTAL 91,20,000.00

3.6 Compensation awarded by the Commission:

3.6.1 Under Section 19(8)(b) of the R.T.I. Act, Commission is empowered to

direct the Public Authorities to compensate the petitioner appellants for

the loss and other detriment suffered by them.

3.6.2 During the year, the Commission had awarded compensation to 342

petitioner appellants amounting to Rs. 4,52,050/-. The department-wise

details are as here under.

Department-wise Compensation Awarded during the Period 2012-13

Sl. Compensation

No. Department Awarded in `̀̀̀̀

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department 2,000.00

2 Commerce and Industries Department 4,000.00

3 Co-operation Department 6,000.00

4 Department of Personnel Administrative Reforms 12,300.00

5 Education Department (Primary and Sec, Higher) 25,750.00

6 Energy Department 2,000.00

7 Finance Department 8,000.00

8 Food and Civil Supplies Department 3,000.00

28

9 Forest, Environment Department 10,000.00

10 Health, Family Welfare and Medical

Education Department 2,000.00

11 Home Department 64,000.00


13 Kannada, Culture, Information, Publicity and

Tourism Department 2,000.00

14 Karnataka Legislative Assembly and

Council Secretariats 4,000.00

15 Public Enterprises Department 1,000.00

16 Public Works Department 5,000.00

17 Revenue Department 59,000.00

18 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department 83,000.00


Welfare Department 5,000.00

20 Transport Department 6,000.00


22 Water Resources Department 6,000.00



TOTAL 4,52,050.00

29

CHAPTER – IV

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RTI ACT

30

31

CHAPTER - IV

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RTI ACT

4.1 The Right to Information Act, 2005, empowers the citizens of the country

to seek information which is available in material form, from Public

Authorities. After the enactment of the Act on 12th October 2005, section

22 of the Act came into force which has got over riding effect on provisions

of the existing enactments which prevent disclosure of information; except

the information exempted under sections 8, 9 and 10 of the Act.

4.2 Section 2(f) of the Act defines what is “information” and Section 2(j)

defines what is “Right to Information”. From past 8 years, citizens are

using RTI Act and getting information.

Statistical Analysis:

4.3 Though the Act was brought into force on 12th October, 2005, the

response was poor, initially. However with increasing awareness, 4,62,287

persons in the State have utilized the Act during the year.

During last 8 years, 14,60,751 requests were received out of which,

13,75,825 information seekers received the information.

32

4.5 During the year, the number of requests for information received and

disposed by all the Public Authorities has gone up by 42.83% and 41.03%

respectively, as against 30.46% and 30.53% respectively, during the

previous year.

4.6 Fig.2 shows the details of the total number of Requests for information

received and disposed by the PIOs and the First Appeals received and

disposed by the First Appellate Authorities during the year 2012-13.

4.4 Fig. 1 below indicates the trend in use of RTI Act by the citizens in the

State.

33

4.7 Fig. 2(a) shows the percentage of First Appeals filed before the First Appellate

Authorities as against requests for information filed before the Public

Information Officers of Government departments in the State. This varies from

0.16% (Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Dept.) to 7.67% (Social Welfare Dept.).

34

35

4.8 As in the previous year, during the year also Revenue Department received

1,62,100 requests for information followed by Urban Development

Department: 73,893 and RDPR 61,946. The number disposed by these

three departments is 1,47,787, 69,250 and 60,396 respectively. These

three departments collectively accounted for 66.64% of the total requests

received by all the Departments during the year. Requests for information

received by RDPR and Revenue Departments saw an increase of 51.76%

and 42.25% respectively. Urban Development Department witnessed a

decrease of 7.08%.

4.9 The other departments which have received requests in five digits are

Transport (20,014), Education (16,751) and Home (15,051) and together

constitute 12% of the total requests received by all Departments.

4.10 The Act has provided exemption from disclosure of information as

follows:

Section 8(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no

obligation to give any citizen:

(a) information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the

sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific

or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead

to incitement of an offence;

(b) information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by

any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute

contempt of court;

(c) Information, the disclosure of which would cause a breach of privilege

of Parliament or the State Legislature;

(d) information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or

intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the

competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority

36

is satisfied that larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such

information;

(e) information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless

the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest

warrants the disclosure of such information;

(f) information received in confidence from foreign Government;

(g) information, the disclosure of which would endanger the life or

physical safety of any person or identify the source of information

or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or security

purposes;

(h) information which would impede the process of investigation or

apprehension or prosecution of offenders;

(i) cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of

Ministers, Secretaries and other officers:

Provided that the decisions of Council of Ministers, the reasons thereof,

and the material on the basis of which the decisions were taken shall be

made public after the decision has been taken, and the matter is complete,

or over:

Provided further that those matters which come under the exemptions

specified in this section shall not be disclosed;

(j) information which relates to personal information the disclosure of

which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which

would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual

unless the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public

Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be, is

satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such

information:

37

Provided that the information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or

a State Legislature shall not be denied to any person.

4.11 The Supreme Court of India in its order in Civil Appeal No.7571 of 2011

dated: 2-9-2011, has clarified the provisions of Section 8(1) of the Act

and held that sub-sections (a), (b), (c), (f), (g) and (h) are “Absolute

exemptions”; (d), (e) and (j) as Conditional exemptions and (i) as “Specific

period exemption”.

4.12 Under Section 8(1) of the Act, the PIOs denied information in 207 requests

during the year. The details are shown in Fig. 2.2

38

4.13 Fig.2.3 below shows the details of requests pending with various

Government departments as at the end of the year 2012-13. During the

year, the total number of pending requests is 24,694 as against 14,094

in 2011-12. A total of 13,181 requests were reported pending in Revenue

Department, followed by Urban Development Department, (3,946). These

two departments, put together, account for 76.61% of the total requests

pending during the year. Total number of requests pending are 5.7% of

the total requests received by all departments.

4.14 During the hearing of Appeals under section 19(3) of the Act, Commission

observed that in majority of cases, first appeals under section 19(1), are

neither heard nor disposed. Some of the First Appellate Authorities are

not hearing the Appeals at all. It is surprising to note that majority of

39

First Appellate Authorities are not even aware that the First Appeals are

to be disposed within thirty days of the receipt of the appeal or within

such extended period not exceeding a total of forty-five days from the

date of filing thereof, as the case may be, for reasons to be recorded in

writing. These Authorities are simply adjourning the cases, much much

beyond the prescribed period, thereby forcing the Appellants to approach

the Commission under section 19(3) of Act. Thus the inaction of the

First Appellate Authorities has not only created tremendous case load

on the Commission but has also resulted in the applicants not getting

the information within the stipulated period.

