1. This document is an application to remove the Chief Information Commissioner under Section 14(3)(d) of the Right to Information Act 2005. The application argues that the performance of the Central Information Commission has been poor, delaying justice for information seekers. 2. Public hearings on the functioning of the Commission recommended that cases should not be closed without both parties being heard, penalties should be imposed when officials violate the law, and guidelines developed for exemptions. However, these recommendations have not been implemented. 3. The application provides two examples of absurd decisions by the Commission from the applicant's experience, demonstrating poor drafting and a misunderstanding of the cases. The applicant requests that the Chief Information Commissioner be removed and

1. Maj (Retd) P M Ravindran 2/18, 'Aathira'
Tele: 0491-2576042 Kalpathy-678003
E-mail: pmravindra@sancharnet.in
pmravindran@rediffmail.com
File: RTI/pio-remove cic-210407 21 Apr 2007
The President
Rashtrapati Bhavan
New Delhi
APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
UNDER SECTION 14(3)(d) OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005.
1. The Right to Information Act is one of the best pieces of legislation in the post-
independent era of this country. It does have it shortcomings and some amendments
required urgently are given in Appendix A to this application. These suggestions have
been submitted to the legislative department of the Ministry of Law and Justice through
an e mail addressed to legis@hub.nic.in on 20 Apr 2007. But notwithstanding those
suggestions, the performance of the Central Information Commission itself has been so
shoddy that citizens, especially activists working in this field, are genuinely afraid that
the Commission itself is subverting the Act. A public hearing took place on 24th Sep
2006 on the functioning of Central Information which was attended, amoung others, by
the Chief Information Commissioner, Dr P C Alexander, T S Krishna Moorthy, Anna
Hazare, Arvind Kejrival, senior advocates Prashant Bhushan and Colin Gonsalves and
about 200 people who had filed complaints/appeals with the Commission. Without going
into the details of the discussion, the summary of recommendations, which emerged
during the hearing, are listed below:
1.1. 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.
1. 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 State Information Commission of UP.
1.3. The Information Commissioners should undergo training in judicial processes from
some retired Supreme Court judges.
1.4. Penalty should be imposed in every case of violation by government officials. Else
RTI would soon be dead.
1.5. 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.
Continued…

2. 2
1.6. Appeal number should be given to every appellant/complainant 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.
1.7. 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.
1.8. There should be a public hearing every three months, which should be attended by
all Commissioners.
2. The summary of cases filed/disposed off by the Commission is given at Appendix B.
At the rate at which the back log is increasing it is difficult to miss the fact that the plight
of information seekers will soon be worse than the plight of people seeking justice from
our courts. But even that is not as bad as the decisions themselves that are given by the
Commission. I am giving below two instances from personal experience. I must admit
that in my 20 plus years of life in the army, I have not seen even a newly recruited clerk
at the lowest level put up such shoddy drafts even for approval!
Case 1. Copies of the application I had submitted to the Public Information Officer (PIO),
Supreme Court and the final orders of the Information Commission are attached as
appendices C and D. The absurdity of the order is evident.
Case 2. Copies of the application I had submitted to the PIO, National Consumer
Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) and the two orders of the Information
Commission are given at appendices E, F and G. Inspite of clarifying the fact that the
appeal pertained to an application submitted to the PIO seeking information on the action
taken by the NCDRC on a petition pending with them and sending the appeal again, the
Information Commission had again send the application to the Kerala State Information
Commission! If such decisions earn for the Information Commission the notoriety of
being an Idiotic Commission can the public be blamed for it?
3. For reasons given above, I request you to kindly exercise the powers under Section
14(3)(d) of the RTI Act to remove the Chief Information Commissioner, Mr Wajahat
Habibulla from his present assignment. I also take this opportunity to highlight the need
to appoint people like Mr Aravind Kejriwal or Ms Aruna Roy to such posts so that the
letter and spirit of the RTI Act is sustained and not subverted.
Yours truly
(P M Ravindran)