http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/ en Wed, 19 Jun 2013 01:51:27 GMT vBulletin 1440 http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/images/styles/Creative/misc/rss.png http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/ http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113407-rti-court-decision-rti-judgement-series-disclose-documents-related-declaration-emergency.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:09:10 GMT Reported by Moneylife.in on 18/06/2013
RTI Judgement Series: Disclose documents related with declaration of Emergency - Moneylife

The institutions of democracy had not become robust enough to withstand an assault and it is imperative for citizens to know the reasons why and how democracy in India was nearly lost, the CIC said. This is the 115th in a series of important judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi that can be used or quoted in an RTI application

The Central Information Commission (CIC), while allowing an appeal, directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) and under-secretary at the President's Secretariat to provide the complete information on declaration of internal emergency by the then president Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed.

While giving this judgement on 15 June 2011, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central Information Commissioner, said, “The public interest in disclosing the materials/documents on the basis of which Emergency was declared is immense and the citizens of India have a right to know the same. India needs to learn its lessons well, and without this information, citizens will not be able to derive the correct inferences of a watershed event in its journey of democracy.”

Delhi resident and right to information (RTI) activist Subhash Chandra Agrawal, on 9 August 2010, sought information about the assets and wealth of Pratibha Patil, the then president of India and her family, as well as details information about declaration of Emergency by the then president Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed from the Public Information Officer (PIO). Here is the information he sought under the RTI Act and the reply provided by the PIO...

1. Complete and detailed information about assets and wealth of Hon'ble President of India and her family members.
PIO's reply: Such information is not maintained by this office.

2. Steps taken to put on website of the President of India complete and detailed information about assets and wealth of President of India (Vice President of India Mohammed Hamid Ansari reportedly expressed desire to make such information about assets and wealth public by putting on relevant website).
PIO's reply: Does not arise, in view of reply (1) above.

3. Complete and detailed information on all documents/records/deliberations/documents/correspondence/file-notings, etc on the declaration of internal emergency in the country by the then president Hon'ble Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed including any communication/advice received from the then Prime Minister Ms Indira Gandhi.
PIO's reply: The information sought is covered under Article 74 of the Constitution and hence, cannot be disclosed.

4. Any other related information.
PIO's reply: No.

5. File notings on movement of this RTI petition.
PIO's reply: NIL

The RTI activist then filed his first appeal, in which he stated, “The CPIO declined to provide information on query (3) on the basis that it was covered under Article 74 of the Constitution of India and hence could not be disclosed. However, the RTI Act has an overriding effect on all previous provisions, and as such it was not justified to refuse any information covered under Section 8 of the RTI Act.”

The First Appellate Authority (FAA), however, disposed the appeal stating that the reply given by the PIO was in order. The FAA in his order said,”…In his appeal, the appellant has stated that if the information on point 1 & 2 are not maintained in the President's Secretariat, the same may be transferred to the public authority holding the information. In this regard it is stated that the President of India is not required to declare his/her assets and wealth to this Secretariat, or to any other public authority. Hence the reply given by the CPIO is in order. As far as the family of the president is concerned, they are private individuals and information about their assets and wealth is also not required to be declared to this Secretariat. Hence reply given by the CPIO is in order and no further action is required to be taken.

Since the correspondence between the president and the prime minister regarding declaration of Emergency is covered under Article 74 of the Constitution of India, the reply given by the CPIO is in order”

Not satisfied with the reply Agrawal then approached the CIC with his second appeal. In the appeal, he stated, “No basis in law for the denial of information. It was prayed that the respondent—public authority—may be directed to provide complete and detailed information on all documents/records/deliberations/documents/ correspondence/file notings on declaration of internal emergency in the country by the then president Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed including any communication/advice received from the then prime minister, Indira Gandhi, and also file- notings on movement of the RTI petition.”

During the hearing on 12 May 2011, Agrawal on query 1 and 2, argued before the Commission that though there may not be any legal obligation on the president to declare her assets and those of her family members, judges at the Supreme Court, Information Commissioners and Election Commissioners had declared their assets voluntarily and put them up on websites. Similarly, the Prime Minister's Office had decided to declare the assets of all the ministers on its website. In view of this, the president may set a good example in transparency which others could follow, he said.

However, Mr Gandhi, the then CIC, said “The Commission cannot pass any direction in this regard, as it does not come within the Commission's powers as mandated under the RTI Act. Now that various functionaries like ministers, judges and Information Commissioners have voluntarily put up details of their assets on websites, it is for the president to take a decision on this matter. The PIO's reply was therefore correct.”