4.15 The Commission has also observed carelessness in the furnishing of

information relating to filing of First Appeals. While only two or three

First Appeals are reported to have been filed, the second appeals received

in the Commission, along with a copy of the First Appeal, are much

more.

4.16 Fig. 2.4 shows the number of First Appeals reported to be pending with

the First Appellate Authorities.

40

4.17 Information pertaining to the implementation of the Act by the

Government Departments, during the year, is furnished in the following

tables:

Table 1: Designation of Public Information Officers [Section 5(1)].

Table 2: Requests for Information filed under section 6 of the RTI Act

and their disposal by the Public Information Officers.

Table 3: Requests rejected by the Public Information Officers.

Table 4: Disposal of Appeals filed under Sec.19 (1) of the Act by First

Appellate Authorities.

Table 5: Summary of Fees and Charges Collected by Public Authorities.

41

Table 1 Number of Public Authorities and Public Information Officers for the Year

2012-13 [Section 5(1)]

[Source: Reports from Departments]

Sl. No. Name of the Department No of Public Authorities

No of Public Information

Officers Designated

1 2 3 4

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department 21 1751

2 Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department 12 3743

3 Chief Electoral Officer and Ex-Officio Principal Secretary

to Government, D.P.A.R. (Elections) 1 1

4 Commerce and Industries Department 28 213

5 Co-operation Department 5 435

6 Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms 37 82

7 Education Department (Primary and Secondary, Higher) 54179 58613

8 Energy Department 12 683

9 Finance Department 9 1755

10 Food and Civil Supplies Department 5 427

11 Forest, Environment and Ecology Department 17 329

12 Governor’s Secretariat 1 1

13 Health, Family Welfare and Medical Education Department

13 583

14 Home Department 8 1625

15 Housing Department 5 70

16 Information, Bio-technology, Science and Technology. Department

12 12

17 Infrastructure Development Department 1 2

18 Kannada, Culture, Information, Publicity and Tourism Department

17 135

19 Karnataka Legislative Assembly and Council Secretariats 2 2

20 Law and Human Rights Department 11 35

21 Labour Department 5 193

22 Parliamentary Affairs and Legislation Department 2 8

23 Planning and Statistics Department 7 54

24 Public Enterprises Department 1 1

25 Public Works Department and National Highways 9 379

26 Revenue Department 78 1512

27 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department 5840 6074

28 Social Welfare and Backward Classes Welfare Department 12 509

29 Transport Department 7 370

30 Urban Development Department 277 1021

31 Water Resources Department 16 399

32 Women and Child Welfare Department 10 485

33 Youth Services Department 3 8

TOTAL 60663 81457

42

Table – 2

Requests for Information filed Under Sec.6 of the RTI Act and their Disposal by the

Public Information Officers for the year 2012-13


Sl. No.

Name of the Department

Requests pending at the

beginning of the year

No of Requests received during the year

Total No of Requests

No of requests Disposed

Requests pending at the end of the year

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Agriculture and Horticulture

Department 91 6301 6392 6322 70

2 Animal Husbandry and Fisheries

Department 6 1228 1234 1232 2

3 Chief Electoral Officer and Ex-Officio

Principal Secretary to Government, D.P.A.R.(Elections)

0 260 260 260 0

4 Commerce and Industries Department 945 7052 7997 7246 751

5 Co-operation Department 159 4890 5049 4949 100

6 Department of Personnel and

Administrative Reforms 43 5124 5167 4739 428

7 Education Department (Primary and

Secondary, Higher) 166 16585 16751 16598 153

8 Energy Department 260 8949 9209 8987 222

9 Finance Department 306 9009 9315 8946 369

10 Food and Civil Supplies Department 53 2328 2381 2239 142

11 Forest, Environment and Ecology

Department 300 6490 6790 6408 382

12 Governor’s Secretariat 0 331 331 331 0


Education Department 73 6318 6391 6242 149

14 Home Department 252 14799 15051 14927 124

15 Housing Department 54 2525 2579 2559 20

16 Information Bio-technology, Science and Technology Department

8 172 180 170 10

17 Infrastructure Development Department 0 35 35 35 0


36 1457 1493 1459 34

19 Karnataka Legislative Assembly and

Council Secretariats 0 629 629 584 45

43

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

20 Labour Department 115 1247 2541 2153 388

21 Law and Human Rights Department 22 2519 1362 1319 43

22 Department of Parliamentary Affairs and Legislation

0 61 61 59 2

23 Planning and Statistics Department 0 381 381 381 0

24 Public Enterprises Department 0 24 24 24 0

25 Public Works Department and National

Highways 105 9785 9890 9684 206

26 Revenue Department 5739 152274 158013 144832 13181

27 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj

Department 518 59597 60115 58688 1427

28 Social Welfare and Backward Classes Welfare Department

332 4958 5290 4072 1218

29 Transport Department 510 19504 20014 19274 740

30 Urban Development Department 3352 65854 69206 65260 3946

31 Water Resources Department 519 3363 3882 3434 448

32 Women and Child Welfare Department 128 4678 4806 4712 94

33 Youth Services Department 2 136 138 138 0

TOTAL 14094 418863 432957 408263 24694

44

Table 3

Number of requests rejected Under Section 8(1) and on other grounds by the State Public Information

Officers for the year 2012-13


Sl. No.

Name of the Department Section 8(1)(a)

Section 8(1)(b)

Section 8(1)©

Section 8(1)(d)

Section 8(1)(e)

Section 8(1)(f)

Section 8(1)(g)

Section 8(1)(h)

Section 8(1)(i)

Section 8(1)(j)

Other Sections

TOTAL

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

2 Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3 Chief Electoral Officer and Ex-Officio Principal Secretary to Government, D.P.A.R. (Elections)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 Commerce and Industries Department 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 1 0 6 14 41

5 Co-operation Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6 Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms

0 0 0 56 39 0 30 60 0 137 98 420

7 Education Department (Primary and Secondary, Higher)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8 Energy Department 1 0 0 7 2 0 2 7 0 7 31 57

9 Finance Department 10 0 3 39 9 0 9 22 3 75 22 192

10 Food and Civil Supplies Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

11 Forest, Environment and Ecology Department

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3

12 Governor’s Secretariat 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


4 0 0 1 2 5 0 4 0 79 0 95

14 Home Department 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 5 27 46

15 Housing Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

17 Infrastructure Development Department 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

45

Sl. No.

