SPIO faces departmental penalty for not furnishing information under RTI
In 2010, Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) had received a complaint against a retired paramilitary (ITBP) man, Manoj Karwasra, alleging that he had submitted false affidavit to get the allotment of a residential plot in Hisar against the defense personnel quota. An enquiry was conducted in the matter by HUDA.
However, the estate officer of HUDA admitted in the enquiry report that there was no fraud on the part of the applicant and the application was wrongly considered under ex-servicemen category instead of general category. Later in 2012, an FIR was lodged against Karswasra concerning the allotment. Karswasra then filed a complaint against HUDA officials for concealing the original enquiry report during the police investigation.
In March, 2013 Karswasra filed an application with the state public information officer (SPIO) of HUDA under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking to get information about the action taken by HUDA on his complaint. When the applicant didn’t get the reply within the stipulated time, he filed first appeal with the commissioner-cum-administrator of HUDA.
The commissioner, in his order against the SPIO, stated that it was a case of sheer negligence and abdication of duty for which he should be charge sheeted under Section 7 of Haryana Civil Service, punishment and appeal rules.