Information on query 3 of the RTI application was denied on the basis that it was protected under Article 74 of the Constitution of India. The PIO also stated that the issue whether exchanges between the president of India and the prime minister of India can be revealed under the RTI Act was the subject matter of a petition before the Delhi High Court.

However, since the PIO did not produce or submit any documents/records in support of this contention before the CIC, Mr Gandhi said it was not possible for the Commission to take cognizance of this. The Commission then reserved its order.

During the hearing on 15 June 2011, the Commission reiterated that Section 22 of the RTI Act gives supremacy to the RTI Act and stipulates that the provisions of the RTI Act shall override, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923, or any other enactment for the time being in force.

“Once an applicant seeks information, as defined in Section 2(f) of the RTI Act from a ‘public authority’, information can only be denied on the grounds mentioned in Sections 8 or 9 of the RTI Act. The Public Information Officer, Appellate Authority or the Information Commission cannot add or introduce any other reasons or grounds for rejecting the disclosure of information,” Mr Gandhi stated.

He said, “There is however one exception, to the aforesaid principle. Disclosure of information which is prohibited under the Constitution of India cannot be furnished under the RTI Act.”

In the instant case, the information sought under query 3 was denied by the PIO on the basis that it was protected under Article 74 of the Constitution of India.

Article 74 of the Constitution of India provides as follows:

“(1) There shall be a Council of Ministers with the Prime Minister at the head to aid and advise the President who shall, in the exercise of his functions, act in accordance with such advice.

Provided that the President may require the Council of Ministers to reconsider such advice, either generally or otherwise, and the President shall act in accordance with the advice tendered after such reconsideration.

(2) The question whether any, and if so what, advice was tendered by Ministers to the President shall not be inquired into in any court.” (Emphasis added)

For determining whether the information sought by the appellant at query 3 is barred from disclosure under Article 74 of the Constitution of India, Mr Gandhi said, the Commission would seek guidance from the pronouncements of the Supreme Court of India.

The Supreme Court of India in a nine-judge bench decision in SR Bommai & Ors Vs Union of India & Ors (AIR 1994 SC 1918) discussed the meaning and scope of Article 74 of the Constitution of India. Specifically, as regards Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court of India observed as follows:

“… Then comes Clause (2) of Article 74 which says that the question ‘whether any, and if so, what advice was tendered by the Ministers to the President shall not be enquired into in any Court.’ The idea behind Clause (2) is this: the Court is not to enquire—it is not concerned with—whether any advice was tendered by any Minister or Council of Ministers to the President, and if so, what was that advice. That is a matter between the President and his Council of Ministers. What advice was tendered, whether it was required to be reconsidered, what advice was tendered after reconsideration, if any, what was the opinion of the President, whether the advice was changed pursuant to further discussion, if any, and how the ultimate decision was arrived at, are all matters between the President and his Council of Ministers. They are beyond the ken of the Court. The Court is not to go into it. It is enough that there is an order/act of the President in appropriate form. It will take it as the order/act of the President. It is concerned only with the validity of the order and legality of the proceeding or action taken by the President in exercise of his functions and not with what happened in the inner Councils of the President and his Ministers. No one can challenge such decision or action on the ground that it is not in accordance with the advice tendered by the Ministers or that it is based on no advice. If, in a given case, the President acts without, or contrary to, the advice tendered to him, it may be a case warranting his impeachment, but so far as the Court is concerned, it is the act of the President…” (Emphasis added)

In the same case, it was argued before the Supreme Court inter alia that the advice tendered to the President comprised of material as well, and therefore, calling upon the Union of India to disclose the material would amount to compelling the disclosure of the advice. The Supreme Court ruled that that this obligation could not be evaded by seeking refuge under Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India. More specifically, the Supreme Court observed as follows:

“…The argument that the advice tendered to the President comprised of material as well, and therefore, calling upon the Union of India to disclose the material would amount to compelling the disclosure of the advice is, if we can say so respectfully, to indulge in sophistry. The material placed before the President by the Minister/Council of Ministers does not thereby become part of advice. Advice is what is based upon the said material. Material is not advice. The material may be placed before the President to acquaint him - and if need be to satisfy him - that the advice being tendered to him is the proper one. But it cannot mean that such material, by dint of being placed before the President in support of the advice, becomes advice itself. One can understand if the advice is tendered in writing in such a case that writing is the advice and is covered by the protection provided by Article 74(2). But it is difficult to appreciate how does the supporting material becomes part of advice. The respondents cannot say that whatever the President sees - or whatever is placed before the President becomes prohibited material and cannot be seen or summoned by the court. Article 74(2) must be interpreted and understood in the context of entire constitutional system. Undue emphasis and expansion of its parameters would engulf valuable constitutional guarantees…” (Emphasis added)