Name of the Department Section 8(1)(a)

Section 8(1)(b)

Section 8(1)(c)

Section 8(1)(d)

Section 8(1)(e)

Section 8(1)(f)

Section 8(1)(g)

Section 8(1)(h)

Section 8(1)(i)

Section 8(1)(j)

Other Sections

TOTAL

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2

19 Karnataka Legislative Assembly and Council Secretariats

0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 20 35

20 Labour Department 2 2 0 0 14 0 0 5 6 15 214 258

21 Law and Human Rights Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

22 Parliamentary Affairs and Legislation Department

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

23 Planning and Statistics Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

24 Public Enterprises Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

25 Public Works Department and National Highways

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

26 Revenue Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

27 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10

29 Transport Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 37 70 3 123

30 Urban Development Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 6

31 Water Resources Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

32 Women and Child Welfare Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4

33 Youth Services Department 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 21 4 7 124 66 5 54 113 52 406 421 1283

Note: A request for information could be rejected under more than one provision.

46

Table 4

Disposal of Appeals by First Appellate Authorities filed under Sec.19(1) of the

Act for the year 2012-13


Sl. No.


First Appeals

pending with Appellate

authorities at the

beginning of the year

No of First Appeals

preferred by

Appellate authoritie

s during the Year

Total No of First

Appeals with

Appellate Autho-

rities

No of First

Appeals Disposed

by Appellate

authorities

No of

First Appeals

pending with

FAAs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department

21 244 265 246 19


0 2 2 2 0


0 4 4 4 0

4 Commerce and Industries

Department 16 148 164 139 25



8 221 229 224 5


0 234 234 231 3





1 71 72 71 1



0 77 77 76 1

14 Home Department 2 142 144 142 2



0 0 0 0 0

17 Infrastructure Development Department

0 2 2 2 0


4 31 35 34 1

47

Sl. No.


First

Appeals pending with

Appellate authorities

at the beginning of the year

No of First

Appeals preferred

by Appellate

authorities during the Year

Total No

of First Appeals

with Appellate

Autho-rities

No of First Appeals

Disposed by

Appellate authorities

No of First

Appeals pending

with FAAs

1 2 3 4 5 6 7


0 27 27 20 7



22 Parliamentary affairs and Legislation Department

0 0 0 0 0



25 Public Works Department and

National Highways 0 185 185 185 0


27 Rural Development and Panchayat

Raj Department 5 1826 1831 1708 123


67 339 406 251 155




32 Women and Child Welfare Department

1 59 60 59 1


TOTAL 1046 13057 14103 11807 2296

48

Table 5

Summary of Fees Collected by Public Authorities for the year 2012-13


Sl.

No. Name of Department

Total Collection

Amt. in .

1 2 3

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department 1,57,453.00

2 Animal Husbandry and Fisheries Department 30,727.00

3 Chief Electoral Officer and Ex-Officio Principal Secretary to Government, D.P.A.R.(Elections)

3,938.00

4 Commerce and Industries Department 3,19,685.00

5 Co-operation Department 96,956.00

6 Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms 2,39,515.00

7 Education Department (Primary and Secondary, Higher) 1,90,395.00

8 Energy Department 1,56,947.00

9 Finance Department 1,09,384.00

10 Forest, Environment and Ecology Department 28,292.00

11 Food and Civil Supplies Department 1,87,797.00

12 Governor’s Secretariat 5,163.00

13 Health, Family Welfare and Medical Education Department 1,30,921.00

14 Home Department 1,81,682.00


16 Information Bio-technology, Science and Technology Department 4,111.00

17 Infrastructure Development Department 320.00

18 Kannada, Culture, Information, Publicity and Tourism Department 32,969.00

19 Karnataka Legislative Assembly and Council Secretariats 21,749.00

20 Labour Department 32,317.00

21 Law and Human Rights Department 31,743.00

22 Parliamentary affairs and Legislation Department 3,749.00

23 Planning and Statistics Department 8,727.00

24 Public Enterprises Department 0.00

25 Public Works Department and National Highways 2,50,054.00

26 Revenue Department 18,33,546.00

27 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department 7,84,718.00

28 Social Welfare and Backward Classes Welfare Department 41,730.00

29 Transport Department 2,61,711.00


31 Water Resources Department 1,20,467.00



GRAND TOTAL 61,91,271.00

49

4.18 Commission Statistics:

4.18.1 The total number of petitions filed before the Commission, since its

inception, increased from 57,548 to 72,775. The total disposals also

increased correspondingly from 49,189 to 61,526. The year-wise details

are given in Fig. 3 below.

4.18.2 During the year the number of Appeals registered in the Commission,

under section 19(3), went up from 927 to 11,470. The Appeals

disposed by the Commission increased from 770 to 4,275. Of the

total number of petitions received (15,227) during the year, 75.33%

(11,470) were second appeals under section 19(3) and 24.67% (3,757)

were complaints under section 18(1). As against this, during the

50

previous year only 927 appeals were received. The increase in second

appeals during the year was due to the judgment of the Supreme

Court of India in the Civil Appeal No. 10787-788 of 2011 dated

12-12-2011, which clearly brought out the distinction between sections

18(1) and 19(3) of the RTI Act.

4.18.3 Of the total number of petitions filed, 65.35% were disposed under

section 18(1), and 34.65% under section 19(3). The disposal under

section 18(1) is more primarily on account of clearing the back-log of

the previous years. The number of Complaints registered in the

Commission under section 18(1) decreased during the year as

compared to the previous year.

4.18.4. Fig. 3.1 shows the emerging trend during 2012-13.

51

4.18.5 The figures below show the percentile distribution of receipts and disposals.

52

4.20 Disposal of Complaints by the Commission (Section 18(1)):

4.20.1 Year-wise details of complaints (since inception) received & disposed under

section 18(1) are shown below:

Table 6

Disposal of Complaints by the Commission (department-wise) under section 18(1) for the

Year: 2012-13

Sl. No. Name of the Department

No of

Complaints pending at the end of Last

year

No of

Complaints received during the

year

Total No of Complaints

No of Complaints Disposed

No of Complaints pending

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department

97 39 136 95 41

2 Animal Husbandry and Fisheries

Department 31 12 43 35 8


3 0 3 1 2

4 Commerce and Industries Department

106 43 149 149 0



99 69 168 138 30


420 324 744 566 178

53

1 2 3 4 5 6 7





68 48 116 97 19



Education Department 102 138 240 240 0

14 Home Department 468 196 664 446 218


16 Information Science, Bio-tech. and

Science and Technology Department 11 0 11 5 6

17 Infrastructure Development



32 8 40 24 16


9 0 9 3 6



22 Parliamentary Affairs and

Legislation Department 4 0 4 0 4



25 Public Works Department and

National Highways 116 76 192 110 82


27 Rural Development and Panchayat

Raj Department 1164 791 1955 1667 288


67 81 148 108 40




32 Women and Child Welfare



TOTAL 6444 3757 10201 8062 2139

54

4.21 Disposal of Second Appeals by the Commission (Section 19(3):

4.21.1 The figure below shows the number of second appeals received and

disposed since inception of the Commission (2005-06 to 2012-13).

55

Table 7

Disposal of Second Appeals by the Commission (department-wise) under

section 19(3) for the Year: 2012-13

Sl. No


No of Second Appeals

pending in the Commission at end of Last

Year

No of Second Appeals received during the Year

Total No of Second Appeals

received in the

Commission

No of Second Appeals Disposed

No. of Second Appeals Pending

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 Agriculture and Horticulture Department 29 129 158 47 111


4 34 38 15 23

3 Chief Electoral Officer and Ex-Officio Principal Secretary to Government, D.P.A.R.(Elections)

2 0 2 0 2

4 Commerce and Industries Department 44 101 145 69 76



42 162 204 76 128

7 Education Department (Primary and Secondary Higher)

130 773 903 339 564




21 28 49 8 41


12 Health and Family Welfare Department 39 9 48 5 43

13 Home Department 64 281 345 88 257


15 Information Bio-technology, Science and

Technology Department 17 37 54 9 45

16 Infrastructure Development Department 1 8 9 4 5



7 33 40 10 30


0 13 13 1 12



22 Parliamentary affairs and Legislation Department

0 0 0 0 0



25 Public Works Department and National Highways

24 162 186 49 137


27 Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department

354 3347 3701 952 2749


Welfare Department 19 148 167 71 96




32 Women and Child Welfare Department 3 49 52 15 37


Total 1817 11470 13287 4275 9012

CHAPTER – V

IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTIONS 4(1)(a) AND 4(1)(b) OF THE

ACT BY DEPARTMENTS DURING THE YEAR 2012-13

58

59

CHAPTER – V

IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTIONS 4(1)(A) AND 4(1)(B) OF THE ACT BY

DEPARTMENTS DURING THE YEAR 2012-13

5.1 Section 4 of the Act mandates every Public Authority to discharge certain

obligations which are as follows:

Section 4: Obligations of public authorities

4.1 Every public authority shall:

4(1)(a) maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and

the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and

ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are, within

a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised

and connected through a network all over the country on different systems

so that access to such records is facilitated;

4(1)(b) publish within one hundred and twenty days from the enactment of this

Act,-

(i) the particulars of its organisation, functions and duties;

(ii) the powers and duties of its officers and employees;

(iii) the procedure followed in the decision making process, including

channels of supervision and accountability;

(iv) the norms set by it for the discharge of its functions;

(v) the rules, regulations, instructions, manuals and records, held by it

or under its control or used by its employees for discharging its

functions;

(vi) a statement of the categories of documents that are held by it or

under its control;

(vii) the particulars of any arrangement that exists for consultation with,

or representation by, the members of the public in relation to the

formulation of its policy or implementation thereof;

(viii) a statement of the boards, councils, committees and other bodies

consisting of two or more persons constituted as its part or for the

purpose of its advice, and as to whether meetings of those boards,

60

councils, committees and other bodies are open to the public, or the

minutes of such meetings are accessible for public;

(ix) a directory of its officers and employees;

(x) the monthly remuneration received by each of its officers and

employees, including the system of compensation as provided in its

regulations;

(xi) the budget allocated to each of its agency, indicating the particulars

of all plans, proposed expenditures and reports on disbursements

made;

(xii) the manner of execution of subsidy programmes, including the

amounts allocated and the details of beneficiaries of such

programmes;

(xiii) particulars of recipients of concessions, permits or authorisations

granted by it;

(xiv) details in respect of the information, available to or held by it, reduced

in an electronic form;

(xv) the particulars of facilities available to citizens for obtaining

information, including the working hours of a library or reading room,

if maintained for public use;

(xvi) the names, designations and other particulars of the Public Information

Officers;

(xvii) such other information as may be prescribed; and there after update

these publications every year;

4(1)(c) publish all relevant facts while formulating important policies or

announcing the decisions which affect public;

4(1)(d) provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected

persons.

Section 4.2 It shall be a constant endeavour of every public authority to take

steps in accordance with the requirements of clause (b) of

sub-section (1) to provide as much information Suo-Motto to the

public at regular intervals through various means of

communications, including internet, so that the public have

minimum resort to the use of this Act to obtain information.

61

5.2 In the State High Level Committee meeting, held on 19.5.2012, chaired

by the Chief Secretary of the State, on the implementation of RTI Act,

Sri A.K.M.Nayak, State Chief Information Commissioner, Karnataka

Information Commission, suggested constitution of a State Level

Committee, under the Chairmanship of the Additional Chief Secretary,

to monitor and review compliance of provisions under section 4(1)(a),

4(1)(b), 4(1)(c) and 4(1)(d).

5.3 Accordingly, Government has taken action and issued circular bearing

No. DPAR/44/RTI/2009 dated 13.8.2012 constituting the following

Committee to monitor and review the progress of implementation of

Section 4 of the Act:

Additional Chief Secretary to Government - Chair Person

Principal Secretaries/Secretaries to Government

of the concerned Department. - Member

Heads of Departments, Managing Directors of

Departments/ Corporations/Boards under the

control of the Administrative Departments. - Member

Principal Secretary to Government, D.P.A.R.

(A.R.-Janaspandhana Kosha) - Convener

5.4 The Committee reviewed the progress in respect of Education Department

on 8-1-2013 and Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department on

11-3-2013. As mentioned earlier in this report, the Committee constituted

for reviewing and monitoring Section 4 of the Act has met only twice.

CHAPTER – VI

ACCOUNTS OF THE COMMISSION

64

65

CHAPTER – VI

ACCOUNTS OF THE COMMISSION

Annual accounts of Karnataka Information Commission for the year

2012-13

6.1 The Government of Karnataka is releasing funds through budget

allocations to the Commission, under Head of Account “2251-00-090-

003 – Non-Plan” to meet the administrative and other expenses. During

the year the Commission received a sum of Rs. 448.74 Lakhs and spent

Rs. 372.79 Lakhs.

