Dr Subramanian Swamy letter against Sonia Gandhi to President Abdul Kalam in 2004
FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT
Smt Rasika Chaube
Joint Secretary & Appellate Authority
I vide my RTI petition dated 11.04.2012 sought complete and detailed information together with related documents/file-notings/
1. Complete and detailed information together related correspondence/documents/file-
2. Copies of letters/correspondence etc by individuals, political parties and others etc staking claim to form the government before Dr Manmohansingh was ultimately invited to form the government
3. Copies of replies, if any, by Honourable President of India and/or President’s Secretariat to any such claims to form the government together with related correspondence/doicuments/
4. Is it true that certain individuals, political parties and/or others etc had objected against some particular person being invited to form the government?
5. If yes, copies of all such letters together with replies, if any, by Honourable President of India and/or President’s Secretariat to any such objections together with related correspondence/doicuments/
6. Is it true that Dr Subramanium Swamy has also made some correspondence with Honourable President of India and/or President’s Secretariat on the aspect/s referred in queries above?
7. If yes, copies of letters by Dr Subramanium Swamy together with replies if any enclosing also file-notings/correspondence/
8. Any other related information
9. File-notings on movement of this RTI petition also
Learned CPIO vide response number 0062/RTI/04/12-13 dated 26th April 2012 declined information on points (6) and (7) exempted under section 8(1)(e) of RTI Act. It is surprising that when author of the letter namely Dr Subramanium Swamy is openly revealing through media about contents of the letter, how President’s Secretariat could claim information to be fiduciary in nature! Significantly CPIO has himself confessed that the then Honourable President of India exercised his to appoint thr Prime Minister based on that letter. At the most, CPIO could invite ‘Third Party’ comments under section 11 of RTI Act on disclosing the said letter from Dr Subramanium Swamy within five days of receipt of RTI petition, which was not done making the provision infructuous now at this stage.
Otherwise also, it is an aspect requiring disclosure under section 8(2) of RTI Act which allows access to information if public-interest outweighs the harm to be protected, because the important issue relates to possible denial of claim for the post of Prime Minister to an Indian citizen and distinguished Parliamentarian as evident from media-reports. People have right to know how and why the claim for the post of Prime Minister by the said dignitary was refused because of objection raised by Dr Subramanium swamy. Honourable Mr Justice S Ravindra Bhatt of Delhi High Court in the matter “Bhagat Singh Vs. CIC (W.P.(C) No.3114/2007)” has held that the Right to Information Act being a right based enactment is akin to a welfare measure and as such should receive liberal interpretation. I appeal that learned CPIO may kindly be directed to provide sought information together with related and sought documents but now to be provided free-of-cost under section 7(6) of RTI Act.
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL
(Guinness Record Holder & RTI Activist)
1775 Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
DELHI 110006 (India)