The Supreme Court, while interpreting the scope of Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India, clearly laid down in SR Bommai that Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India merely barred an enquiry into the question whether any, and if so, what advice was tendered by the council of ministers to the president. It did not bar the court from calling upon the council of ministers to disclose to the court the material upon which the President had formed the requisite satisfaction. The material on the basis of which advice was tendered did not become a part of the advice. Even if the material was looked into by, or shown, to the president, it did not partake the character of advice.

Mr Gandhi said, “Given that the advice tendered by the council of ministers to the president enjoys the Constitutional protection of Article 74(2) and cannot be disclosed to the courts, a citizen under the RTI Act cannot seek information pertaining to such advice. However, the Supreme Court has held that the materials on the basis of which such advice is tendered by the council of ministers or on the basis of which the president forms the requisite satisfaction is not covered by Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India. Since Article 74(2) does not cover such material, it can be accessed under the RTI Act, subject only to the exemptions under the RTI Act.”

In the instant case, complete and detailed information on all documents/ records/ deliberations/ correspondence/ file notings on declaration of internal emergency in the country by Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, the then president is not barred from disclosure under Article 74 of the Constitution of India; only the advice received by the then president from the then prime minister is protected from disclosure under Article 74(2) of the Constitution of India (in line with the ruling in SR Bommai) and therefore cannot be provided to the appellant under the RTI Act, the CIC said.

“In other words,” Mr Gandhi said, “...complete and detailed information on all documents/records/deliberations/correspondence/file notings, etc on declaration of internal emergency in the country by Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, the then president including communication received from Indira Gandhi, the then prime minister, but excluding the advice received from Indira Gandhi, the then prime minister, can be provided, subject to the provisions of the RTI Act.”

The RTI Act, which codifies the citizens’ fundamental right to information, has prescribed certain exemptions from disclosure of information in Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. It is clear that the underlying principle which prompted the Parliament to define the 10 exemptions in Section 8(1) of the RTI Act were to safeguard larger public interest as well as certain other interests. However, the parliament also perceived that the potential to harm such interests would be negligible after twenty years and therefore it stated that only three exemption clauses would apply after the lapse of twenty years. This has been clearly laid down in Section 8(3) of the RTI Act, which stipulates as follows:

“(3) Subject to the provisions of clauses (a), (c) and (i) of sub-section (1), any information relating to any occurrence, event or matter which has taken place, occurred or happened twenty years before the date on which any request is made under Section 6 shall be provided to any person making a request under that section:”

The CIC said, in the instant case, “…the information sought pertains to events that occurred over 30 years ago. Hence, only the exemptions contained in Sections 8 (1)(a), (c) and (i) of the RTI Act would apply. However, the PIO has not claimed any of the said exemptions while denying the information under the RTI Act. However, even if it was to be argued that the information sought was exempted under Sections 8 (1)(a), (c) or (i) of the RTI Act, Section 8(2) of the RTI Act would mandate disclosure of the information.”

Section 8(2) of the RTI Act mandates as follows:

“Notwithstanding anything in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923) nor any of the exemptions permissible in accordance with sub-section (1), a public authority may allow access to information, if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests.”

Mr Gandhi noted that the period of Emergency is considered to be the biggest challenge to India’s commitment to democracy. “This period was symbolized by curtailment of fundamental rights of citizens, restrictions on freedom of press, illegal detention and abuse of citizens and enactment of draconian laws. Most institutions of governance when asked to bend, prostrated themselves and crawled. This showed that the institutions of democracy had not become robust enough to withstand an assault. Given the same, it is imperative for citizens to know the reasons why and how democracy in India was nearly lost,” the Commission said.

While allowing the appeal, the CIC the directed the PIO to provide the complete and detailed information on all documents/ records/ deliberations/ correspondence/ file notings, etc on declaration of internal emergency in the country by Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, the then president, including communication received from Indira Gandhi, the then prime minister, except any advice received from Ms Gandhi, the then Prime Minister before 10 July 2011.

