The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea under the transparency law for disclosure of selection norms and appointment process in the country's internal intelligence agency, Intelligence Bureau (IB). A bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi rejected the plea by an unsuccessful IB job aspirant, dismissing his accusation that IB selection process was plagued by corruption.

"It appears that the selection process has been conducted in a transparent manner, and there is nothing to indicate any corruption in the said process," Justice Sanghi said. The high court's order came on an appeal by IB job aspirant Ravinder Kumar Kataria, challenging the Central Information Commission's June 2011 order, dismissing his plea earlier for disclosure of selection process and norms in IB. Kataria had alleged he could not be selected for the post of Junior Intelligence Officer (JIO) in IB in 2009 due to corruption.

The court accepted the Union Home Ministry's argument that Kataria is a Scheduled Caste (SC) candidate and there were 17 posts reserved for SC category. All posts have been filled and the petitioner had scored lesser marks than the candidate last recruited in SC category, while the cut-off marks for the general category were substantially higher, the ministry told the court, seeking dismissal of Kataria's plea.

Kataria had approached the CIC after the Public Information Officer (PIO) had rejected his query saying Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts the intelligence and security agencies from the Right to Information Act's purview. The CIC had rejected Kataria argument that the information sought by him did not pertain to IB's functioning and merely pertained to the recruitment process for public employment by the agency and so the said information should be given to him.

The AP High Court was pulled up by the Central Information Commission (CIC) for its failure to adhere to the RTI Act. Nine other high courts besides AP's have been given three months time to get their act right. The CIC was reacting to a complaint filed by Hyderabad-based RTI activist C J Karira and Mani Ram Sharma of Rajasthan between December 2009 and March 2010. The complainants had stated that there was no disclosure of information under section 4 (1) (b) of the RTI Act by the courts. The case came up for hearing on December 30, 2011 and the order was passed on Thursday, ordering the high courts to fall in line within three months.

As per section 4 (1) (b), every government department should disclose complete details of the organization, employees, decisions taken by it and budget, among other details. According to the Act, this information should be updated as frequently as possible and made available to public by whatever means possible, including internet.

Apart from the AP High Court, the high courts of Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Allahabad, Madras, Guwahati, Punjab & Haryana and Sikkim were directed to start complying with the rule. However, since the Guwahati HC had recently updated all the details in conformity with the RTI Act, it was appreciated by the CIC and suggested that the court model could be emulated by others.

The complainant, Karira said, "For the past six years, from the time the RTI Act was introduced in 2005, the AP High Court has never abided by the section 4 (1) (b). The court has not provided the details related to it and its employees either on the internet or manually.

This section not only introduces transparency in the system but informs the public with clarity about the officials and the functioning of a department." Karira also expressed his disappointment that most of the departments in the state government were not following this particular section.

The delay in getting information and the vague information provided for applications submitted under Right to Information Act is upsetting the RTI users who say that these ‘bureaucratic rules’ would water down the spirit of the Act.

A meeting of the RTI Users Coordination Committee held here on Sunday has decided to submit a memorandum to Chief Information Commissioner Sibi Mathews on the problems faced by the RTI users. RTI users from various districts shared the difficulties they faced in

getting response to their applications. 

The main complaint was that most of the lower level State Government offices had been rejecting the applications saying that the concerned file was missing. The meeting constituted a 25-member ad hoc committee with P Sharfudheen as convener. Rajan Kalam, Raveendran Kandoth, P S Vijayan and K V Janardhanan have been elected as joint conveners. The gathering demanded the State Information Commission to impose a specific time limit for disposal of Second Appeals, which is not exist at present. 

This is resulting in the pending of appeals before Information Commissioners and causing financial loss to the applicants.

The meeting also decided to constitute district-level committees of RTI users and activists.“The RTI law demands transparency at every stage of public service, but the officials are not keeping time schedule for making decisions over the appeals,” said P Sharfudheen.

“We will point out the issues and complaints to the Chief Information Commissioner soon. The proceedings are getting unseasonably delayed and only a few applications received replies recently. We demand strengthening the RTI by ensuring a transparent procedure for State Information Commission and a system for their uniform functioning, he added.