Fee paid in favour of the ‘Accounts Officer’ of the public authority
The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act with the Estate Office and the RTI application was returned by the Public Information Officer (PIO) by stating that the Indian Postal Order (IPO) for Rs.10/- furnished by the applicant has been issued in the name of ‘Accounts Officer’. The PIO requested the applicant to furnish fresh IPO in the name of the Estate Officer enabling that office to proceed further in the matter. On scrutiny of the copy of the RTI application and the IPO submitted by the complainant it is observed that the IPO has drawn in favor of Accounts Officer as per rule 6 of the RTI Rules, 2012 which says that fees would be paid in the manner of cash, by demand draft or bankers cheque or Indian Postal Order payable to the Accounts Officer of the public authority or by electronic means to the Accounts Officer of the public authority.
View of CIC
The Central Information Commission (CIC) directed the First Appellate Authority (FAA) to enquire into the allegations made by the complainant and pass an appropriate order with a view to ensuring that the desired information is provided to the complainant. The FAA was also directed to obtain the explanation of the concerned Officers/ PIO for not providing the information and returning the RTI application to the applicant and send the same to the Commission along with his comments.
Ignorance of law is common after years of the coming in force of the RTI Act and many PIO’s still commit the folly of not accepting the fee by the prescribed mode and manner.
Citation: Ms. Sarala Gupta v. Estate Office in Adjunct to Complaint No: CIC/DS/C/2013/000013
RTI Citation : RTIFI/2013/CIC/1172
Click here to view original RTI order of Court / Information Commission