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000287/SG/12889
http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SM_A_2011_000287_SG_12889_M_58598.pdf
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000287/SG

Appellant : Subhash Chandra Agrawal,
Delhi- 110006

Respondent : CPIO & Under Secretary,
President's Secretariat, RTI Section,
Rashtrapati Bhavan,
New Delhi- 110004

]]> Sajib Nandi http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113407-rti-court-decision-rti-judgement-series-disclose-documents-related-declaration-emergency.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113394-rti-activism-tamil-nadu-rti-petition-digs-out-30-year-old-proposal.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:54:32 GMT Reported by Deccanchronicle.com on Jun 18, 2013 RTI petition digs out 30-year-old proposal | Deccan Chronicle (http://www.deccanchronicle.com/130618/news-current-affairs/article/rti-petition-digs-out-30-year-old-proposal) *Chennai: *Sometimes it probably requires an RTI activist to clear the dust on pending files. And in this case, the officials started working on a proposal that they ought to have done 30 years ago. RTI activist V. Gopala*krishnan from M.G.R. Nagar in the city, who has been trying to trace vanished parks, playground and a community hall at Jafferkhanpet in south Chennai, had initially filed an RTI before the city corporation seeking to know about the status of the OSR (open space reservation) land at Sathya*murthy block in west Jafferkhanpet. Annoyed by the response that the land was not yet handed over to the corporation by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB), he filed another RTI with the housing board. To his shock, he found that the land ought to have been given to the corporation about 30 years back. But only now TNHB had submitted the proposal to hand over the land to the board for approval. “Only after receiving the complaint from me, TNHB realised its duty that it had not done for 30 years,” Gopalakri*shnan said. The OSR land must be provided to the corporation to build playgrounds. “Our area lacks playground and, hence, we can find people from various areas thronging the Sivan park at K.K. Nagar, which has been providing relief,” he said. Similarly, the Sathya*mu*rthy block also remains devoid of religious centres and community halls, which are specified in the plan layout of the block, he added. Nowadays, residential buildings occupy places meant for community halls and other centres, Gopalakrishnan pointed out. Reported by Deccanchronicle.com on Jun 18, 2013
RTI petition digs out 30-year-old proposal | Deccan Chronicle

Chennai: Sometimes it probably requires an RTI activist to clear the dust on pending files. And in this case, the officials started working on a proposal that they ought to have done 30 years ago.

RTI activist V. Gopala*krishnan from M.G.R. Nagar in the city, who has been trying to trace vanished parks, playground and a community hall at Jafferkhanpet in south Chennai, had initially filed an RTI before the city corporation seeking to know about the status of the OSR (open space reservation) land at Sathya*murthy block in west Jafferkhanpet.

Annoyed by the response that the land was not yet handed over to the corporation by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB), he filed another RTI with the housing board. To his shock, he found that the land ought to have been given to the corporation about 30 years back. But only now TNHB had submitted the proposal to hand over the land to the board for approval.

“Only after receiving the complaint from me, TNHB realised its duty that it had not done for 30 years,” Gopalakri*shnan said. The OSR land must be provided to the corporation to build playgrounds. “Our area lacks playground and, hence, we can find people from various areas thronging the Sivan park at K.K. Nagar, which has been providing relief,” he said.

Similarly, the Sathya*mu*rthy block also remains devoid of religious centres and community halls, which are specified in the plan layout of the block, he added. Nowadays, residential buildings occupy places meant for community halls and other centres, Gopalakrishnan pointed out.

]]> Sajib Nandi http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113394-rti-activism-tamil-nadu-rti-petition-digs-out-30-year-old-proposal.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113393-rti-activism-gujarat-govt-shielding-bokhiria-company.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:52:25 GMT Reported by Roxy Jagdekar in dnaindia.com on June 18, 2013
Was Gujarat govt shielding Bokhiria and company? - Ahmedabad - DNA

Was Gujarat govt shielding Bokhiria and company?

State's mining department was forthcoming with information about mining in all districts, but remained silent in case of Porbandar

What makes the state government keep Porbandar’s mining discrepancies under wraps? What is it afraid of divulging? While replying to dna’s RTI application on the total revenue lost by state due to illegal mining, or the registered cases of illegal mining and penalty collected, etc, state’s geology and mining department gave figures of all the districts, barring Porbandar.

Call it a systematic effort to hide (or at least tone down), the BJP government had been hiding exact details of mining thefts related to Porbandar since the last decade. Are the efforts directed towards shielding the mining mafia prevalent there including BJP leaders like Babu Bokhiria, is what comes to the mind.

