Section 22 of The Gujarat (Right of Citizens to Public Services) Act, 2013 — In any appeal proceedings, the burden of proof to establish the non-redressal of complaint, shall be on the Grievance Redressal Officer who denied the request

Bare section text

Official Legislative Text

Where grievance complained of is a result of corrupt practices 22. Where it appears to the Authority that the grievance complained of is, prima facie, indicative of a corrupt act or practice in terms of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, on the part of the responsible officer of the public authority complained against, then it shall record such evidence as may be found in support of such conclusion and shall refer the same to the appropriate authority.

Educational Study Layer

Summary

In any appeal proceedings under the Act, the burden of proof lies on the Grievance Redressal Officer who denied the request.
This officer must prove that they did not fail to address or resolve the citizen's complaint.
The citizen who filed the appeal does not have to prove that the officer failed; the responsibility is entirely on the officer.

Practical examples

1Meera files a complaint because she did not receive her ration card within the promised time limit. The Grievance Redressal Officer, Mr. Patel, rejects her complaint. Meera appeals this rejection to the Designated Authority. During the appeal hearing, Meera does not have to prove that Mr. Patel ignored her case. Instead, under Section 21 of the Act, Mr. Patel must present the office files and evidence to prove that he actually resolved her complaint or had a valid reason for the delay.

2Rahul appeals to the State Appellate Authority after his complaint about a water connection delay is denied by the Grievance Redressal Officer, Mrs. Shah. Mrs. Shah claims that she sent a team to fix the connection, but she has no written records or photographs. Under Section 21 of the Act, because the burden of proof is on Mrs. Shah, her verbal claims are not enough, and the Authority rules in favor of Rahul because she failed to prove she resolved the complaint.

FAQ

1. Who has the burden of proof in an appeal under Section 21 of the Act?

The burden of proof is entirely on the Grievance Redressal Officer who originally denied the citizen's request.

Practice Quiz

Q1.An applicant files an appeal under Section 10 of the Act to the Designated Authority. Under Section 21 of the Act, who carries the burden of proof to show that the complaint was properly addressed?

Q2.Under Section 21 of the Act, if a Grievance Redressal Officer denies an applicant's complaint and the applicant appeals, what is the default legal assumption during the appeal proceedings?

Q3.A Grievance Redressal Officer fails to attend an appeal hearing and provides no records to show they resolved a citizen's complaint. Under Section 21 of the Act, what is the outcome?

Q4.Which officer is specifically burdened with the responsibility of proof in appeal proceedings under Section 21 of the Act?

21PreviousSection 21 Burden of proof to be on Grievance Redressal Officer 23NextSection 23 Penalty and Compensation for mala fide action

←Section 21 Section 23→