6.2 The Statement of Receipts and Expenditure is as follows:

Receipts: ( .in lakhs)

Budget Allocation Head of Accounts Total

1.Pay-Officers 2251-00-090-003-02 56.40

2.Pay-Staff 2251-00-090-003-03 13.57

3.Interiem Relief 2251-00-090-003-004 10.50

4.Dearness Allowance 2251-00-090-003-011 58.77

5.Other Allowance 2251-00-090-003-014 41.81

6.Medical Allowance 2251-00-090-003-020 0.46

7.Reimbursement of Medical expenses

2251-00-090-003-021 2.32

8.Travel Expenses 2251-00-090-003-041 36.12

9.General Expenses 2251-00-090-003-051 117.19

10.Telephone Charges 2251-00-090-003-052 10.00

11.Machinery & Equipment 2251-00-090-003-180 41.68

12.Transport expenses 2251-00-090-003-195 44.35

13.Building Expenses 2251-00-090-003-071 15.57

Total 448.74

66

Expenditure: ( . In Lakhs)

Expenditure incurred by the Commission

Head of Accounts Total Expenses

1.Pay-Officers 2251-00-090-003-02 62.37

2.Pay-Staff 2251-00-090-003-03 32.93

3.Interiem Relief 2251-00-090-003-004 1.04

4.Dearness Allowance 2251-00-+090-003-011 52.53

5.Other Allowance 2251-00-090-003-014 27.97

6.Medical Allowance 2251-00-090-003-020 0.07

7.Reimbursement of Medical

expenses

2251-00-090-003-021 0.85

8.Travel Expenses 2251-00-090-003-041 7.64

9.General Expenses 2251-00-090-003-051 107.28

10.Telephone Charges 2251-00-090-003-052 3.23

11.Machinery & Equipment 2251-00-090-003-180 13.52

12.Transport expenses 2251-00-090-003-195 16.08

13.Building Expenses 2251-00-090-003-071 37.73

14.Retritement Benefits 2251-00-090-003-251 9.55

Total 372.79

67

CHAPTER – VII

RECOMMENDATIONS

68

69

CHAPTER - VI

RECOMMENDATIONS:

7.1 The Commission has made several recommendations in its earlier Annual

Reports. While reiterating those recommendations, the Commission

makes the following recommendations in this report:

7.2 Even after lapse of eight years of implementation of Right to Information

Act 2005, majority of the Departments have not taken concrete steps for

cataloguing and indexing of records as required under section 4(1)(a) of

the Act and publishing information under section 4(1)(b) of the Act. Since

the Karnataka Public Records Keeping Act, 2010, has come now into

force, it is necessary that all the Government records are properly

preserved and accounted. The Commission, therefore, recommends that

Government should review this in its monthly meetings and Secretaries

to Government should be strictly instructed to monitor and comply with

the said Act.

7.3 The Committee, constituted under the Chairmanship of the Additional

Chief Secretary, for reviewing the implementation of section 4(1)(a) and

4(1)(b) of the Act, should also meet regularly, at least once in two months,

and complete the review of all the departments every year.

7.4 The Government of Karnataka has issued circular No.DPAR.52.RTI-2007,

dated: 14-5-2007, directing all the officers to take immediate action to

display the name of the Public Information Officer, the Assistant Public

Information Officer and the First Appellate Authority, appointed under

section 5(1) of the Right to Information Act, on the notice boards of their

offices. This does not appear to have been done since many appellants,

during the hearing of their appeals in the Commission, complain that

they are not aware of who is the First Appellate Authority since no such

70

information is displayed on the notice board and are filing first appeals

to other offices who are not FAAs. Hence Commission recommends to

the Government to reiterate the circular instructions and ensure

compliance.

7.5 Commission, in its 7th Annual Report, has already recommended to the

Government to assess the financial requirement and send proposal to

Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, for allocating

funds to State Government to undertake cataloguing and indexing of

records. In case no such proposal is sent as yet then, at least now, to

begin with, the Government may direct Secretaries to Government of

four departments, viz., Revenue, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj,

Urban Development and Home Departments to assess their financial

requirements for cataloguing and indexing of records and send a proposal

to Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India.

7.6 The Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, has

agreed to provide Rs.50,000/- per RTI Cell in Central Government Offices.

Commission also recommends to the State Government to start such

RTI Cells, in all the District offices, Sub-division offices and Taluk offices,

at least in the Revenue, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, and

Police Departments and write to Department of Personnel and Training

to allocate funds to State Government to establish these RTI Cells.

7.7 Failure of the First Appellate Authorities (FAAs) to dispose appeals under

section 19(1) of the Act not only results in depriving a citizen of his right

to receive information sought within the prescribed period, but also

unnecessarily increases the caseload on the Commission. Since the Act

does not provide for imposing of penalty on the FAA, the Commission

recommends that the Secretaries to the Government and Heads of

Departments be made responsible for monitoring disposal of appeals

71

under section 19(1) of the Act and initiate disciplinary action against the

persistently defaulting officers.

7.8 It was recommended in the 4th State High Level Committee Meeting,

chaired by the Chief Secretary of the State, that the further fee collected

from the petitioners may be allowed to be retained by the PIOs so that

this amount could be utilized for purchase of photo-copying papers, photo-

copying cartridges, etc. by the PIOs. However, presently PIOs are allowed

to retain this amount for 3 months and are not permitted to use this

amount. Hence it is recommended that the Government may permit the

SPIOs to utilize the further fee collected for the said purpose and, if

necessary, remit the unutilized amount at the end of the financial year

to the Treasury.

7.9 Commission imposes penalty under section 20(1) of the Act and directs

the controlling officers to recover the penalty imposed and remit it to the

Treasury. Commission has observed that some of the controlling officers

are not recovering the penalty imposed, nor, is the PIO remitting the

penalty amount. Commission recommends to the Government to issue

strict instructions in the matter of recovery and remittance of the penalty

imposed.

7.10 Officers posted as Secretary of the Commission, Under Secretaries and

Section Officers are being frequently transferred. This not only affects

the day to day administration of the Commission, but also causes much

inconvenience to appellants/complainants who visit the Commission’s

office in connection with their appeals and complaints. Commission

recommends that any officers posted to the Commission be continued at

least for a minimum period of two years.

72

73

ANNEXURE

(i)

(Source: ATI Mysore)

Sl.No Topic No of

Participants Target Group Course

Co ordinator Programme held on dated

1. Reading Material 5000 Copies

2. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat ZP, Hassan

109 All Department

Group A& B officers

APIOS,PIOS, FAAs Elected Representative, Press, Representative,

NGOs, Community Based Organization

C.K. 2.11.2012 (Fri- Sat) 3.11.2012

3. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat

Bangalore (Urban)

101 KMP

5.11.2012 6.11.2012 (mon-tue)


Chikkmagaluru

252 C.K.

5.11.2012 (mon- tue) 6.11.2012

5. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Raichur

124 B.Y.S.

5.11.2012 (mon- tue) 6.11.2012

6. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Yadgiri 245 KMP

6.11.2012 (Tues- Wed) 7.11.2012

7. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Gulbarga

143 KMP 7.11.2012(Wed-Thurs) 8.11.2012


Bangalore (Rural)

104 B.Y.S.

7.11.2012 (Wed-Thurs) 8.11.2012

9. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Bidar

121 KMP 8.11.2012 (Thurs-Fri) 9.11.2012

10. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Mysore 87 C.K.

8.11.2012 (Thurs-Fri) 9.11.2012

11. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Madikeri 94 C.K.

