E-Paper
RTI: State fit case for a PIL
RAJYA SABHA Secretary General Yogendra Narain on Friday said due to inordinate delay in the appointment of Chief Information Commissioner and other Information Commissioners, make Uttar Pradesh a fit case for filing a public interest litigation (PIL).
RAJYA SABHA Secretary General Yogendra Narain on Friday said due to inordinate delay in the appointment of Chief Information Commissioner and other Information Commissioners, make Uttar Pradesh a fit case for filing a public interest litigation (PIL).
“The states reluctant to implement the Right to Information Act have left no other option for the people but to take recourse to law, he said. “All citizens have the right to information and action could be initiated against officers who fail to provide it”, Narain said.
Delivering lecture on ‘Right to Information- Challenges Before Management’ at the Jaipuria Institute of Management, Narain said students studying management should have knowledge about the working of the government.
Terming Right to Information as the biggest revolution in field of information Narain said now the government could keep nothing from the people. One can ask the government about its policies and various decisions.
“Financial activities of the government have increased and a large amount of fund is being invested in rural areas. The siphoning off of public fund could be prevented through the Right to Information”, he said. “The government has failed to control the escalating expenditure. Independent regulators are being appointed in government and private sector and they are now taking the function of the government on themselves”, Narain said.
“When is the government shedding its power to the independent regulators that are not accountable to the people? There is a need to bring openness and transparency in the working of the government”, he said.
“In 1977 the Janata Party government pledged to bring the Right to Information Bill and later the Janata Dal government too promised to bring the Bill in 1984.
When work to draft the Bill started in 1997 it was decided to include the private sectors. Thirteen states had their independent Right to Information Acts”, he said. Drawing the attention of the audience toward the hurdles in the information rights, Narain said Section 123 and 124 of Indian Evidence Act, Rule 11 of the Central Services Rule and Atomic Energy Act 1962 restricts the right to information.
Narain said democracy requires informed citizens and transparency in information is vital for the functioning of the democracy and to check corruption. “An applicant does not have to give reasons for seeking information. If the information is denied, he can appeal to the appellate authority”, Narain said.
