RTI and National Literacy Mission Authority
Jibanananda Goswami
(Querist) 10 March 2010
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sirs,
In my previous queries, I asked several times about the legal value of an un-authenticated reply of RTI application. After first appeal, I got the certified copies of some (not all) documents but the original answers sheet is not stamped/sealed. Actually they just sent the certified copies and not anything else. But the answer sheet is the main evidence. The sheet is plain A4 papers. Each pages is signed by somebody(now after having the attested copy, I know that the somebody is P.R.A. NAIR, under Secretary to the GOI) Now the question is:-
1. The law of evidence permits that documents may be proved either by primary or secondary evidence. Sec.65 of the Evidence Act provides for the admissibility of secondary evidence under certain circumstances. In the instant case, eventhough the document obtained under RTI is not a certified copy, if the litigant files a sworn affidavit to the effect that he has obtained the copy of the documents through RTI and that the original is in possession of the party against whom the document is sought to be proved, then what will be the status of admissibility of this uncertified document. If there are any legal practitioners among our members, please clarify on this point.
2. As the documents are attested with signature and seal of P.R.A. NAIR and the answer sheet is signed by him, can the answer sheet be treated as authenticated by comparison of the signature on it and on the attested documents? Which authority can certify that the signatures are same?
3. Is there any legal term that describe "the reply must be signed, sealed and anything else required to be treated as evidence under all the Courts"? If any, please give reference to the laws. Even I mentioned the format as "Certified papers that can be used for official and legal proceedings" they sent plain copies first. In first appeal, I referred to the definition of "Certified copy" in INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, section 76 and then got attested copies.
If you please like to see the complete information, visit www.openrti.co.cc. I have placed all scanned copy and also typed the content.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 10 March 2010
1. You shall have to summon original record from th office issuing those uncertified documents and shall have to get compared otherwise those shall not be admissible.
2. If both are taken at the same time then answer sheet shall also be treated as authenticated and the stamp and seal affixed over attested documents shall also be treated for this document also as the same are interlinked and issued by same authority.
3. Under RTI Act, it is prescribed clearly that the required information should be provided duly signed, sealed and stamped by competent authority so no specific law is required to establish this common procedural action to be performed by respondent department. Court provide due reliance to such information obtained from departments.
Jibanananda Goswami
(Querist) 10 March 2010
1. So if the authority gives uncertified document on asking for certified copies, can I ask for compensation for time loss? I have to wait 30 days more to get the attested (not certified) copy through first appeal. Can I treat it as "hiding of evidence"?
2. The answer sheet and the attested documents are not taken at the same time. At first, the answer sheet came with uncertified copies. After first appeal, I got the attested (not certified) copies of documents (not the answer sheet). But the authority is the same. The signature is also the same.
3. The answer sheet was signed by someone but not stamped. There was no information about the identity of the signatory. After first appeal, the related documents is attested but the answer sheet is the same. So whatever the law says, the answer was (and is) not authenticated even I asked for "each pages of documents and the reply should be acceptable as evidence" in the first appeal.
