Whether The First Appellate Authority has the power to summon Appellant ??? Reply To Tripura Assembly

Response to the letter No.F.1(203)-LA/78-I, dated 27^th Apr 2017. 

To

The First Appellate Authority,

C/O The Public Information Officer,

Tripura Legislative Assembly Secretariat,

Agartala-799010

Sub: Response to the letter No.F.1(203)-LA/78-I, dated 27^th Apr 2017.

Respected First Appellate Authority (FAA),

1.     I have filed first appeal on 8^th Feb 2017. On 18^th Mar 2017 i.e 39^th Day after receiving the first appeal, The FAA asked for my appearance before it on 25^th Apr 2017 i.e on 78^th Day of filing First appeal. Again on 1^st of May 2017, I have received another communication regarding appearance on 18^th May 2017, i.e on 101th day, issuing warning that it would take harsh step, on failure.

2.     u/s 19 (6) of The RTI Act, 2005; An appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be disposed of within thirty days of the receipt of the appeal or within such extended period not exceeding a total of forty-five days from the date of filing thereof, as the case may be, for reasons to be recorded in writing. The FAA is under obligation to dispose the 1^st appeal within 30 days in general cases, it can also take 45 days, with reasons recorded. This time limit is clearly breached. This Act of Omission by The FAA is illegal and contrary to the objectives of the Act.

3.     The other Important issues in these Communications are;

a)     Whether the FAA has the legal sanction to summon the Appellant?

b) Whether the FAA has the legal sanction to take Harsh measures against Appellant

c)    Whether the FAA can breach the time line of 30days specified malafidely 

4.     According to RTI Act, 2005, and Tripura Right to Information Rules, 2008, The FAA authority does not have any legal sanction regarding the three issues mentioned above. 

5.     u/s 5(2) of the Act, the sanction is only to appoint one officer to receive appeals is present; 

6. u/s7(8) Where a request has been rejected under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall communicate to the person making the request,—

(i) the reasons for such rejection;

(ii) the period within which an appeal against such rejection may be preferred; and

(iii) the particulars of the appellate authority.

Thus this section creates the FAA; and does not grant any powers on Appellant.

7. Similarly u/s 11(4) A notice given under sub-section (3) shall include a statement that the third party to whom the notice is given is entitled to prefer an appeal under section 19 against the decision.

8. u/s 19 (1) Any person who, does not receive a decision within the time specified in sub-section (1) or clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 7, or is aggrieved by a decision of the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, may within thirty days from the expiry of such period or from the receipt of such a decision prefer an appeal to such officer who is senior in rank to the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer as the case may be, in each public authority: This sub-section clearly explains who can be the FAA, and the Rights of Information seeker on rejection or refusal of information.

9. u/s 19 (5) In any appeal proceedings, the onus to prove that a denial of a request was justified shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, who denied the request. Thus it is the obligation of SPIO to appear before the FAA and defend or explain why he/she has not provided the information. This section does not lay any obligation on the Appellant to appear and also does not grant any power to summon him.

10. Furthermore under Tripura Right to Information Rules, 2008, Chapter-VI does not grant any authority to perform the three above mentioned issues.

11. Therefore, It can be surmised from the above facts that

       i.            The FAA is violating section 19(6) of the Act.

     ii.            The FAA’s call the appellant to appear before it is ultra virus it powers.

  iii.            The FAA’s warning to take harsh measures also ultra virus it powers.

  iv.            The Act of Omission is malafide.

 v.            The Powers FAA is only to seek explanation from SPIO, why he/she has not given information, upon which; the FAA can decide the First Appeal.

Therefore we would Request the First Appellate Authority to decide the Appeal without our appearance and Order the SPIO to provide the Information Free of Cost within 7 days.

Thanking You Sir.

Yours truly,

Venu Prasad M & Thandava Yogesh

3/3 LLB, Andhra University,

H:NO:55-7-61/3,

HB Colony,

Visakhapatnam-530022