First, the RTI application filed in May 2012, remained unanswered for over 13 months. Then, while replying to the application’s query on the FIRs filled between 2002 and 2012, the department failed to mention details of the FIR registered against Babu Bokhiria in the year 2006. However, it did provide facts of all other districts like Junagadh, Amreli, Banaskantha, Sabarkantha and Jamnagar – which have substantial illegal mining activities prevalent in their respective areas.

Talking to dna, commissioner, geology and mining department, Gujarat state, T Natarajan said that he wasn’t aware of the application and will find out the status and see that the statistics are provided against the RTI application. There are over 28 RTI applications filed by an RTI activist in Porbandar. The activist had gone for appeal in 12 applications out of the 28 and, in each application, he had asked for details of the mining discrepancies in Porbandar.

It is worth mentioning that if an applicant is not satisfied with the information provided by any government department, he or she can appeal against the decision.

The activist, who is at present facing threat to his life from mining mafias in Porbandar, told dna on condition of anonymity that when the department refused to give him the details he, along with his team members, conducted a survey of the district to get the details of illegal mining themselves.

“According to my primary estimate, there are 300 illegal mines of limestone and 800 illegal mines of building stones, while around 1,800 other small and big mines are operating across the state,” the activist confided to dna.





]]> akhilesh yadav http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113393-rti-activism-gujarat-govt-shielding-bokhiria-company.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113390-rti-fine-chhattisgarh-23-a.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:42:58 GMT Reported by navabharat.org on June 18, 2013
Navabharat Press -

निगम के आरटीआई अधिकारियों पर 23 हजार का जुर्माना

रायपुर. सूचना का अधिकार (आरटीआई) के तहत तीन अलग-अलग प्रकरणों में सूचना मांगने वाले आवेदक को निगम के अधिकारियों ने एकबार फिर जानकारी नहीं दी. इसके चलते मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त सरजियस मिंज और सुनील तिवारी ने निगम के सूचना अधिकारी पर 23 हजार रुपये का अर्थदंड व अनुशासनात्मक कार्रवाई का आदेश दे दिया. छत्तीसगढ़ आरटीआई एक्टिविस्ट एसोसिएशन के अध्यक्ष संजय सिंह ठाकुर ने बताया यह आवेदन उन्होंने निगम में लगाया था. इस पर उन्हें तीन बार जानकारी नहीं दी गई. इसीलिए उक्त दंड के अलावा सूचना आयुक्तों ने निगम को उन्हें क्षतिपूर्ति के लिये 1 हजार रुपये देने का आदेश दिया. श्री ठाकुर ने बताया कि नगर निगम द्वारा मच्छर उन्मूलन हेतु डीडीटी, पोटाश तथा सभी कीटनाशकों की सूची व खरीदी हेतु जारी वर्कआॅर्डर एवं अनुबंध की जानकारी उन्हें नहीं दी. इसी के साथ उक्त कार्य के लिये वर्ष 2010-11 व 2011-12 में कुल स्वीकृत बजट व वास्तविक खर्चे का ब्यौरा भी मांगा वह भी नहीं मिला. इसी प्रकार निगम के नवीन मुख्यालय भवन की जमीन किस विभाग की थी, उसका डायवर्सन कब हुआ था, वित्त विभाग से कितनी राशि की स्वीकृति मिली थी एवं स्वीकृत नक्शे की फोटोकॉपी मांगी गई इसे देने में जनसूचना अधिकारी अक्षम साबित हुआ. इस पर मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त ने जनसूचना अधिकारी प्रीतम मिश्रा के विरुद्ध अनुशासनात्मक कार्रवाई का आदेश दे दिया. इस मामले में डॉ. मिश्रा ने कहा कि जिस समय आवेदन लगा था, वे सूचना अधिकारी नहीं थे. इस पर वे आयोग के समक्ष अपनी स्थिति स्पष्ट करेंगे.

