Feel free to contribute on burning issues concerning the armed forces. Contributions would be acknowledged - Use the 'Comments' tab or email navdeepsingh.india[at]gmail.com. No operational/business/commercial matters to be discussed please. Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained. Information on this blog is opinion based and is neither official nor in the form of an advice. This is a pro bono online journal in public service related to issues, policies and benefits, and the idea behind it is to educate and not to create controversy or to incite. Be soft in your language, respect Copyrights.

Monday, May 24, 2010

Payment of RTI fee

In line with the strongest and finest public traditions of our country, some central public authorities continue to return RTI applications on the pretext that the name of the payee has been mentioned incorrectly on the Postal Order / Draft / Banker’s Cheque. Some have also been returning postal orders on the ground that the payee’s name has been left blank by the RTI Applicant. The applicable rules of the central govt provide that payment can be made universally in the name of the ‘Accounts Officer’ of the particular public authority, but some offices have been returning such payment instruments stating that the payment should be made through a different nomenclature such as ‘Section Officer’ etc. This approach is grossly incorrect and the Govt of India had, in fact, in December 2008 apprised all concerned that payment had to be accepted when made in the name of the ‘Accounts Officer’ for that was inherently provided by the statutory rules. Anyone facing such a problem may quote this letter issued by the DoPT specifically in this regard. Moreover, blank IPOs cannot also be refused since the public authority has the liberty to fill them up in whichever manner that it may deem fit without burdening RTI Applicants with a search operation for the name in which the IPO is to be filled. Some establishments have not even updated their websites with such information and then they expect the public to know exactly the particulars RTI Applicants need to fill up before processing their application. It is high time that the PIOs are sensitised that one can delay with these tactics but not deny.


VNatarajan said...

Dear Interested,
As observed by Maj Navdeep, blank IPOs should not be refused for not being filled up. Yes. This is correct. I have sent quite a number of RTI applications with Open Blank IPOs - and the same have NOT BEEN REFUSED. However, I had taken care to mention in the Applications that RTI Ap's Initial Fee of Rs 10/- is enclosed in the form of open blank IPO No...../ dtd....., issued by such and such PO.

Anonymous said...

MRP said....
Dear Maj Navdeep,

I would like to mention here that for Central Govt all Supdt of POs function as CPIO of Postal Division for acceptance and onward transmission of RTI applications. RTI application fee can be paid at Head Post Office counter in cash. The receipt issued by PO is to be pasted on application and counterfoil kept for record. The application and subsequent fee, if demanded by CPIO of concerned Central Govt department can also be sent through Supdt of POs in the shape of crossed IPOs/ Bank Drafts payable to CPIO/AO. Even appeal to the first appellate authorities are forwarded by Supdt of POs and the applicant is saved botheration of sending application/appeal by regd/speed post.

Anonymous said...

Can PIO of a department refuse a postal order and insist on payment only through a bank draft or a banker's cheque?