Got lock instead of aeroplane as symbol,he used RTI to unlock it

Distraught,Mukhtiar took up the matter with the authorities and sought annulment of the election. But absence of documents in his favour took the edge off his assertions. At this moment,he decided to file an RTI application in the office of SDM (West) Jalalabad,to find the key to the puzzle of allotment of ‘lock’ without any prior intimation. Dissatisfied with the response,he moved the Punjab State Information Commission.

After protracted hearings spanning over two years,information commissioner Rupan Deol Bajaj,who retired in December-end,took his case to a logical conclusion.

When the commission summoned RO Surinder Pal Singh,he asserted that,after due verification,Mukhtiar was allotted the symbol of ‘lock’ and not ‘aeroplane’. He also said that on May 19,2008,an announcement was made regarding allotment of symbols and “no dummy ballot paper was given”.

However,Mukhtiar produced the original papers — signed by the RO — in which he had been allotted ‘aeroplane’ as well as the original dummy ballot paper,which also showed the same symbol against his name. After hearing both the parties,the commissioner called for the file of symbol allotment and also summoned Jalalabad SDM Jasdeep Singh Aulakh,who was the chief election officer.

The SDM sent the RO and an assistant who was posted with him at that time,as both had conducted the poll,from scrutiny of papers to the declaration of result. Bajaj perused the file and found assertions of Mukhtiar true. The commissioner took the file in custody and said it was clear that the RO’s previous letter was false. “It is a misleading reply giving under the RTI Act,” she said,while recommending an inquiry.

Show-cause notices were issued to the SDM and the RO. The SDM stated in his reply that the entire process was conducted by the RO,who may have erred due to excessive workload. The commission advised Mukhtiar that now,armed with whatever information he has got through the RTI Act,he should approach the competent authority in the administration,State Election Commission or the civil courts.

As the complainant made many trips from Jalalabad to Chandigarh for the case,therefore,a token compensation of Rs 250 per visit was given to him,besides Rs 10,000.