CIC slams Election Commission for not replying to RTI on EVMs for over a year

Chief Information Commission Heeralal Samariya stated that the poll body’s actions were in gross violation of the Right to Information Act.
CIC slams Election Commission for not replying to RTI on EVMs for over a year

The Central Information Commission (CIC) recently took exception to the Election Commission of India (ECI) not replying to a Right to Information (RTI) Act query on Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) for more than a year. [MG Devasahayam vs PIO Election Commission of India].

Chief Information Commissioner Heeralal Samariya ruled that the poll body’s actions were in gross violation of RTI Act and called for written explanations from the officers concerned.

“Commission, after perusal of case records and submissions made during hearing, expresses severe displeasure over the conduct of the then PIO in not having provided any reply to the RTI Application within the time frame stipulated under the RTI Act. Therefore, Commission directs the then PIO through the present PIO to furnish a written explanation for the gross violation of the provisions of the RTI,” the CIC stated in its decision rendered on March 28.

The verdict came while hearing a second appeal arising out an RTI application filed by retired civil servant MG Devasahayam in November 2022.

After not receiving a reply within 30 days, and subsequently no response on first appeal either, Devasahayam moved the CIC in March last year.

The RTI application sought the following information regarding a representation sent to the ECI by a group of eminent citizens. The representation raised questions on the credibility of EVMs and Voter-Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) machines during polls and compliance of EVMs with democratic principles.

The RTI request sought the following details with regard to the representation:

1. Names and designations of persons to whom the representation was forwarded/ or shared.

2. Names of public authorities to whom the representation was forwarded/ or shared.

3. Details of any meeting held by the ECI where the issues raised in the representation were discussed indicating the following particulars – a. Date of meetings b. Names and designations of persons who attended c. Copy of minutes/deliberations of the meetings

4. Copy of all correspondence/ communication related to the representation.

5. Copy of all file notings related to the representation.

6. I would like to Inspect all the information and records held by the ECI regarding the action taken on the representation. Kindly let me know the date, time and venue for the inspection.

After the applicant received no response from both ECI and the first appellant authority, second appeal was filed before the CIC.

The ECI in second appeal claimed that the RTI application had not been received and also said the necessary data would be shared within a month.

The CIC castigated the poll body and called for written submissions from the Public Information Officer (PIO) of the ECI and other concerned officers, within 30 days of receipt of the instant decision.

Importantly, it directed that the information sought be shared within 30 days and a compliance report be submitted to the CIC.

“The present PIO will ensure service of this order to then PIO. Now, Commission directs the concerned PIO examine the instant RTI Application and provide a point-wise reply … free of cost via speed post,” it ordered.

RTI activist Amrita Johri appeared for the appellant-retired civil servant.

Election Commission of India Under-Secretary Rakesh Kumar and Assistant Section Officer Satish Kumar appeared for the poll body.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You cannot copy content of this page