Complaint
under Section 17 of Right to Information
Act
To
Sri S.C. Jamir
Hon’ble Governor,
Odisha
Bhubaneswar
Sub-
Complaint against Sri L.N.Patnaik and Smt. Shashi Prava Bindhani, Odisha State
Information Commissioners on the grounds of their chronic inefficiency coupled
with vested interests, in the matter of disposal of cases and delivering
justice to the RTI complainants/appellants- regarding.
Esteemed
Sir,
I,
Sri Srikant Pakal, an RTI applicant/appellant and a Member-functionary of
Odisha Soochana Adhikar Abhijan (a
state-level forum of RTI Activists spearheading campaign for effective
implementation of RTI Act) do hereby bring to your kind notice the
following complaint for its appropriate and urgent remediation at your
end.
(1)
That, as per
section 17(1) of the Act, the
State Chief Information Commissioner or
a State Information Commissioner shall
be removed from his office only by order
of the Governor on the ground of proved
misbehaviour or incapacity after the Supreme Court , on a reference made to it by the Governor, has on inquiry ,
reported that the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner, as the case may be , ought on such ground be
removed.
(2) That, the Governor may suspend
from the office , and if deem necessary prohibit also from attending the
office during inquiry , the State Chief
Information Commissioner or a State
Information Commissioner on respect of
whom a reference has been made to the
Supreme Court under sub-section(1) until
the Governor has passed on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such
reference.
(3) It is crystal clear that the office of
hon’ble Governor is
empowered to take action against the
Information Commission on the ground of inefficiency and unfit to
continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body.
(4)That,
in this context, I would draw the
attention of His Excellency on the issue
of functioning of two Information Commissioners
, their inefficiency which has subverted
RTI in the state. The information that
was gathered from the PIO of the Commission in response to an RTI application,
was too alarming and too fretful in respect of the performance of the above
named duo of Commissioners, on account of which I felt compelled to lay bare
the whole of the unenviable facts so gathered and leave to your pristine wisdom
the imperative for taking a just and appropriate remedial action at your end.
(5)That,
the said RTI application addressed to the PIO of Commission had sought for the
month-wise details of information regarding the Complaints and Second Appeals
heard and disposed by each Information Commissioner along with the number of
cases in which penalty was imposed by them, during the period from January 2016
to July 2017.
(6)That,
as we all know, Odisha Information Commission
is currently functioning with Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra as Chief SIC
and Sri L.N.Patnaik and Smt. Sashi Prava
Bindhani both being SICs. Further, while
the Chief SIC got appointed in Nov. 2016, both SICs had got appointed more than a year and half
earlier to him, i.e. in June 2015. I present a statistical abstract and
analysis in the following Table on the information supplied by the PIO of the
Commission on 08.09.2017.
No.
of Cases (Complaint and Second Appeal) heard and disposed along with penalty
imposed if nay by each SIC during the period of 19 months (Jan 2016 to July
2017)
|
Name of
State Information Commissioner
|
Total Cases heard
|
Total cases disposed
|
No. of cases where Penalty was imposed
|
|
Sri L.N.Patnaik , SIC
|
3894
|
1293
|
41
|
|
Smt. Shashi Prava Bindhani, SIC
|
4220
|
868
|
1
|
|
Division Bench ( Sri L.N.Patnaik and Smt. Shashi
Prava Bindhani)
|
443
|
72
|
19
|
|
Total
|
8512
|
2233
|
61
|
It
was observed that while Sri L.N. Patnaik, SIC disposed only 68 cases per month
(nearly 33% of total no. of cases heard by him), Smt. Shashi Prava Bindhani SIC disposed only
45 cases per month (less than 20% of total cases heard by her within 19 months.
As
regards the numbers of penalty imposed, while Sri Patnaik SIC has clamped
penalty only in 41 cases out of total 1293 cases disposed by him (about a
meagre 3%), the number of penalty ordered by Smt. Bindhani was only a solitary
one out of total 868 cases disposed by her during the said 19 months.
Both
the State Information Commissioners (Sri L.N. Patnaik and Smt Shashi Prava
Bindhani) have performed the worst among their peers from across the country.
And on comparison between the two SICs, Smt. Bindhani figures as the worst of
the worst in respect of both disposal of complaints/appeals and imposition of
penalty on defaulters.
(7) That, it is worthwhile to draw a
performance comparison between the Chief OSIC Sri S.K.Misha on one hand and
that of the above named Commissioner duo on the other. While Sri Mishra
disposed 86 cases per month (highest among the three), Smt. Bindhani disposed
45 cases (lowest among the lot) and Sri Patnaik disposed only 68 cases, which
though counted higher than Smt. Bindhani’s, stood way below that of Sri
Mishra.
(8) That, for your kind information, the
general perception shared by the appellants and complainants points to a bitter
truth that both the State Information Commissioners have been found to be
dubiously supportive to erring and corrupt officials and always go an extra
mile to protect them from the penal clauses of RTI Act.
(9) That, it has been observed that due to
utter lack of knowledge, expertise and inefficiency, the dullest SIC, Smt.
Bindhani performed miserably, almost amounting to non-performance, and nay,
negative performance too, if we take into account the fabulous package of
salary and allowances she enjoyed non-stop during the concerned period of 19 months.
As has been gathered from the appellants and complainants who had the
misfortune of getting their cases heard by Mrs. Bindhani, she keeps on
adjourning the dates of hearing ad infinitum and shows in course of the
hearings inordinate leniency to the defaulting PIOs and FAAs, simply to
discourage the appellants and complainants and to protect the opposite parties.
Besides, her utterances and behaviour towards the appellants and complainants
has been so disgusting that many of them, unable to bear with it, have simply
opted out from the hearing process altogether, paving the way for her arbitrary
decision pronounced in favour of opposite parties.
PRAYER-
(10) Under the circumstances, in compliance to
Section 17(1) of the Act , the office of
Governor is requested to treat this
Complaint as deserving of an Enquiry by the Supreme Court Judge .
(11) Pending the completion of the above said
Enquiry, His Excellency may suspend both the Information Commissioners from the
office and prohibit them from attending the office during inquiry under section 17(2)
of the Act.
(12)
His Excellency may take any other action as, deemed fit.
Thanking
you
Yours
sincerely
Srikant
Pakal
Qr. No- 25/1, OTM Colony, Choudwar ,
Cuttack-754025, Odisha
M- 9338455092
Date- 17.1.18
No comments:
Post a Comment