]]> akhilesh yadav http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113390-rti-fine-chhattisgarh-23-a.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113389-rti-happenings-237-a.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 03:30:31 GMT Reported by Piyush Pandey in amarujala.com on June 18, 2013
Supreme Court administration refuses to answer in Hindi - ??????? ????? ??????? ?? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ????? - Amar Ujala

सुप्रीम कोर्ट प्रशासन का हिंदी में जवाब देने से इंकार


सूचना के अधिकार के तहत शारीरिक तौर पर अक्षम व्यक्तियों के हित में पूछे गए कुछ सवालों का जवाब हिंदी में देने से सुप्रीम कोर्ट प्रशासन ने इंकार कर दिया है।

मुख्य जन सूचना अधिकारी (सीपीआईओ) ने राजभाषा में जवाब न देते हुए कहा है कि सर्वोच्च अदालत के कार्यालय की भाषा अंग्रेजी है।

उन्होंने अदालत के नियमों और संविधान के अनुच्छेद 348 का हवाला भी दिया है।

जबकि आरटीआई एक्ट के तहत सूचनाएं अंग्रेजी और हिंदी, दोनों ही भाषाओं में मांगी जा सकती है।

इसके अलावा हाल ही में शीर्षस्थ अदालत ने ही एक मामले में स्पष्ट किया था कि भाषा आधारित दक्षता न होने पर आम जनता को किसी राज्य में परेशानी नहीं होनी चाहिए।

आवेदन, अपील या पेशकश हिंदी-अंग्रेजी में कर सकते हैं।

उत्तर प्रदेश के हापुड़ निवासी सामाजिक कार्यकर्ता विकास शर्मा की ओर से सुप्रीम कोर्ट से विकलांग लोगों के संबंध में सरकार, विभागों को अदालत की ओर से दिए गए सुझावों, आदेश व निर्णय की मांग की गई थी।

आरटीआई में पांच सवाल किए गए थे, जिनके जवाब हिंदी में दिए जाने की मांग करते हुए यह भी पूछा गया था कि सर्वोच्च अदालत में बतौर न्यायाधीश, प्रशासनिक कार्यालय व आदि पदों पर कितने विकलांग लोग कार्यरत हैं।

जवाब में अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार व सीपीआईओ ने हिंदी में जवाब न देते हुए स्पष्ट किया कि शीर्षस्थ अदालत के कार्यालय की भाषा अंग्रेजी है।

अंग्रेजी में पहले और दूसरे सवाल के जवाब देते हुए सीपीआईओ ने सूचनाएं एकत्रित न किए जाने, तीसरे व चौथे को अपने अधिकार क्षेत्र से बाहर करार दिया है। जबकि पांचवें सवाल का कोई जवाब ही नहीं दिया गया है।

आरटीआई कार्यकर्ता के मुताबिक सर्वोच्च अदालत प्रशासन सूचना के अधिकार के तहत पूछे गए सवाल का जवाब देने से इंकार नहीं कर सकता क्योंकि आरटीआई एक्ट में लोक प्राधिकरणों एवं जन सूचना अधिकारियों को इस संबंध में स्पष्ट निर्देश दिया गया है।

ऐसे में हिंदी में जवाब देने से सीपीआईओ इंकार नहीं कर सकते। उन्होंने कहा कि अदालत के कार्य की भाषा अंग्रेजी है। लेकिन सीपीआईओ तो आरटीआई अधिनियम के मुताबिक मांगी गई सूचनाओं का जवाब देंगे, न कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट के नियमों के तहत जवाब देंगे।

शर्मा ने कहा कि वह सुप्रीम कोर्ट सीपीआईओ के जवाब के खिलाफ अपील करेंगे।

पिछले महीने मई में सर्वोच्च अदालत ने एक महत्वपूर्ण फैसला जारी कर एक नौसेना कर्मचारी की ओर से हिंदी में दस्तावेज उपलब्ध कराने की मांग को सही ठहराते हुए बांबे हाईकोर्ट के फैसले को दरकिनार कर दिया था।





]]> akhilesh yadav http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113389-rti-happenings-237-a.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113384-rti-activism-maharashtra-631-teachers-posts-vacant-government-schools-rti.html Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:37:54 GMT Reported by Timesofindia.indiatimes.com on Jun 18, 2013
631 teachers' posts vacant in government schools: RTI - The Times of India

MUMBAI: There are 631 vacant posts of teachers in government aided schools in the city, a Right To Information (RTI) query has revealed.

This has raised questions about the state education department's claims of maintaining a good teacher-student ratio. According to the Right to Education (RTE) Act, teacher-student ratio should be 1:30 for lower classes (I-V) and 1:35 for higher classes (VI-VIII).

"There are many schools where students are suffering because of lack of teachers and the government has not looked into this problem yet. RTE guidelines need to be followed well or the entire purpose of the Act will fail," said Chetan Pednekar, an activist. He has received information from education officers in the western suburbs, south and central Mumbai. It shows that many schools don't even have a principal.

