State is equally responsible for collecting fines'- Dr. Joshi

[ajay marathe]

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/epapermain.aspx?queryed=9&eddate=10%2f29%2f2009

All is not well with the Right to Information (RTI) Act. There are 15,410
pending cases in the state, the fines imposed by the state information
commission are not getting collected, nor are its orders being complied
with. DNA spoke to the chief state information commissioner, Dr Suresh
Joshi, on these stumpers. Joshi conceded that there is no mechanism to check
on compliance and held the state government equally responsible for the
Act's implementation.

Thought the case disposals have increased, activists complain that it is
still below the expected mark, and is only half of what was done by the
central info chief Shailesh Gandhi. What's your take?
We have notched a good performance. My own average of clearings per month
has improved from 165 to 259 this year. In August, it had further improved
and we will have a better performance reflected by this year end. Gandhi's
(600 clearings per month) benchmark is good. But, the fact remains that with
the maximum number of applications and appeal hearings, our average is the
best. I look at it this way—it's good that Sachin scores a century, but
India should also win. I am trying to ensure that there is a better average.
The biggest worry has been the non-compliance with orders. Why are there no
records of compliance? Why are the fines not collected?
We get to know of such cases only when an applicant informs us. We have to
wait for such complaints. But such complaints are only about 10% of the
complaints filed and we take them as regular ones. On the issues of fines
and compliance, I have asked the state government to appoint an officer at
the joint secretary level to look into it and inform us. After all, fines
are government money and they need to ensure that it is collected.
But statistics show that the pendency has not reduced?
Pendency in Mumbai has reduced drastically. We do not have figures of the
older pendencies, but the commission prefers to ignore the old ones as some
people keep on filing appeals. In such cases, we feel that it is important
that others are a given chance and the appeals of a single person are taken
later on.
What kind of applications have come this year? Has non-implementation of
Section 4 (voluntary disclosure of information) reflected on the
applications?
Around 70% of the applications are still of the nature of personal issues
like building irregularities and status of complaints or licenses. Section 4
disclosure will not affect such applications.

--
Thanks & Rgds

Ajay Marathe

Vashi, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra