Gonda RTI Violation has become a significant issue in Uttar Pradesh’s Gonda district, a place with a notorious reputation. Many hoped that the Yogi government’s rise to power would bring positive changes. While some improvements have been made, the district’s administration—whether at the block, sub-district, or district level—continues to falter in upholding citizens’ Right to Information (RTI).
Despite clear directives from the Hon’ble Supreme Court, such as in the State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain case, which reinforced that the right to information is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a), Gonda’s administration frequently fails to comply. Rather than providing requested information promptly, they often cite Section 8(1) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, as a reason to deny access, claiming the information sought cannot be disclosed. However, Section 7(1) of the same Act explicitly states that Public Information Officers (PIOs) are required to provide the requested information within 30 days or give a valid reason for any refusal.
Gonda RTI Violation and Your Rights
Moreover, Section 18(1) of the RTI Act empowers the Central and State Information Commissions to investigate complaints from citizens who have been wrongfully denied information. Applicants can even ask the PIO to submit an affidavit if the officer claims not to have the requested information, cannot disclose it, or if the information is under investigation.
It’s not just Gonda where these issues arise—across Uttar Pradesh, both police and bureaucratic officials are known to drag their feet when it comes to responding to RTI applications. Often, they only take action after a first appeal is filed, and in many cases, even then, they fail to provide the necessary information. This leaves many citizens frustrated, as the process of filing a second appeal can be daunting and complicated, often deterring them from pursuing it further.
Both the Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission and the Central Information Commission must step up to ensure that RTI applications are addressed promptly and thoroughly. It’s crucial that citizens get the information they’re entitled to without unnecessary delays.
Understanding Gonda RTI Violation and Your Rights Under RTI
The right to information is a cornerstone of Indian democracy, as emphasized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases like People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India and Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms. Under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, any citizen has the right to request information from any public authority, including government offices and courts.
Section 7(1) of the RTI Act mandates that the PIO must respond within 30 days of receiving the request, whether it’s filed online or offline. The only exception to this timeline is when information is exempt under Section 8(1), but even then, the PIO is required to explain the reason for withholding information.
If you don’t receive a response within 30 days, you have the right to file a first appeal under Section 19(1) of the RTI Act. This appeal, which goes to a senior officer, must be resolved within 45 days according to Section 19(6).
And if that doesn’t work, you can escalate the matter by filing a second appeal under Section 19(3). This appeal is handled by the State Information Commission or the Central Information Commission, and while the law requires them to respond in a timely manner, it can sometimes take up to three months or more. During this process, you might be called for a hearing, where the officer will review your case and ensure that you receive the information you requested.
Even if you receive information after your initial request but find it incomplete or unsatisfactory, you can still file a first appeal and, if necessary, a second appeal. The decision made by the SIC or CIC in the second appeal is considered final.
Lastly, under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act, any officer or PIO who unjustifiably denies information can face penalties. They may also be required to cover the costs incurred by the applicant, and a record of non-compliance will be noted in their service records. This provision is especially significant in cases where applicants seek relief through a second appeal.
AdChoices Opt-out 