competent Authority as defined in RTI Act, 2005

I have gone through provisions of the RTI Act, 2005. 

Among other things, the Act has defined “Competent Authority” as follows.

"(i) the Speaker in the case of the House of the People or the Legislative Assembly of a State or a Union territory having such Assembly and the Chairman in the case of the Council of States or Legislative Council of a State; 

 (ii)the Chief Justice of India in the case of the Supreme Court;  

(iii)the Chief Justice of the High Court in the case of a High Court;  

(iv)the President or the Governor, as the case may be, in the case of other authorities established or constituted by or under the Constitution; 

 (v)the administrator appointed under article 239 of the Constitution;"

I fail to understand as to why the framers of the Act have defined this Authority when no function of this Competent Authority has been prescribed. 

Perhaps the framers of Law wants to impress the Citizens of India that so many big Authorities are present in India (!)

First Appeal against OPSC

We have filed a 1st Appeal against the wrong decision of CPIO, OPSC, Cuttack. Odisha. The CPIO has rejected RTI Application on the ground that RTI Application has not been written in the prescribed format. I have gone through the entire provision of the RTI Act, 2005 and do not find any such provision. The second point advanced the CPIO is that identity proof has not been given by the RTI Applicant. There is no such provision in the said Act to give identity. When an Applicant is giving his name & address which is within the territory of India, it is simply foolishness to ask such frivolous question. The tragedy is that such person has worked hard and lucky enough to hold key posts in administering the country. And we, the poor citizen of India has to apply & apply and it seems there is no end to it. So, something is to be done-------