16.11.2012 (Fri – Sat) 17.11.2012

12. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Kolar

110 B.Y.S. 16.11.2012 (Fri – Sat) 17.11.2012

Physical Progress Report of RTI Workshops/Training Programmes for 2012-13 by Administrative

Training Institute, Mysore

(Source: ATI Mysore)

(ii)

13. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Tumkur

96 B.Y.S. 19.11.2012 (mon- tue)

20.11.2012

14. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Shimoga

110 All Department

Group A& B officers APIOS,PIOS, FAAs

Elected Representative, Press, Representative, NGOs, Community Based Organization

B.Y.S. 22.11.2012 (thurs- Fri) 23.11.2012

15. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Chitradurga

95 B.Y.S. 27.11.2012(Tues-Wed)

28.11.2012

16. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Mangalore

107 K.I.H 3.12.2012 (mon- tue)

4.12.2012

17. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Udupi

93 K.I.H 5.12.2012 (wed-thus)

6.12.2012

18. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Chikkballapur

80 B.Y.S. 10.12.2012(mon-tue)

11.12.2012

19. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Ramanagar 94

B.Y.S. 13.12.2012 (Tues-Wed) 14.12.2012

20. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Mandya 72 K.I.H

11.12.2012 (Tues-Wed) 12.12.2012

21. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Gadag 80 C.A

26.12.2012(wed-thurs) 27.12.2012

22. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Belguam 96

C.A 28.12.2012(Fri – Sat) 29.12.2012

23. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Bijapur 86

C.A 3.01.2013(thur- fri) 4.01.2013

24. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Bellary 118 K.M.P.

7.01.2013(mon-tue) 8.01.2013

25. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, H.D.Kote Taluk level (Mysore)

99 K.I.H

7.01.2013(mon-tue) 8.01.2013

26. RTI Act -2005 Shiraguppa, Taluk level 118

K.M.P. 8.01.2013(tue- wed) 9.01.2013

(iii)

27. RTI Act -2005 Gangavathi, Taluk level, (Koppala)

130 K.M.P. 9.01.2013(wed- thur)

10.01.2013

28. RTI Act -2005 Gundalpet Taluk level, Chamarajanagar

108 All Department

Group A,B &C officers APIOS, PIOS, FAAs

Elected Representatives,

Press,

K.I.H 9.01.2013(wed- thur) 10.01.2013

29. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Koppala

110 K.M.P. 10.01.2013(thur- fri)

11.01.2013

30. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Bagalkote

108 C.A 08.01.2013(tues- Wed) 09.01.2013

31. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat, Chamarajanagar

83 KIH 13.01.2013(mon-tue) 14.01.2013

32. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Karwara (Uttar Kannad)

76 A.C. 16.01.2013(Wed-Thurs) 17.01.2013

33. RTI Act -2005 Taluk Panchayat Chelkere (Chitradurga)

98 B.Y.S. 16.01.2013(Wed-Thurs) 17.01.2013

34. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Davangere

107 C.A 18.01.2012(Fri – Sat) 19.01.2012

35. RTI Act -2005 at ATI, Mysore

37 Drug Controllers APIOS,PIOS, FAAs

K.M.P 19.01.2013(Sat)

36.

RTI Act -2005 Taluk Panchayat Basavana Bagevadi Taluk level (Bijapur)

88

All Department Group A,B &C officers APIOS, PIOS, FAAs


Press,

C.A

21.01.2013(thurs –fri) 22.01.2013

37. RTI Act -2005 at Vikasa Soudha Bangalore

56 US, SC & JC level

officers K.M.P 23.01.2013 (Wednesday)

(iv)

38. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Shirahatti Taluk level (Gadag)

82 All Department

Group A,B & C officers APIOS, PIOS, FAAs


Press,

C.A 29.01.2013(Tues –Wed) 30.01.2013

39. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Pavagada Taluk level (Tumkur)

100 B.Y.S 29.01.2013(Tues –Wed) 30.01.2013

40. RTI Act -2005 at ATI, Mysore 37

Karnataka State Pollution board APIOS,PIOS, FAAs

K.M.P 4.02.2013(Monday)

41. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Haveri

86 All Department

Group A,B &C officers APIOS, PIOS, FAAs


Press,

C.A 20.02.2013(Wed-Thur) 21.02.2013

42. RTI Act -2005 Zilla Panchayat Dharwad

84 C.A 22.02.2013(Fri- Sat)

23.02.2013

Total No of Participants 4224

Name of Faculty & Course Co-ordinators

* K.M.P: Sri. K.M. Prasad

* B.Y.S: Sri. B. Yoganath Singh

* A.C: Sri. C. Ashoka

* K.I.H: Sri. K. Iqbal Hussain

* C.K.: Dr. Chirstina Kantharaju

(v)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.7571 OF 2011

THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA

VERSUS SHAUNAK H.SATYA & ORS. … DECIDED ON 02-09-2011,

HELD AS FOLLOWS:

11…….The exemption Under Section 8(1)(d) is available only in regard to

such intellectual property, the disclosure of which would harm the

competitive position of any third party…..

12……What is exempted from disclosure at one point of time may cease

to be exempted at a later point of time, depending upon the nature of

exemption. For example, any information which is exempted from disclosure

Under Section 8, is liable to be disclosed if the application is made in regard to

the occurrence or event which took place or occurred or happened twenty

years prior to the date of the request, vide section 8(3) of the RTI Act. In other

words, information which was exempted from disclosure, if an application is

made within twenty years……cannot be disclosed before the examination is

held, as it would harm the competitive position of innumerable third parties

who are taking the said examination…..But the position will be different once

the examination is held. Disclosure of the question papers, model answers

and instructions in regard to any particular examination, would not harm the

competitive position of any third party once the examination is held. In fact

the question papers are disclosed to everyone at the time of examination. The

appellant voluntarily publishes the “suggested answers” in regard to the

question papers in the form of a book for sale every year, after the examination.

Therefore section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act does not bar or prohibit the

disclosure of question papers, model answers (solutions to questions) and

instructions if any given to the examiners and moderators after the

examination and after the evaluation of answer scripts is completed, as

at that stage they will not harm the competitive position of any third

party….

13……The word ‘State’ used in section 9 of RTI Act refers to the Central or

State Government, Parliament or Legislature of a State, or any local or other

authorities as described under Article 12 of the Constitution. The reason for

using the word ‘State’ and not ‘public authority’ in section 9 of RTI Act is

apparently because the definition of ‘public authority’ in the Act is wider

(vi)

than the definition of ‘State’ in Article 12, and includes even non-

government organizations financed directly or indirectly by funds provided

by the appropriate Government. Be that as it may. An application for

information would be rejected Under Section 9 of RTI Act, only if information

sought involves an infringement of copyright subsisting in a person other than

the State…..

