Chandigarh: Taking a firm stand against misuse of the Right to Information (RTI) law, the Punjab State Information Commission has ruled that parallel invocation of remedies by concealing material facts cannot be permitted, warning that such practices undermine both the spirit and efficiency of the transparency framework.The ruling came while the bench of state information commissioner Sandeep Singh Dhaliwal disposed of seven appeals filed by a Ludhiana resident.During the hearing, the respondent public information officer (PIO) was represented through counsel, assisted by a draftsman from the municipal council, Khanna. However, neither the appellant nor any authorised representative appeared before the commission, and no written explanation for the absence was submitted.The respondent’s counsel argued that in several cases, along with connected complaints, the appellant had filed both a second appeal under Section 19 and a complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act, 2005, on the same RTI application, thereby invoking parallel remedies.After examining the record, the commission observed that the appellant had pursued parallel proceedings on the same cause of action by filing both a complaint and a second appeal over the same RTI application. It noted that such conduct prima facie reflected suppression of material facts and multiplicity of proceedings, which was not in line with the settled legal framework governing the RTI Act.The commission held that entertaining such parallel remedies amounted to misuse of the statutory process and led to avoidable duplication of proceedings.It also noted that despite being given an opportunity, the appellant neither appeared nor placed any material on record to justify the conduct or rebut the respondent’s submissions.The commission said filing multiple proceedings on the same issue unnecessarily burdened its limited time and resources, delayed disposal of cases and prejudiced other litigants awaiting adjudication.While disposing of the appeals, the commission said: “Parallel invocation of remedies by concealing material facts cannot be permitted.”
