..SAVE ENERGY FOR THE BENEFIT OF SELF AND NATION" HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED

Transcription

1 ..SAVE ENERGY FOR THE BENEFT OF SELF AND NATON" HMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRCTY BOARD LMTED U~ (A State Govt. undertaking) -'':;;:A:ii:''1M1 A ~~: HPSEBL (Sect) 410-RT (App.)/2014- :]6::rJf"- 4J-r Dated: ~ The Public nformation Officer-cum- Subject: mplementation of Section 4(1)(a) & (b) of the RT Act. Sir, A copy of order NO. SC-1(C) / dated from Assistant Registrar, State nformation Commission, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla received through Executive Director (Personnel). H.P. State Electricity Board Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan, Shimla-04 vide letter No. HPSEBL(Sect)106-1(RTJ Act,200S)/ dated is enclosed herewith for further necessary action in the matter. t is requested to adhere to the instructions imparted under Section 4(1)(a) & (b) of the Right to nformation Act-200S as per order passed by the Hon'ble Chief nformation Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh on in true letter and spirit. DA: As above Yolilrs faithfully, ~1 Er. v~ gr.) State ~~i~~" nformation Officer-cum.. ~hief Engineer (P&M), ~dyut Bhawan, HPsEBl, Shim la- 04. Telefax No cepm@hpseb,i!l ~o the Superintending Engineer (T), HPSEBL, Vidyut Bhawan, Shimla-04 with the request to get the above instruction uploaded on the website of HPSEB Ltd. M:-Al" l d ~ne1'-- [0 - Suprintn tng n. 1 'tt~ (Er.vi~~). HPSEBLtd., V' t8 awan., State Public nformation Officer.cum 1htm, ~~~ ~hief Engineer (P&M), Ylt\\~ :\~ ~idyut Bhawan, HPSEBl, \ \\, Shimla- 04. /"\ j...(} 'fs':-- ~ Telefax No ~. ~ v'ji-~~ /~e\\("\\e"'dl";.~t~;~~cepm@hpseb'in -'. ~ V or;.j. \r3'" 1;>, Ho ~ ~ "Y' \ \ * 0."... '. ~...~~Jl!-'... l ".. 7-' of.,.. ''<:'~;'' 'i~ "'-t~.. '. ;:. :{~..:'1;,\'~

2 . HMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRCTY BOARD LMED (A State Government Undertaking) No.HPSEBL(Sectt)/106-(RT Act,2005)/ '17 Dated:- b 11 J~ The Chief Engineer (P&M). Nodal Officer at State Level. HPSEBL, Vidyut Bhawan, Shimla-~. Subject: mplementation of Section 4(1) (a) ~ (b) of the RT Act. ~'";\- Sir, Please refer to the notification '0.HPSEBL(SECTT)/R&E/ 06- JlRTl Act,2005/ dated n this context, it is requested to advise all the Public nformation Officers. of HPSEB~ 'for implementation the instructions o~ Section 4( ) (a) & (b) of the RT Aet as per order passed by the Hon'ble Chief nformation Commissioner. Himachal Pradesh on (copy enclosed) in letter and spirit. DA:- As above. ~~(1J '~.~ ).U ; (E)"'v~ S,.E. (eo). ttl q) } ~ SupdL ~.,..p-\(j.-) ~'\\\j t;...v' Yours faithfully...,x " '::.,, ~,,;,....~,: (RohifJamwal).. Xeclltive Director (Personnel)...<" H.P.State Eleety. Board Ltd.. Vidyut Bhawan, Shi~ ( _'

3 From:. SC- (C) / \\ ~) State nformation Commission, Himachal Pradesh Tele: O77-...u,,,..,.lJ.u Tele: (Registpr) Tele-fax: &9. The Registrar. State nformation Commission, Majitha House, Shimla-2.. To: 1. The Suptd., Engineer (works)-cum..nodal Officer, 0/0 HPPWD, Nirman Bhawan, Nigam Vihar, Shimla-2 2. The PO-cum-Executive Engineer (B &R) HPPWD, Paonta Division, Distt. Sirmour HP.. The PO-cum-Executive Director (Personnel) HPSEB Ltd., Vidyut Bhawan Kumar House Shimla-4. /' / 4. Sh. Subodh Abhi, Sylvan Height Baiamandi. (~"// Paonta Sahib, Distt. Sirmour HP ) :::-D('f). s?r.~1~)~~\~' rz. Dated: Shimla "'" "-- "'vj, a1l1 directed to eflclose ~fierewith the certified copy of order, ~~Jb 'passed by the Hon'ble Chief nfonnation Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh ~SfJtRi.~ on in Complaint Nos. 0012, 0013, & 0014/ filed by Sh. Subodh Abhi, Sylvan Height Batamandi. Paonta Sahib. Distt. Sirmour HP \\~ for information and further necessary action. '\\( Encls: as above,.("'~ \ (sanf~)'-' Asstt. Registrar. (, \\ State nfonnation Commission. \".t"" \ /.-J / Himachal Pradesh. ---' ,

