My Personal Experience with the RTI Act

I decided to quit the Indian Navy for the second time in 2010 and submitted my resignation in May 2010 for release in Mar 2011. As per the so called ‘resettlement scheme’ of the Armed Forces, I had applied in May 2010, for a course at IIM Ahmadabad commencing in Oct 2010. However, the Navy decided not to grace me and kept the decision on my release pending till Feb 2011 causing severe anguish to me and my family. It forces me in Oct 2010, to seek some uncomfortable information through the RTI Act in an attempt to draw their attention towards my pending application. As expected, the RTI made the magical impact and soon enough they took a decision to release me. However, I decided not to give up on my quest to know some of the well forgotten secrets and the urge to expose the buried skeletons grew stronger.  

As expected, the Indian Navy initially did not provide any meaningful information and blocked/scuttled it through their malicious ways. It soon became a tussle of sorts and I started sending appeals to the Chief Information Commission. One such RTI application initiated in Oct 2008 was to get information on the Redressal of Grievance submitted by me to my superiors in 2002. There was a sudden lull as the Navy chose not to respond. After a month, I appealed to the appellate authority and again there was complete silence. After allowing for reasonable time to respond, in Mar 2011, I sent the second appeal to the Chief Information Commission which was finally heard on 06 Jul 2012 along with all my other cases, after I wrote a letter to the Chief Information Commissioner threatening to go public.

Digression from the issue, I would like to point out that the appeal at the CIC took 16 months to be heard. This is an apt example of how the bureaucracy establishes unaccountability for itself. Without doubt the RTI Act must have been drafted / vetted by some bureaucrat before it was enacted. While the Act stipulates a stringent 1 month period for the Public Information Officer and the Appellate Authority, the act does not stipulate any time frame for hearing the appeals at the CIC. I am sure the job of PIO is far more difficult and time consuming as he has to coordinate with various departments to provide information whereas the Information Commissioner heard five of my cases in just about 45 minutes and yet it took him 16 months to do that with no one questioning this delay. Further, the notice of hearing dated 16 Jun 2012 was received by me on 04 Jul 2012 through speed post, when the hearing was slotted for 06 Jul 2012. When the appellant has provided his email address in the application, I wonder why the notice of hearing could not have been sent through e-mail. I could have at least saved Rs 13,000/- spent on flight tickets.  

Coming back to the RTI application, after about 22 months of my seeking the information the Chief Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Indian Navy claimed to have forwarded the application to the Public Information Officer at Southern Naval Command whose is responsible to reply in this case. Interestingly, there is no record of any such communication with me or the CIC. The CIC did initiate a letter to the CPIO in May 2012 (after 14 months of my second appeal) asking as to why the Indian Navy is not responding and to this there has been no reply and the CPIO claimed to have not received this letter even though it was sent by speed post. It was a clear case of malaise and yet the CIC did not impose any penalty. The act has a penal clause wherein if the PIO does not provide information within one month he/she can be asked to pay a penalty proportionate to the delay, which will be recovered from his/her personal salary. In my case while both the CPIO and the Appellate Authority did not provide any information for so long, it did not attract any penalty. This is another example of callousness with which the bureaucrats function. No wonder the law and order in our country is so poor. Taking a casual stance, the Information Commissioner ordered the Indian Navy to provide relevant information within 4 weeks and disposed off the case. To my utter surprise, I was later told, off the record, that my application was stalled by the person who was occupying a senior position at the Southern Naval Command then, against whom the original Redressal of Grievance was initiated.

While, I am determined to dig the truth out even if it means flying to Delhi a hundred times, I wonder what is the use of such Act for a common man? This is a classic example of how the bureaucracy fails every policy in this country and then they boast of their brilliance. Unless the intent is one of public good their brilliance can only prove to be a curse to our society.