State education minister Rajendra Darda said the education department has recently approved teachers to many schools across the state. "We have had problems hiring maths and science teachers but the problem will be solved shortly. We have ensured that each school has the right number of teachers."

]]> Sajib Nandi http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113384-rti-activism-maharashtra-631-teachers-posts-vacant-government-schools-rti.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113381-rti-happenings-maharashtra-mahim-building-collapse-advocate-rizwan-merchant-use-rti-get-info-against-bmc.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 21:14:59 GMT Reported by Mustafa Plumber in Dnaindia.com on Jun 18, 2013
Mahim building collapse: Advocate Rizwan Merchant to use RTI to get info against BMC - Mumbai - DNA

Merchant had complained about the damages and alterations in Aftab Manzil by alleged owners of the building, in connivance with the car dealer, who had a shop on the ground floor.

Advocate Rizwan Merchant, who lost three of his family members in the Mahim building collapse on June 10, plans to make use of Right to Information (RTI) Act to dig out information from the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), which could be used against it, to prove that the civic body did not act on his complaints.

Merchant had complained about the damages and alterations in Aftab Manzil by alleged owners of the building, in connivance with the car dealer, who had a shop on the ground floor.

Merchant, on June 15, lodged a first information report (FIR) against several persons including the BMC for acting in a negligent manner. He was also informed by the BMC that they have not received his complaints.

Merchant said, "The RTI is the most powerful tool in the hands of the public to get through the obstacles in getting information from government offices, and I will use it for getting all sors of information that will help build my case against the perpetrators.”

Merchant had sent complaints to the BMC in 2008 and again in 2012, highlighting the danger to the building because of alterations carried out by Sandeep Bafna, the owner of the car showroom, after the approval of the owners of the property.

“I had personally visited the Assistant Municipal Commissioner, one Mr Pai, with my complaint and then another officer, Mr Rane, had visited our building but gave a report indicating that there were no illegal alterations/constructions going on," he said.

"By filing RTI applications, I hope to get all the correspondence and reports filed on my complaints and if I don’t get any response then the provision of appeals against higher authorities will ensure that the BMC officials responsible for their callous approach are booked or fined," Merchant added.

Merchant has also claimed that he will take up this case as a mission to ensure that no such incident takes place in Mumbai.

“I don’t want any son to face the situation where he has to remove his mother's body from the rubble. I want justice for everyone and not only for me or the residents of Aftab Manzil," he added.

]]> Sajib Nandi http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113381-rti-happenings-maharashtra-mahim-building-collapse-advocate-rizwan-merchant-use-rti-get-info-against-bmc.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113380-rti-point-view-india-information-power.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 21:09:31 GMT By Humanrights.asia on June 17, 2013
INDIA: Information is power

There is an ongoing debate about the Right to Information (RTI) Act in India, and the proposed amendments to the scope and extent of that legislation. It is tempting to express one's sentiments for or against it but the RTI debate is a layered discussion, which requires sensitivity to the nuances it involves. To break it down into its simplest form, there is disagreement over what and how much information the public has a right to receive. This in turn has a bearing on the agents responsible for giving the relevant information up. The RTI debate is intriguing because it is not just a debate about information; it is a debate about power.

The RTI Act is a mechanism to ensure citizens' access to information. As it stands, the RTI Act fulfils an important function of narrowing the information gap between the public and its leadership. The Central Information Commission (CIC) has recently made a move to push for inclusion of political parties in the RTI Act, which has been met with criticisms citing conflict with the role and rights of a political party in a democratic system. Yet, it is imperative to adopt a more macro perspective about the political landscape and not be myopic about the effects of such an amendment to the RTI Act.

Thomas Jefferson remarked, "information is the currency of democracy", an observation which is particularly apt in this debate. Is an informed citizenry not a fundamental tenet of a democratic system? If it is, then the provision of information on public authorities and other political parties can be argued to be equally essential because they have a shared influence on public opinion and the discourse involved in policy formulation. The conversations and lobbying by other political parties and interest groups have a significant effect on the decisions involved in policy formulation, which in turn affects lives of ordinary citizens. If the government is expected to be transparent, it is intuitive to expect the same of other political institutions whose activities have the same end, particularly those who are "substantially financed by the Central government... [and] control vital organs of the State."

The existing information gap has done an excellent job of maintaining a power imbalance in Indian society today, reserving room for the government and other institutions to manipulate the citizenry through illegitimate means. Coercive techniques such as torture are but one example. Thus, the debate calls upon a much larger question about the legitimacy of the Indian government and it is logical to consider how the RTI Act and the CIC's push for greater inclusion feed into that.