14. There is yet another reason why section 9 of RTI Act will be inapplicable. The

words ‘infringement of copyright’ have a specific connotation. Section 51 of the

Copyright Act, 1957 provides when a copyright in a work shall be deemed to be

infringed. Section 52 of the Act enumerates the acts which are not

infringement of a copyright. A combined reading of sections 51 and 52(1)(a)

of Copyright Act shows that furnishing of information by an examining

body, in response to a query under the RTI Act may not be termed as an

infringement of copyright. Be that as it may.

16…..The examiners and moderators are required to maintain absolute secrecy

and cannot disclose the answer scripts, the evaluation of answer scripts, the

instructions of ICAI and the solutions to questions made available by ICAI, to

anyone. The examiners and moderators are in the position of agents and

ICAI is in the position of principal in regard to such information which

ICAI gives to the examiners and moderators to achieve uniformity,

consistency and exactness of evaluation of the answer scripts. When

anything is given and taken in trust or in confidence, requiring or expecting

secrecy and confidentiality to be maintained in that behalf, it is held by the

recipient in a fiduciary relationship.

17. It should be noted that section 8(1)(e) uses the words “information available

to a person in his fiduciary relationship. Significantly section 8(1)(e) does not

use the words “information available to a public authority in its fiduciary

relationship”. The use of the words “person” shows that the holder of the

information in a fiduciary relationship need not only be a ‘public authority’

as the word ‘person’ is of much wider import than the word ‘public

authority’. Therefore the exemption Under Section 8(1)(e) is available not

only in regard to information that is held by a public authority (in this

case the examining body) in a fiduciary capacity, but also to any

information that is given or made available by a public authority to anyone

(vii)

else for being held in a fiduciary relationship. In other words, anything

given and taken in confidence expecting confidentiality to be maintained will

be information available to a person in fiduciary relationship. As a consequence,

it has to be held that the instructions and solutions to questions

communicated by the examining body to the examiners, head-examiners

and moderators, are information available to such persons in their fiduciary

relationship and therefore exempted from disclosure Under Section 8(1)(d)

of RTI Act.

18. The information to which RTI Act applies falls into two categories,

namely, (i) information which promotes transparency and accountability

in the working of every public authority, disclosure of which helps in

containing or discouraging corruption, enumerated in clauses (b) and (c)

of section 4(1) of RTI Act; and (ii) other information held by public

authorities not falling Under Section 4(1)(b) and (c) of RTI Act. In regard

to information falling under the first category, the public authorities owe

a duty to disseminate the information widely Suo-Motto to the public so

as to make it easily accessible to the public. In regard to information

enumerated or required to be enumerated Under Section 4(1)(b) and (c) of

RTI Act, necessarily and naturally, the competent authorities under the

RTI Act, will have to act in a pro-active manner so as to ensure

accountability and ensure that the fight against corruption goes on

relentlessly. But in regard to other information which do not fall Under Section

4(1)(b) and (c) of the Act, there is a need to proceed with circumspection as

it is necessary to find out whether they are exempted from disclosure. One of the

objects of democracy is to bring about transparency of information to contain

corruption and bring about accountability. But achieving this object does not

mean that other equally important public interests including efficient

functioning of the governments and public authorities, optimum use of limited

fiscal resources, preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information, etc.

are to be ignored or sacrificed. The object of RTI Act is to harmonize the

conflicting public interests, that is, ensuring transparency to bring in

accountability and containing corruption on the one hand, and at the

same time ensure that the revelation of information, in actual practice,

does not harm or adversely affect other public interests which include

efficient functioning of the Governments, optimum use of limited fiscal

(viii)

resources and preservation of confidentiality of sensitive information, on

the other hand. While sections 3 and 4 seek to achieve the first objective,

sections 8, 9, 10 and 11 seek to achieve the second objective. Therefore when

section 8 exempts certain information from being disclosed, it should not be

considered to be a fetter on the right to information, but as an equally important

provision protecting other public interests essential for the fulfilment and

preservation of democratic ideals. Therefore in dealing with information not falling

Under Section 4(1)(b) and (c), the competent authorities under the RTI Act will not

read the exemptions in section 8 in a restrictive manner but in a practical manner

so that the other public interests are preserved and the RTI Act attains a fine

balance between its goal of attaining transparency of information and safeguarding

the other public interests.

19. Among the ten categories of information which are exempted from

disclosure Under Section 8 of RTI Act, six categories which are described

in clauses (a), (b), (c), (f), (g) and (h) carry absolute exemption. Information

enumerated in clauses (d), (e) and (j) on the other hand get only conditional

exemption, that is the exemption is subject to the overriding power of the

competent authority under the RTI Act in larger public interest, to direct

disclosure of such information. The information referred to in clause (i)

relates to an exemption for a specific period, with an obligation to make

the said information public after such period. The information relating to

intellectual property and the information available to persons in their fiduciary

relationship, referred to in clauses (d) and (e) of section 8(1) do not enjoy absolute

exemption. Though exempted, if the competent authority under the Act is

satisfied that larger public interest warrants disclosure of such information,

such information will have to be disclosed. It is needless to say that the

competent authority will have to record reasons for holding that an

exempted information should be disclosed in larger public interest.

24. In regard to parts (i), (iii) and (v) of query (13), ICAI submits that such data

is not maintained. Reliance is placed upon the observations of this Court in

Aditya Bandopadhyay ….……As the information sought under parts (i), (iii)

and (v) of query (13) are not maintained and is not available in the form of

data with the appellant in its records, ICAI is not bound to furnish the

same.

(ix)

25……Examining bodies like ICAI should change their old mindsets and

tune them to the new regime of disclosure of maximum information.

Public authorities should realize that in an era of transparency, previous

practices of unwarranted secrecy have no longer a place. Accountability

and prevention of corruption is possible only through transparency.

Attaining transparency no doubt would involve additional work with

reference to maintaining records and furnishing information. Parliament

has enacted the RTI Act providing access to information, after great debate

and deliberations by the Civil Society and the Parliament. In its wisdom,

the Parliament has chosen to exempt only certain categories of information

from disclosure and certain organizations from the applicability of the

Act. As the examining bodies have not been exempted, and as the examination

processes of examining bodies have not been exempted, the examining bodies

will have to gear themselves to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act.

Additional workload is not a defence. If there are practical insurmountable

difficulties, it is open to the examining bodies to bring them to the notice of the

government for consideration so that any changes to the Act can be deliberated

upon. Be that as it may.

26. We however agree that it is necessary to make a distinction in regard to

information intended to bring transparency, to improve accountability

and to reduce corruption, falling Under Section 4(1)(b) and (c) and other

information which may not have a bearing on accountability or reducing

corruption. The competent authorities under the RTI Act will have to

maintain a proper balance so that while achieving transparency, the

demand for information does not reach unmanageable proportions

affecting other public interests, which include efficient operation of public

authorities and government, preservation of confidentiality of sensitive

information and optimum use of limited fiscal resources.