4 ~ STATE NFORMATON COMMSSON HMACHAL PRADESH, MAJTiHA HOUSE, SHMLA-2 ',Date of nstitution: 'Date of Decision: Complaint Nos.0012, 0013 & 0014/ Complainant: Sh. S~bodh Abhi, Sylvan Height Batamandi, Paonta Sahib, Distt. Sirmour Absent Versus' Public nformation Officer: 1. Sh. "jay Garg, Nodal Officer-cum SE (W9rks), HPPWD Nirman Bhawan, Shimla. Respondent- Present. 2. Exeeutive Engineer (B&R), PWD Paonta Division, Distt. Sirrnour (HP). Respondent- Present. 3. Exe~utive Engineer, HPSEB Ltd., Vidyut '!Bhawan, Kumar Hous~, Shimla~4. Respondent- Present ORDER i The complainant filed three complaints registered in the Commission as complaint Nos. C'~0012,, C-0013 & C-OO 14. All these complaints are directed against different POs but are related to the same subject matten of information regarding non implementation of provisions of Se~tion 4 of the RT j1,ct Hence, all these complaints were taken up together for enquiry M[l ier' i. ~F\.. ~.! 0: ~.' ".':' i' 1.\ > ~,,L..,~., ~/ /~:. -

5 Cil,' , Section 18 of the RT Act, 2005 and are being through this single order. 2. The complainant filed three RT applications in the first week of April, 2013 addressed to three different POs namely PO in the office of Secretary (PWO) to the Govt. of Himachal Pradesh who transferred the application to the PO in the office of Engineer in Chief, PWD. PO office of the Chief Engineer (MM), HPSEB Ltd., Kumar House, Vidyut Shawano Shimla and the PO-cum-Executive Engineer, PWD (B&R) Division, Paonta Sahib, Distt. Sirmour. 'The contents of all these applications are the same and are reproduced from one of the applications as "Please provide details of files and records which have been digitized and computerized by your department, as mandated in seetton4 (1)(a~ of RT Act, which requires every public authority to maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and form, which facilitate proactive information under this Act. A sum of Rs.10/- in the form of Postal order, alongwith the prescribed form, for obtaining the information under the Right to nformation Act, is enclosed." 3. The responaent nos. 2 & 3 responded to these applications Of the applicant by way of intimating him that no files and records have been digitized and computerized as per Section 4 of the RTf Act, The respondent no.1 however, responded' by way of providing information consisting of four pages primarily related to certain Acts and departmental circulars having been uploaded on the departmental website. Being dissatisfied with the responses of the respondents, complainant approached the Commission to enquire into non implemenlatior of the provisions of Section 4 by the respective public authorities even after the lapse of seven years since when RT Act cam!:; C; A1 'i' \tv/ ". below: ~-~-

6 into oper3tion. RT applications endosed with the complci~ts were not specific in their contents as to what information "'~ sought from the respondents in terms of the definition of.., expression information given in Secti9n 2 (f) of the RT Act,' But through the additional submissions made by him during the enquiry he sought to cla~ify that he had sought information as to the implementation o(,section 4 (1) (a) & 4 (1) (b) of the RT Act by these public authorities. 4. As per Section 4 (1) (a) "every PU,blic authority shall have to maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a. \ manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under the Act. The public authorities are also mandated to, ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerized are within the reasonable time and subject to the availability of resources, computerized and connected,through a network all over the country on different systems sci that access to such records is facilitated. Thus, the complainant had sought information as to:~ (a) (b). The details of files and records which have been catalogued and indexed in a manner and forrn which facilitates proactive information; The details of files and records which have been digitized and computerized. 5., \11 these three respondents did not respqnd to these RT applications as per the contents of these applications. All the respondents on the first date of hearing sought time to file their detailed replies as to the status of implementation of the obligations of the public authorities under Section 4 of the Act. ~/ They also argued that nodal officers of the departml:i7~ ~- ----

