Functioning of Odisha Information Commission- An RTI-based Monitoring Report

Functioning of Odisha Information Commission- An RTI-based Monitoring Report

 Indolent and shallow neophytes in the posts of Information Commissioner-  a grave threat to RTI regime in Odisha:  An expose through  RTI disclosures

Dear friends,

The RTI Act, being implemented since 2005 is the sun-shine  law which empowers the common people to access information held under public authorities by enforcing transparency and accountability in the administration,  and thereby containing corruption. The Act  provides for constitution of Information Commission in the state ( Section 15 and 16), which is obligated   to hear and adjudicate  Complaints and Second Appeals to ensure supply of information to the aggrieved   appellants/ complainants, to impose penalty and recommend disciplinary proceedings against the erring PIOs ( Section-20) and award  compensation to the detrimented citizens {Section 19(8)(b)}. The primary work of the Commission is to adjudicate the cases  as  expeditiously as possible, so that  the aggrieved  citizens  will  get  justice  in time.  If the cases stay pending for disposal in the office of Commission for years together, it    leads to frustration among Information-seekers by impeding their right to obtain information in time  and thereby ultimately destroys  RTI Act in the long run.

Pendency of the cases is attributable to failure of Information Commission in ensuring  quick   disposal of the cases. The inefficient and inexperienced Information Commissioners who are appointed out of  considerations for  political rehabilitation or for their nexus with corrupt bureaucracy, could not hear or dispose the cases timely or effectively. Despite  a hefty salary and multiple allowances  amounting to Rs. 2.80 lakh per month to their credit,  the  Information Commissioners  could  not   dispose  the cases timely and thereby became themselves instrumental in rising pendency of cases. Approximately it takes   3 to 4 years  for disposal of  cases  by these lazy and lethargic Information Commissioners.  Odisha Information Commissioners are the   brightest example of this malaise and  this very truth has been exposed through RTI exercises.

On 19.11.19.,  Sri Santosh Mohanty,  a Retired Head Master, Advocate and RTI Activist of Mayurbhanj district  had filed RTI Application to the PIO of Odisha  Information Commission seeking details of  Complaint and Second Appeal cases  heard and disposed  by the State Chief Information Commissioner ( SCIC ) and two Odisha  Information Commissioners( SICs), penalty imposed on erring PIOs, Disciplinary proceedings recommended,  compensation awarded during the period of 3 years, from Nov. 2016 to October,2019.

On 25.11.19., the PIO supplied the  requested information, a  detailed analysis of which  as presented below shall bring home as to why RTI is badly implemented in our state and pendency of cases  runs for 3 to 4 years awaiting  disposal.

1.      No. of days devoted  for hearing of the cases by SCIC and SIC-

An RTI query  was made   to ascertain how many days  in a month are really devoted  to  hearing of the cases  ( Complaints and Second Appeals) by the Commission during  last three years ( Nov. 16 to October,19) .

Year	Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra, SCIC	Mrs. Sashiprava Bindhani, SIC	Mr. L.N.Patnaik, SIC	Remarks
2016 ( Nov.& Dec.)	26	30	29
2017 ( 12 months)	180	189	196
2018 ( 12 months)	189	185	186
2019 ( upto Oct.)	130	147	34 ( from Jan. to May)	Sri Patnaik got retired in May 2019. As he  remained ill  for months together, could not hear the cases
Total Nos. of days devoted ( during 3 years)	525	551	445
Days  devoted for hearing of the cases   per month	15 days	15 days	14 days

·         SCIC and each SIC devoted around 15 days a month for hearing of the cases.

2.Complaint  cases  under Section 18  heard and disposed  by SCIC and two SICs

As  per  Section 18 of the RTI Act,  an RTI user  being aggrieved  by  systemic malfeasance leading to denial of information or  supply of false , incomplete and misleading information or any obstruction in accessing information  may   file a complaint  directly before the   Information Commission  for enquiring and remedying the same. The Information Commission is to  hear and adjudicate the complaint cases and may require the public authority to compensate the detrimented complainant and may also impose penalty on any erring PIO or deemed PIO as required under Clauses (b) and (c ) respectively of Section 19(8) RTI Act.

	Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra, SCIC		Sashiprava Bindhani, SIC		Sri L.N.Patnaik, SIC		Remarks
Year	Complaint cases heard	Complain cases  disposed	Complaint cases heard	Complain cases  disposed	Complaint cases heard	Complain cases  disposed
2016 ( Nov. and Dec.)	66	29	12	10	29	8
2017	466	80	316	114	470	87
2018	429	169	311	150	552	99
2019 ( upto Oct. )	416	134	275	80	126	13	L.N.Patnak retired in May, 2019
Total	1377	412	914	354	1177	207

3.      Second Appeal cases  Heard and Disposed  by SCIC  and two SICs

As per  the Section 19 (3) of the RTI Act, in case the appellant is  aggrieved with  order of First Appellate Authority, he or she  will   file  a Second Appeal before  Odisha  Information Commission for getting undone the injustice done to him. Quick and proper disposal of such 2^nd Appeal  cases by the Commission is crucial for maintaining the faith of the public in the RTI regime of the state.. Here are the figures relating to SA cases disposed by SCIC and SIC during  last 3 years.

	Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra, SCIC		SashipravaBindhani		Sri L.N.Patnaik		Remarks
Year	Second Appeal  cases heard	SA    Cases disposed	SA cases heard	SA cases  disposed	SA  cases heard	SA  cases  disposed
2016 ( Nov. and Dec.)	350	174	359	71	311	129
2017	3030	892	2995	704	2484	774
2018	2929	1057	2845	768	2417	665
2019 ( upto Oct. )	2541	837	2334	434	535	108	L. N. Patnak retired in May, 2019
Total	8850	2960	8533	1977	5747	1676

Findings:

·         Mr. Sunil Kumar Mishra, SCIC performs well in comparison with other two Information Commissioners in the matter of hearing and disposal of Complaint and SA cases.

·         Within 3 years, while Sri Mishra , SCIC disposed 3372 nos. of Complaint and SA cases ( 2960+412), Smt. Sashiprava Bindhani SIC disposed 2331  cases ( 1977 +354), around 1000 less than   the disposal figures of SCIC. Sri L.N.Patnaik, former District Judge appointed  as Information Commissioner  who got retired in May, 2019  had disposed 1883 nos. of cases ( 1676+207).

·          As to the monthly rate of disposal of cases , it is found that Sri Mishra, SCIC disposed 93 cases, whereas Smt. Bindhani disposes only 64 cases , which is incidentally equal to the rate of disposal by Sri Jagadanand Mohanty, former SIC ( from 2008 to 2013). Even though both hailed from civil society background.  They performed very badly.

·         Number of Cases fixed for per day hearing by Information Commission is also not encouraging. While Sri Mishra, SCIC fixed on an average 18 cases per day, Smt. Bindhani, SIC  only 17 cases  and Sri L.N.Patnaik only 15 cases per day. It needs to be recalled, Sri Jagadanad Mohanty , former SIC was hearing only 12 to 15 cases per day. The performance of State Information Commissioners in respect of quantum of cases heard by them has not improved over the years and it is the biggest hurdle to provide quick justice to the Information-seekers.

4.      Penalty

As per section 20 of the RTI Act, the Information Commission is empowered to impose penalty on erring PIOs and deemed PIOs for mala fide denial of information or supply of false, deficient or misleading information or destruction of information or obstructing the access to information. Besides, The Commission can also recommend to the concerned public authorities imposition of disciplinary proceedings against the erring PIOs and deemed PIOs, who are found to be persistent violators of RTI Act. Needless to say, imposition of penalty acts as a deterrent to carelessness on the part of the PIOs in dealing with RTI requests.  As persistent denial of information by the PIOs has become the order of the day in Odisha, it is expected from the Information Commission to impose penalty, without fear or favour, on such erring PIOs who are guilty of flagrant violation of  RTI Act. It goes without saying that, in absence of penalty against such recalcitrant PIOs, they will persist in their denial mode towards RTI requests, leading ultimately to pilling and pendency of cases in the Commission. Such an ominous trend is bound to jeopardize the whole RTI regime running at a massive cost to the public exchequer.

As to the figures of cases in which te SCIC and both SICs of Odisha Information Commission imposed penalty the the scenario is a despairing one.  Figures of penalty imposed by SCIC and SICs within last 3 years are as follows:-

·   Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra, SCIC has imposed highest    penalty of Rs. 8, 54,500/- in 84 cases covering 114 persons.

·   Smt. Sashiprava Bindhani, SIC imposed penalty in a minisule of only 5 cases (2016-Nil penalty, 2017- in one case, 2018- in two cases and 2019- in two cases)  amounting to a total of only Rs. 33,000/-. It won’t be out of place to mention here that she  tried her utmost to protect the erring    PIOs and safeguard the corrupt officials and thereby encouraged them to persist in their denial mode towards the  information-seekers. 

·   Sri L. N.Patnaik, SIC (retired now) had imposed penalty in only 29 cases, amounting to a total  of Rs. 4, 16,502/- only.

·   

Above all, it is disconcerting to know that the Commission has never recommended any disciplinary proceedings as required under Section 20(2) of RTI Act against any  erring PIO or deemed PIO within last 3 years.

5.   Awarding  Compensation

As per section 19 (8)(b) of  RTI Act, the Commission can award compensation payable by the concerned public authority to any Complainant  in case he or she has physically or mentally suffered any detriment due to addressing a complaint to the Commission. Within last 3 years, the Information Commission has not awarded any compensation to any Complainant, though quite many of them have been harassed, brutalized and even killed by the anti-social mafias in nexus with corruptible public servants who are managing the RTI desks under the very nose of the Government of the day.

Santosh Mohanty

Advocate  and RTI Activist

M- 9337029395

Date- 5.1.2020