State Election Commission, Mizoram, Government of Mizoram, India

REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 FOR THE YEAR 2016-2017.

I. PARTICULARS OF REPORTING AUTHORITY :

1	Name of the office	: STATE ELECTION COMMISSION, MIZORAM
2.	Number of gazetted officers	: 3 (Three)
3.	Names of Public Sector Undertakings, Boards, Council etc under the Office	: Nil
4.	Names of NGOs assisted by the Department	: Nil

II. IMPLEMENTATIONS OF SECTION 4 OF THE RTI ACT :

1.	Whether all the records are catalogued and indexed by the office? If not, reason as to why?	: YES
2.	Whether all relevant facts relating to formulation of important policies have been published by the department/ office as required under Sec. 4(1 )(b)?	: YES
3.	Whether suo moto information has been provided to the public at regular intervals as required by Sec 4(2)?	: YES
4.	Whether every information in the department/office has been widely disseminated as required by Sec. 4(3)?	: YES
5.	Whether information the department/office has been made accessible to State Public Information Officer (SPIO) concerned as required by Sec. 4	: YES

III. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 5 :

1.	How many SPIOs have been designated in the office? If not why?	: 1 (One)
2.	How many SAPIOs have been appointed in the office? If not why?	: Nil
3.	How many Departmental Appellate Authorities (DAAs) have been appointed in the office? If not why?	: 1 (One)
4.	When were these designations made? Kindly enclose a copy of such orders	: 1 (One)

Whether any assistance of any other officer has been sought by SPIO? If so, in how many cases?

: NO

IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 6 :

1.	No. of applications received in the office	: Nil
2.	How many applications had been assisted by the SPIO to reduce an application in writing under Sec 6(1) (b)?	: Nil
3.	How many applications have been referred to another Public Authorities (PAs)/Offices for providing information?	: Nil
4.	Amount of application fees received. Were these deposited to the Government?	: Nil

V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 7 :

1.	How many applications were decided within the prescribed time limit?	: Nil
2.	How many applications were rejected by the SPIO? What were the main grounds for rejecting the applications?	: Nil
3.	How many applications were not decided within the prescribed limitation?	: Nil
4.	What are the main reasons for not deciding the applications within limitations?	: Nil
5.	How many applications were received concerning the life or liberty of a person Ni	: Nil
6.	Whether applications concerning the life or liberty of a person were decided within a period of 48 hours from time of receipt of the application?	: Nil
7.	How many applicants failed to make payment of cost of providing the information? State the amount?	: Nil
8.	How many applicants belonging to BPL were provided information free of cost? And how many of them were denied information free of cost?	: Nil
9.	How many sensorily disabled applicants were assisted by the SPIO?	: Nil
10.	How many applicants were given information free of cost due to failure of the PAs to provide the information within limitation?	: Nil
11.	In how many applications a third party was involved.	: Nil
12.	Amount of fees collected for the provisions of such information during the reported period	: Nil

VI. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 8 :

1.	How many applications were denied information under Sec. 8? Give reasons used for denying such information	: Nil
2.	How many applicants were given information under Sec. 8 on the ground of larger public interest?	: Nil

VII. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 9 ;

How many applications were rejected on the ground specified under Sec. 9 of RTI Act?

: Nil

VIII. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 19 :

1.	How many appeals have been instituted before the DAA against the actions/inaction of the SPIO in the Office?	: Nil
2.	How many such first appeals were decided by the DAA within a period of 45 days from the date of filing the first appeal?	: Nil
3.	How many first appeals were rejected?	: Nil
4.	How many first appeals were allowed?	: Nil
5.	How many 2^nd appeals were preferred against the First Appellate Authority before the MIC?	: Nil
6.	How many 2^nd appeals were decided by MIC and how many appeals were pending?	: Nil
7.	How many appeals were allowed by the Commission and how many were disallowed?	: Nil
8.	In how many cases the Commission made recommendations and what are the actions taken by the Office on such recommendations?	: Nil

IX. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 25 :

What are the recommendations, if any, for compliance of the provisions of the RTI Act by the Office?

: Nil

X. IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 26 :

What are the departmental and organizational programmes conducted by the Office in respect of exercise of the RTI as contemplated under Sec. 26(1) (a)?

: No such programmes conducted

What actions were taken by the Office to encourage PAs in the developmental organization of such programmes as mentioned above

: No such action taken

What were the actions taken by the office to promote the Act

: Applicants were encouraged to

seek all kinds of information under

this Public Authority.