The rules also required applicants to submit a self-attested copy of a photo identity document establishing Indian citizenship along with every RTI application. Applications lacking such proof could be returned for compliance.
Another contentious provision stipulated that each RTI application should ordinarily be confined to a single subject and generally not exceed 150 words. Where multiple subjects were raised, the public information officer (PIO) could process only the first and ask the applicant to file separate applications for the remaining issues.
The rules further provided that where the requested information was already available on the website of the concerned public authority, the PIO could direct applicants to access it online instead of supplying copies.
In addition, they proposed a fee of Rs 50 for filing a first appeal before the first appellate authority and Rs 100 for a second appeal before the Maharashtra State Information Commission. The rules also envisaged physical as well as video-conference hearings.
Hazare, in a memorandum to Fadnavis, alleged that the rules had been framed without public consultation and introduced unnecessary procedural hurdles, higher costs and a more cumbersome appeals process, thereby weakening transparency and accountability. He urged the government to withdraw the notification and frame fresh rules after consulting RTI experts, Information Commissioners, lawyers, journalists, social activists and citizens.
With PTI inputs
About the Author
