Litigants on SIC radar for possible misuse of RTI Act
The state information commission (SIC) has started identifying litigants filing applications under the Right to Information (RTI) Act whose motive for doing so was not deemed bona fide and not in public interest.
Recently, state information commissioner Ajay Kumar Uprety (court no 6) had taken certain measures to check the misuse of the RTI Act.
He dismissed an application of a frequent RTI litigant, stating that the information sought by him was not in public interest.
“When the court asked the applicant that the information sought by him was in public interest in what manner, he could not give a satisfactory answer,” observed the court in its order.
The applicant had sought information from the Krishi Nideshalaya (directorate of agriculture), Lucknow.
“Facts reveal that the applicant was not interested in seeking information because the information is related with a third person and is not in public interest,” observed the court.
Notably, after the court’s observation, the RTI activist concerned has stopped filing such applications.
SUPREME COURT ORDER
The SIC’s measures for checking frivolous applications come in the wake of the Supreme Court having expressed concern about the misuse of the RTI Act on several occasions.
As recently as December 16, the Supreme Court had observed in an order that the RTI Act had ‘come to be a weapon of intimidation, blackmail no less’.
Chief Justice of India SA Bobde was a part of the three-judge bench that passed the order.
BULK APPLICATIONS
Meanwhile, the SIC has identified two other RTI litigants from Ambedkar Nagar district who reportedly file applications in bulk.
Recently, the court disposed of 26 out of 34 applications filed by one litigant and 24 out of 29 filed by the other. Remaining applications of both these litigants were dismissed.
The court also observed that at times, public information officers (PIOs) of government offices also harassed RTI applicants.
In a recent incident, a PIO allegedly forged five signatures of an RTI applicant to inform the court that the litigant was satisfied with the replies provided to him.
Taking a serious note of the issue, state information commissioner Ajay Uprety wrote to the senior superintendent of police, Lucknow, Kalanidhi Naithani, to get the signatures examined forensically.
“There are cases in which the RTI Act has been misused by information seekers and others where it has been misused by PIOs. Activists ask for tonnes of information from the PIOs, which puts unnecessary burden on them and also affects the working of the office concerned,” said Uprety.
“On the other hand, there have been instances where PIOs have forged signatures of litigants to mislead the state information commission,” he added.
SIC Ajay Uprety has disposed of 3,767 cases in around 200 working days.
