First time in eight years, state records dip in RTI applications

As mandated by the RTI Act, the annual report prepared by the SIC contains details of RTI applications received by the various government offices. Also, the number of first appeals, second appeals and the amount collected for providing photocopies of documents is reported in the documents.

Other than giving a clear picture of the RTI movement in the state, this data also shows the compliance factor of various government departments.

The annual report, which was placed before the state legislature earlier, shows that 2014 was the first time in the last eight years when the state reported a dip in the number of RTI applications received by various departments. As per records, from 2006 onwards (when the first RTI report was placed before the state legislature), there has been a consistent rise in the number of applications received by various government departments. For example, in 2006, 1,23,000 applications were received. In 2007, the number rose to 3,61,000.

In the last eight years, a total of 46,26,397 RTI applications were received, of which 45,42,585 were replied to.

The report states that only 4 per cent of the applicants had filed second appeals before the various SIC boards.

While the report does not make any comment about the dip in the number of applications, former information commissioner Vijay Kuvalekar says the difficultly in getting information on time could be one of the reasons why people are shying away from RTI. “If it takes almost five years to get the information, it obviously defeats the purpose of the Act,” he said.

Kuvalekar also says that at times, several government departments fail to provide information about the number of applications received by them, which reflects in the total number.

In the 2014 SIC report, departments of environment, tourism, minority affairs and secretariat of the state legislature have been shown receiving no RTI applications.

Kuvalekar, who had also officiated as the chief state information commissioner for some time, says that in previous reports, such departments were singled out for their failure to provide information.