27….this appeal is allowed in part and the order of the High Court is set aside

and the order of the CIC is restored, subject to one modification in regard to

query (13): ICAI to disclose to the first respondent, the standard criteria, if

any, relating to moderation, employed by it, for the purpose of making revisions

under Regulation 39(2).

(x)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN SLP (CIVIL) 34868 OF 2009

KHANAPURAM GANDAIAH VS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER & ORS.. …

DECIDED ON 04-01-2010, HELD AS FOLLOWS:

1. This special leave petition has been filed against the judgment and order

dated 24.4.2009 passed in Writ Petition No.28810 of 2008 by the High Court

of Andhra Pradesh by which the writ petition against the order of dismissal of

the petitioner’s application and successive appeals under the Right to

Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter called the “RTI Act”) has been dismissed. In

the said petition, the direction was sought by the Petitioner to the Respondent

No.1 to provide information as asked by him vide his application dated

15.11.2006 from the Respondent No.4 – a Judicial Officer as for what reasons,

the Respondent No.4 had decided his Miscellaneous Appeal dishonestly.

2. * * *

3. Petitioner filed an application dated 15.11.2006 Under Section 6 of the RTI

Act before the Administrative Officer-cum-Assistant State Public Information

Officer (respondent no.1) seeking information to the queries mentioned therein.

The said application was rejected vide order dated 23.11.2006 and an appeal

against the said order was also dismissed vide order dated 20.1.2007. Second

Appeal against the said order was also dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh State

Information Commission vide order dated 20.11.2007. The petitioner challenged

the said order before the High Court, seeking a direction to the Respondent

No.1 to furnish the information as under what circumstances the Respondent

No.4 had passed the Judicial Order dismissing the appeal against the interim

relief granted by the Trial Court. The Respondent No.4 had been impleaded as

respondent by name. The Writ Petition had been dismissed by the High Court

on the grounds that the information sought by the petitioner cannot be asked

for under the RTI Act. Thus, the application was not maintainable. More so,

the judicial officers are protected by the Judicial Officers’ Protection Act, 1850

(hereinafter called the “Act 1850”). Hence, this petition.

4. * * *

5. At the outset, it must be noted that the petitioner has not challenged the

order passed by the Respondent No. 4. Instead, he had filed the application

Under Section 6 of the RTI Act to know why and for what reasons Respondent

(xi)

No. 4 had come to a particular conclusion which was against the petitioner.

The nature of the questions posed in the application was to the effect why and

for what reason Respondent No. 4 omitted to examine certain documents and

why he came to such a conclusion. Altogether, the petitioner had sought answers

for about ten questions raised in his application and most of the questions

were to the effect as to why Respondent No. 4 had ignored certain documents

and why he had not taken note of certain arguments advanced by the petitioner’s

counsel.

6. Under the RTI Act “information” is defined Under Section 2(f) which provides:

“information” means any material in any form, including records,

documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars,

orders, logbooks, contracts, report, papers, samples, models, data material

held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body

which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the

time being in force.”

This definition shows that an applicant Under Section 6 of the RTI Act can get

any information which is already in existence and accessible to the public

authority under law. Of course, under the RTI Act an applicant is entitled to

get copy of the opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc., but he cannot ask for

any information as to why such opinions, advices, circulars, orders, etc. have

been passed, especially in matters pertaining to judicial decisions. A judge

speaks through his judgments or orders passed by him. If any party feels

aggrieved by the order/judgment passed by a judge, the remedy available to

such a party is either to challenge the same by way of appeal or by revision or

any other legally permissible mode. No litigant can be allowed to seek

information as to why and for what reasons the judge had come to a particular

decision or conclusion. A judge is not bound to explain later on for what reasons

he had come to such a conclusion.

7. Moreover, in the instant case, the petitioner submitted his application Under

Section 6 of the RTI Act before the Administrative Officer-cum- Assistant State

Public Information Officer seeking information in respect of the questions raised

in his application. However, the Public Information Officer is not supposed to

have any material which is not before him; or any information he could have

(xii)

obtained under law. Under Section 6 of the RTI Act, an applicant is entitled to

get only such information which can be accessed by the “public authority”

under any other law for the time being in force. The answers sought by the

petitioner in the application could not have been with the public authority nor

could he have had access to this information and Respondent No. 4 was not

obliged to give any reasons as to why he had taken such a decision in the

matter which was before him. A judge cannot be expected to give reasons other

than those that have been enumerated in the judgment or order. The application

filed by the petitioner before the public authority is per se illegal and

unwarranted. A judicial officer is entitled to get protection and the object of the

same is not to protect malicious or corrupt judges, but to protect the public

from the dangers to which the administration of justice would be exposed if the

concerned judicial officers were subject to inquiry as to malice, or to litigation

with those whom their decisions might offend. If anything is done contrary to

this, it would certainly affect the independence of the judiciary. A judge should

be free to make independent decisions.

8. As the petitioner has misused the provisions of the RTI Act, the High Court

had rightly dismissed the writ petition.

9. In view of the above, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly.

(xiii)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN SLP (CIVIL) 27734 OF 2012 GIRISH

RAMCHANDRA DESHPANDE VS CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMR.

& ORS. … DECIDED ON 03-10-2012, HELD AS FOLLOWS:

13. We are in agreement with the CIC and the courts below that the details

called for by the petitioner i.e. copies of all memos issued to the third

respondent, show cause notices and orders of censure/punishment etc.

are qualified to be personal information as defined in clause (j) of Section

8(1) of the RTI Act. The performance of an employee/officer in an organization

is primarily a matter between the employee and the employer and normally those

aspects are governed by the service rules which fall under the expression

“personal information”, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public

activity or public interest. On the other hand, the disclosure of which would

cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of that individual. Of course, in a

given case, if the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public

Information Officer of the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger

public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, appropriate

orders could be passed but the petitioner cannot claim those details as a

matter of right.

14. The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are “personal

information” which stand exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of

Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, unless involves a larger public interest and

the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer

or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies

the disclosure of such information.

15. The petitioner in the instant case has not made a bona fide public interest

in seeking information, the disclosure of such information would cause

unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual Under Section 8(1)(j) of the

RTI Act.

16. We are, therefore, of the view that the petitioner has not succeeded in

establishing that the information sought for is for the larger public interest.

That being the fact, we are not inclined to entertain this special leave petition.

Hence, the same is dismissed.

* * * * *

Govt. Press, Bangalore, P7, PWS 603 , Copies: 800

Documents

KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION - KIC Report/Annual Report...5 8/8/2012 Bangalore Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bangalore North Division. 6 18/8/2012 Bangalore Karnataka Government