Information regarding the applicability of the Shariat Bill - PIO: part information does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Legislative Department - CIC: transfer that part of the application u/s 6(3) to the Department of Law & Justice
22 Nov, 2013Seeking information regarding the applicability of the Shariat Bill - PIO: part information defined u/s 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; and part information sought do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Legislative Department - CIC: provide specific reply to query the information concerning the Legislative Department and transfer the rest u/s 6(3) to Department of Law & Justice
ORDER
1. The Appellant through the RTI application dated 19.10.2012 sought information on following 7 points as follows:
(1) Provide information, whether in view of the Supreme Court, the provisions of the Shariat Bill is mandatory for Muslims in relation to Marriage, Divorce and Ancestral Property or not?;
(2) What is the constitutional procedure for enacting Shariat Bill?;
(3) is there any rules/regulations/guidelines in respect of Act of 1986?;
(4) If yes, provide certified copy; (4) Whether the courts are implementing the Act of 1986 in true letter and spirit?;
(5) If no, then what is object of enacting this Act of 1986 by the Parliament?;
(6) Lower Courts are not obeying the provisions of the Act of 1986 and they are passing the decisions as per their discretion in this regard. Provide information as to, what action has been taken by the Central Government to stop this practice of the lower courts;
(7) Provide information, under which section a legal action can be taken against the judges and judicial officer who are responsible for this practice.”
2. CPIO vide letter No:10 (97)/2012RTI dated 19.11.2012 sent a reply to the Appellant that the querries raised in the RTI application do not fall under the definition of “information” in view of section 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the RTI Act, 2005. The CPIO is not bound to provide individual opinions/suggestions to the imaginary questions.
3. Aggrieved with the reply of CPIO Appellant filed a first appeal dated 23.11.2012 before the FAA in which an order has been passed by the FAA vide order No: 76/2012/ [10 (97)/2012RTI] dated 08.1.2013. The FAA upheld the reply of the CPIO.
4. Being aggrieved with the reply of the FAA, Appellant filed a second appeal before the Commission that incomplete information has been provide to him by the CPIO and the FAA.
5. During hearing before the Commission, the CPIO submits that the Appellants querries do not fall under the category of the definition of “information” as defined u/s 2(f) “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; “information” means any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law for the time being in force; of the RTI Act, 2005. CPIO also submits that the query No: 4 to 7 of the RTI application do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Legislative Department and that these querries fall under jurisdiction of the Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice.
6. Having considered the submission and perused the documents on file, the Commission hereby directs the CPIO Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice to provide specific answers/reply to query No:1, 2 and 3 of the RTI application of the Appellant within 2 weeks of receipt of this order and for query No: 4 to 7 to transfer under the provisions of section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005 there to the Department of Law & Justice within 5 days of receipt of this order. The CPIO, Department of Law & Justice will thereafter directly reply to Appellant as per provisions of the RTI Act, 2005.
(Sushma Singh)
Information Commissioner
Citation: Shri M.D Kadir Khan v. Ministry of Law and Justice in Case No: CIC/SS/A/2013/000863