7 """',.'t""...,~ly designated to coordinate the im;:,lement3:t::y' provisions of this Section be also called for hearing, Through subsequent hearings, the respondent concerned nodal officer filed his r~ply no,1 alongwith the stating that at the time of receipt of the RT application, proqess of indexing of the files in ail the offices of public authority was not complete be.::ause of shortage of staff, However, the same has no.v beer Jo-,e, They also placed on record the copies of instr'uctions Superintending Engineers to maintain all tne to all the records as per Section 4 (1) (a) of the RT Act, Similar replies 'Nere filed by respondent nos. 2 & 3 alongwith the concerned nodal officers of their departments, 6. t is worthwhile to take note of sche!natic pattern of the operationalization of different provisions of the RT Act. Section 1 (3) provides for that "the provisions of Sub Section 1 of Section 4, Sub Section 1 and 2 of Sub Section 5, Sections 12, 13, 15, 16, i 24, 27 & 28 shall come into forcf 'at once and the rer: 3.ining prc\'isions of ths Act shall come intc force c; the 12"-~?, of its enadment. Sections - 5, 12, 13, 15 & ~ 6 pro'.:;~s fur the appointment of Puqlic nformation l Officer and Ce'-,',r3, & State,nformation Commissions_ Sectio~s 24, 27 & 28 i):g'jides for exempted categories of organisati~ns froc)! the amb~:)f this Act and to make rules by the appropriate govermrien~s and competent authorities. Section 4 (11) (a) & (t: provides for ~-:;ertain obl'gations of public:,. auth~rities rjquiring them to ;~-,alr:;.3in ail their records duly catalogued and indexed n a manne~ and the which facilitates the right to iltlformatiof, under this \ct and......" vely in nl::spect of differeni: parameters. Every pjblic auhdrity WeS dlie-:ted to offieenl to cc::.ordinate Z'~::j ensure '--- --, r

8 The office record c;>f oifferent publi.c c;iuthorities was supposed'lo be catalogued and indexed in a manner which facilitates dissemination of information to information seekers pr-oactively by every public authority. Similarly Section 4 (1) (a) also provides that all records that are appropriate to be computerized are within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources computerized and connected through a net work all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated. 7. Given this status of legal provisions the nodal departments of the State Govt. for implementation of the RT Act - Administrative Reforms and Training Department - circulated detailed guidelines to every administrative Secretary and Heads of Departments to take steps to implement the provisions of Section 4 (1) and also issued reminders from time to time to this effect. nstructions to appoint nodal officers by every public authority to coordinate the efforts of public authorities to ensure implementation of the provisions of this Section were also issued but from the perusal of responses give,n by all the respondents to the complainant, it is observed that compliance of the St2te Govt. instructions in this regard has not been done till date t is also important to take note of the fact that the guidelines in the form of office manual laid down by the, State Govt. as tothe maintenance " of office records even prior to the ena'ctment of the RT Act ha~ not been adhered to by, these public. authorities, However, the " respondents as POs having responded to the RT applications of the complainant within the stipulated period under Section 7 of the Act and there being nothing on record to indicate that the respondents intended to deprive the 'complainant of the requisite information knowingly, no penal action under Section 20 of the Act is ordered against them. All the nodal officers of these public aothorities ~ssured during the hearing that all the administrative units under the control of these publ:ic authorities h~~~ "~e~h ~ /~~.( -.~-k:}-.....,' _ c.,:. ~.

9 directed now to comply with the provisions of Section 4 (1). However, the respective Nodal Officers must take note of the fact that provisions of Section 4 were mandated to be implemented within a period of 120 days after thert Act, 2005 came into operation in the year This has not been done by these public authorities primarily for the reason that. their records / files are not being maintained as per procedure laid.down in office manual. From the perusal of a sample record in the office of POcum-EXN (B&R) in respect of a particular link road stretch of two kilometres it was observed that three different sets of files are being maintained. in three different branches. Two kilometres length- of road was not complete for la&t more than 7 years. How this road was proposed for construction was not avaiiable in record. This sort of preparation and maintenance of record is certainiy not in consonance with the spirit of RT Act, :~'J05 as enshrined in the preamble of this ACt. They must c.onsider opening of subject wise files as provided for in office manual and one subject should have only one file.instead of multiple files leading to confusion and non-transparency With these observatio'ns, the complaint is hereby disposed of under intimation to all the parties. Announced. ca~. ( K.D. 8atish) " (Bhim Sen) State nformaton Commissioner State Chief nformation Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. Place. Shimla Dated: '.,., J. ' ~.'~ ", _ ~ ,