Arun Ram

Chennai: A tug-of-war between the Tamil Nadu industries department and the state information commission is throwing up new questions on the implementation of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

Leading to the standoff was an RTI application filed by Madhumitha Dutta, a Chennai-based public interest researcher, in December 2006. When the principal information officer (PIO) of the department did not respond and later refused to give all the details sought, Dutta complained to the commission.

When instructions to the department went unheeded, the commission, after a hearing on October 4, observed that the PIO had abdicated his responsibility.

The industries secretary said it was not mandatory under the RTI to give information regarding project reports and MoUs when there is a “third party” (industrial house getting land in the SEZ) involved. But state information commissioner S Ramarishnan said the third party angle was an afterthought.

He said the commission has the option of invoking section 18 (3) to seize documents. “The panel has the powers of a civil court, but it does not have an ameena (a process servant of the court) who can seize documents. This case has raised the question if information commissions should have ameenas,” said Ramakrishnan.

The industries secretary said the government has got a stay from the Madras HC on the panel’s order, but Ramakrishnan said he neither had a copy of it nor was he aware of it.

Source : DNA