Curious case of lawyer who wants info his way

Interestingly,the legal notice,which was sent in October last year,was not accompanied by a copy of the original RTI application,which is a requirement under the relevant regulations. The commission wrote back to the complainant,saying he should comply with the requirements of the RTI Act,but the latter did not despite repeated reminders.

Bhinder’s plea was that his client had approached the RTI cell of the Jalandhar police on December 28,2009,seeking information on three points,including copies of some judgments of the Punjab DGP and the home secretary. The case came up before Chief Information Commissioner R I Singh,who said in keeping with the spirit of transparency,the commission would make a concession: the condition of attaching a copy of the original RTI application would be waived and the legal notice treated as a complaint. Thereafter,summons were issued to the Jalandhar police.

The deputy commissioner of Jalandhar police submitted a written reply,stating that the complainant was contacted and told to deposit the fee and collect information,but he neither responded to the telephone calls nor the letter. Strangely,the information-seeker also abstained,without giving any intimation,from the two hearings held in the commission in November last year,and the case was ordered to be closed.

However,after the closure,Bhinder moved a fresh application for review of the order,taking different pleas,including that he did not receive the notices issued by the commission. The CIC said: “Notices issued by the commission were not returned undelivered by the postal authorities. It is strange that while the notices were not received,the order of the commission was duly received by the complainant.”

RI Singh said: “Giving the benefit of doubt and in the interest of justice,commission reopened the case and fresh summons were issued to the parties in April this year.”

During the hearing held on Tuesday,information held by the Jalandhar police was handed over to the complainant free of cost. But Bhinder,who appeared this time,stated that the documents were incomplete.

The CIC then stated in his order that the applicant was supposed to approach the PIO of the public authority concerned and in this case information was to be obtained from the Jalandhar Range DIG,Punjab DGP and home departments,which were three independent public authorities. “Though a PIO should transfer an RTI application to another public authority,the law does not impose any legal obligation on him,” he said while closing the case.