Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- explanations:transfer-application [2017/11/26 15:25] – Shrawan
+++ explanations:transfer-application [2023/04/15 11:09] (current) – Shrawan
@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ===== Interpretation of the Provision =====
-<html>
-<script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
-<ins class="adsbygoogle"
-     style="display:block; text-align:center;"
-     data-ad-layout="in-article"
-     data-ad-format="fluid"
-     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3082882621726443"
-     data-ad-slot="9529004960"></ins>
-<script>
-     (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
-</script>
-</html>
 'Section 6( 1) of the RTI Act, 2005 provides that a person who desires to obtain any in formation shall make a request to the public information officer (PlO) of the concerned public authority. Section 6(3) provides that where an application is made to a public authority requesting for any information which is held by another public authority or the subject matter of which is more closely connected with the functions of another public authority, the public authority to which such application is made,shall transfer the application to that other public authority. A careful reading of the provisions of sub-section (1) and sub-section(3) of Section 6, suggests that the Act requires an information seeker to address the application to the PlO of the '**concerned public authority**'. However, there may be cases in which a person of ordinary prudence may believe that the piece of information sought by him/her would be available with the public authority to which he/she has addressed the application, but is actually held by some another public authority. In such cases, the applicant makes a bonafide mistake of addressing the application to the PlO of a wrong public authority. On the other hand where an applicant addresses the application to the PlO of a public authority, which to a person of ordinary prudence, would not appear to be the' concern of that public authority, the applicant does not fulfill his responsibility of addressing the application to the 'concerned public authority'.
+If the citizen sends the application to the wrong Public Authority, it is the responsibility of the PIO  to send it to the concerned Public authority within a period of five days. However, the citizen must take care to find the appropriate Public authority. But in case the application reaches erroneously to another PIO, then that PIO is responsible for transferring it to the right Public authority. No PIO is authorized to return a Right to Information application, saying that the applicant must approach another department or Public authority which holds the information. This provision is further proof of the extent to which this Act is designed for the convenience of the citizens.
+If the information is available in the same Public authority, it is clearly the job of the PIO to collect the information from the units or different offices by seeking assistance as envisaged in Section 5(4)and give it to the applicant.27 If the information is available with different Public authorities, the PIO must transfer it to them. Section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 enacts a general rule of construction that words in the singular shall include the plural and vice versa if there is nothing repugnant to such a construction in the subject or context of the legislation which is to be construed. There is nothing in the Act which would show that Parliament intended that the transfer should only be to one public authority.
+This principle of law has been well-established and applied by various authorities. Hence, if a Right to Information request has  to be transferred to multiple public authorities, or assistance
 ===== Transfer of Application =====
@@ Line 41: / Line 38: @@
 ==== Scenario III: No Information is available but the information is scattered ====
-<html>
-<script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
-<ins class="adsbygoogle"
-     style="display:block; text-align:center;"
-     data-ad-layout="in-article"
-     data-ad-format="fluid"
-     data-ad-client="ca-pub-3082882621726443"
-     data-ad-slot="9529004960"></ins>
-<script>
-     (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
-</script>
-</html>
 If no part of the information sought, is available with it but is scattered with more than one other public authorities, the PlO should inform the applicant that information is not available with the public authority and that the applicant should make separate applications to the concerned public authorities for obtaining information from them. It may be noted that the Act requires the supply of such information only which already exists and is held by the public authority or held under the control of the public authority. It is beyond the scope of the Act for a public authority to create information. Collection of information, parts of which are available with different public authorities, would amount to creation of information which a public authority under the Act is not required  to do. At the same time, since the information is not related to anyone particular public authority, it is not the case where application should be transferred under sub-section (3) of Section 6 of the Act. It is pertinent to note that sub-section (3) refers to 'another public authority' and not 'other public authorities'. **Use of singular form in the Act in this regard is important to note**.
@@ Line 73: / Line 59: @@
 [<>]
+~~socialite~~
-~~DISCUSSION~~