The Tamil Nadu Information Commission has taken a firm stance against what it calls a clear misuse of the Right to Information Act. In a recent order, the commission fined an appellant ₹10,000 for filing 33 similar petitions in a single case. This action highlights growing concerns over RTI filings made with ulterior motives.
Commissioner R Priyakumar Issues Strict Order
Commissioner R Priyakumar passed this order while disposing of the 33 petitions. The appellant, Krishnaramanujam from Andipatti, had filed all these petitions. They were addressed to the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Theni and revolved around the same subject matter. The commission decided to batch and hear them together due to their repetitive nature.
RTI Should Be Used Responsibly, Says Commissioner
In his remarks, Commissioner Priyakumar emphasized that the RTI Act ensures citizens' right to information as guaranteed by the Constitution. However, he stressed that this right must be exercised with responsibility. He pointed out that the government can only share available information under the Act. It is not required to generate new information just to dispose of queries.
"Most of the queries from the appellant are based on assumptions or framed as questions," the commissioner noted. "Such queries do not fall under the category of 'information' as defined by the RTI Act."
Background of the Appellant's Petitions
The appellant's RTI queries were related to three specific cases where he himself stood as an accused. Krishnaramanujam skipped the hearing, citing health reasons. He informed the commission that he needed the documents to fight what he described as 'fake cases' filed against him. This was his stated reason for seeking information under the RTI Act.
Chief Administrative Officer Responds
Appearing for the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chief Administrative Officer N Arun Suryakumar presented the official stance. He stated that the appellant habitually filed multiple RTI applications on the same subject. Suryakumar argued that these queries were framed in a manner that did not qualify as 'information' under the law.
This case underscores a broader issue of RTI misuse in Tamil Nadu. The commission's order serves as a warning against using the Act to threaten public information officers or overload the system. It reaffirms that while transparency is crucial, the RTI mechanism must not be exploited for personal grievances or harassment.
