1. The document provides suggestions to improve the functioning of the Central Information Commission (CIC) in Kerala. It suggests establishing timelines for appeals, routinely imposing penalties as provided in law, and compensating appellants. 2. It also recommends expanding and updating information about the CIC on government websites to include contact details, orders, and links to the central CIC. Definitions should also be clarified to include all state government offices in the capital. 3. Finally, it outlines recommendations from a public hearing on improving the central CIC, such as giving parties a chance to be heard, imposing penalties on officials, establishing guidelines, and holding regular public hearings.

1. SUGGESTIONS TO THE CIC, KERALA: 26 JAN 2007
1. Whenever an appeal is received at the Commission it should be acknowledged with
an appeal number and a tentative date by which the decision would be given.
2. It would be logically and morally binding on the Commission also to have some time
limits specified to dispose off appeals.
3. Imposition of penalty should be routine, as provided in the Act, and exemption, when
given under rarest of rare circumstances, the reasons for the same should be given in
detail in the orders of the Commission.
4. There should be provision to compensate the appellant to the tune of 50% of the
penalties imposed.
5. Information about the KSIC available at the official website of the Govt of Kerala is
scanty and not up to date. In this context, the following points are highlighted:
5.1. At the website of the Central IC there is a link giving information about the state ICs.
Though only 11 odd states figure there, amoung the southern states, it is only Kerala
that is missing!
5.2. At the official website o f the Govt of Kerala http://www.kerala.gov.in/ there is a link
to the Right to Information Act. There one can get the postal address, tele no and fax
no of the KSIC and the name of the CIC. Not even the details of the other ICs and e-
mail ids of the ICs /officials are available. These need to be provided.
5.3. Besides, the information mentioned in 5.2, there are various orders passed on the
implementation of the RTI Act. These are totally confusing. Only the current orders
need to be made available here and they should be presented subject-wise. The older
ones may be archived, again subject-wise.
5.4. Links need to be provided to the Central IC also.
5.5. The details of PIO/AA of the IC should also be provided at this site.
5.6. The orders of the Commission should also be provided at the site. It should be
searchable by appeal number/subject/appellant name/department or office name
6. The Kerala Govt has provided for accepting applications etc pertaining to the
Secretariat at the office of the RDO. Some officials are interpreting this in the narrowest
sense to mean only the offices in the Secretariat building at Thiruvananthapuram. This
should be clarified and the definition should include all offices of the Kerala Govt and
corporations/commissions under it that are located at Thiruvananthapuram due to the fact
that it happens to be the State capital.

2. 7. Following are the summary of recommendation which emerged during a public
Hearing held on 24 Sep 2006 on the functioning of Central Information Commission:
7.1. Opportunity of being heard should be given to both parties in every case. It is upto
the party to decide whether they wish to be physically present or send their written
comments or decide not to avail of the opportunity.
7.2. No case should be closed, just by ordering that information be provided in the next
15 days etc. In most of the cases, it has been seen that the PIO does not comply with
such an order. As a result, the appellant has to again approach the Commission and
again wait for 7 months for his/her turn to come. Therefore, after passing an order, the
case should be adjourned, and not closed. On the next hearing, if the appellant
confirms having received information to his/her satisfaction, only then should a case
be closed. This is the practice which is being successfully followed by Public
Grievance Commission in Delhi for the last five years and also by SIC of UP.
7.3. The Information Commissioners should undergo training in judicial processes from
some retired Supreme Court judges.
7.4. Penalty should be imposed in every case of violation by government officials. Else
RTI would soon be dead.
7.5. Some guidelines should be made on the terms like "fiduciary", "private information"
and "public interest", which should be uniformly adhered to by all the
Commissioners.
7.6. Appeal number should be given to every appellant/complaina nt and it should be
communicated to him within 24 hours of receipt of his appeal/complaint. Within the
next 24 hours, it should be put up on the website. Status of every appeal should be
provided on the website, even if it is treated as inadmissible ab-initio.
7.7. No case should be taken up on out of turn basis, unless there is some grave public
interest involved, which should be mentioned in the order.
7.8.There should be a public hearing every three months, which should be attended by all
Commissioners.
P M Ravindran
2/18, ‘Aathira’
Kalpathy-678003
Tel:0491-2576042
E-mail: pmravindra@sancharnet.in, pmravindran@rediffmail.com