LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

sanjeev (officer)     18 January 2010

Haryana RTI Rules 2009

This is regarding recently notified Haryana RTI Rules 2009 Rule 8 of Haryana RTI Act Rules , 2009 ----it deals with Mode of serving Notice by Commission in Appeals under RTI Act . It reads “the Commission may serve notice to the persons concerned in any of the following modes , namely :--
(a) by hand delivery (dasti) through process server;
(b) by Registered Post , Speed Post , Under Postal Certificate , Courier or such other means;
( c ) by electronic mail , if e-mail address is provided ; or
(d) by publication in the news-paper .”

Notices sent by Regd Post , Speed Post and Courier are delivered after taking receipt of delivery from recepient and thus delivery can be proved .
But in case of Notice sent by UPC Post , there will be no proof of delivery and it may have following implications amongst others :--

1 . PIO may deny receipt of notice . The Commission will penalize PIO for non-appearance and pass an Order against him . Commission's Order will be promptly quashed by High Court on the plea of PIO that Notice never reached him or did not reach in time . The PIO will have nothing to lose as he will be defended by department at tax-paying citizens (read RTI Applicants) . What will happen to rights of Appellant / Complainant , is anybody's guess .

2.Suppose the Notice from the Commission does not reach the Appellant / Complainant and thus he does not appear before Commission on date of hearing . The Commission is within its right to Pass an Order as per merits of the case . The Order of the Commission being final , with no review , the Appellant / Complainant is left with only one choice – a Writ Petition ! How many of citizens would (or rather can ) afford a writ petition .

3.“Courier or such other means “-- what it means is that Commission may literally use any mode (efficient or not ) without getting approval from Competent Authority or the legislature – literally giving the Commission powers to make its own Rules in this regard which may not be always in interests of the Pubic .

Now given the repeated observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court that UPC Post is not proper and reliable service , don't you think it is wrong to include UPC in such rules ? 

Rule 4(4) of Haryana RTI Act Rules , 2009

Under old Rules ( 2005) the SPIO was required to assess and inform the Applicant of required fee within 7 days of receipt of RTI Application . But now there is no such limit . Now it reads that fee assessed by the SPIO shall be intimated to the applicant “expeditiously” . Can such a ambiguous rule be held efficient and sustain in eye of law ? Does it not dilute efficiency of original RTI Act 2005 .

Can these 2 infirmities be challenged in court and if yes , how ?


 3 Replies

Anil Agrawal (Retired)     19 January 2010

 Please don't be harsh on Haryana Babus.

SK VERMA (COMPANY SECRETARY)     30 January 2010

Kindly send me a link to the amended Haryana RTI Rules 2009.  Thanks.

S. K. MISHRA (RTI Activist & Accountant Mob. 09872439347)     25 February 2011

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register