India may be labeled as the world's largest democracy, but the magnitude of corruption in the country is also common knowledge. Since the legitimacy of the state hinges on the public's trust in the system and the people involved in the management of that system, it is critical for reform to be a top-down initiative. This approach is preferred because it will (1) be more strategic and coordinated than having a collection of individual efforts at state or provincial level; (2) communicate the state's commitment at tackling the problem of corruption, both internally and in other institutions relevant to protecting the constitutional rights that citizens are entitled to; (3) draws on the authority that the leadership possesses, of which has been granted by the people. In a more abstract sense, it is a reconciliation of the state's political outcomes with social outcomes, and that should not be perceived or treated as a trade-off.

It is now appropriate to add a word of caution, because the position advocated in this argument is not that the RTI Act can or will solve all of India's problems. Rather, it is an input to ensure that transparency is an instrument that is upheld in the governance of India as a democracy, which necessitates a closer look at the value it brings to the people and not just the costs borne by other parties. It is definitely necessary for the RTI Act to run in-tandem with other instruments or tactics to ensure that the overall strategy will fulfill the long-term goal of democratic growth in India.

For the ordinary citizen to form a value judgment with the help of the RTI Act and the proposed expansion, it is important to ensure that the RTI does not create another loophole and reset the reform process. The CIC has proposed to include political parties in the RTI Act, which necessitates the following to be addressed clearly and comprehensively: (1) conditions to classify an organisation as a political party; (2) procedures for registration of a political party; (3) safeguards to ensure that proper documentation of a political party is in place, for which evasion of registration can be detected and the organisation in question possibly penalised; (4) the exact provisions of the RTI Act that a political party is legally bound to adhere to.

To date, there is a lack of enforcement on the registration of political parties in India, and absence of such a mechanism is a loophole, which could jeopardise what the RTI is set out to achieve. Creating more regulations for the activities of political parties without a system to ensure that the relevant organisations register themselves creates the perfect disincentive for these organisations in reporting their activities as a political party, and work their way around the system. It is important to consider the factors laid out above and more, for the RTI Act to meet its intended objectives. Otherwise, with its current organisation of power, India could remain the largest democracy, but perhaps never the greatest.

]]> Sajib Nandi http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113380-rti-point-view-india-information-power.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113378-rti-improvement-new-delhi-govt-extends-online-rti-facility-president-secretariat-mea.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 16:12:12 GMT Reported by Thehindu.com on June 17, 2013
Govt extends online RTI facility to President secretariat, MEA | The Hindu

Moving further towards greater transparency in governance, the government has extended the facility of e-filing of RTI applications to President and Vice-President’s secretariat, and Foreign Ministry among others.

Citizens will also be able to seek information online from ministries of Food Processing Industries, Health & Family Welfare, Home Affairs, Information & Broadcasting and Road Transport & Highways by exercising their Right to Information.

The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), which acts as nodal ministry for implementation of Right to Information Act, has launched a website -- www.rtionline.gov.in -- to facilitate e-filing of applications and payment of fees.

As a pilot project, the facility was restricted to DoPT only but late last month it was extended to Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries and Department of Consumer Affairs and Department of Food and Public Distribution.

Now it has been extended to other public authorities like Department of Agricultural Research & Education, Department of Chemicals & Petrochemicals, Department of Commerce, Department of Disinvestment, Department of Public Enterprises and Ministry of Culture also, a DoPT official said.

The Centre’s flagship Right to Information Act, which was enacted in 2005, mandates timely response -- within 30 days -- to citizen requests for government information. One has to pay a fee of Rs 10 for seeking information.

The government plans to extend e-filing of RTI applications to all central ministries or departments through the website.

At present, the text of an application that can be uploaded at the prescribed column (on the website while filing application) is limited to 500 words only. In case, an application contains more than 500 words, then it can be uploaded as an attachment.

The initiative for filing of RTI pleas through electronic mode is getting good response from information seekers.

However, the department has asked people not to file information related to state governments.

“Please do not file RTI applications through this portal for the public authorities under the state governments, including government of National Capital territory of Delhi. If filed, the application would be returned, without refund of amount,” said a note put up on the website.

]]> Sajib Nandi http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113378-rti-improvement-new-delhi-govt-extends-online-rti-facility-president-secretariat-mea.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113376-rti-happenings-up-rti-flies-face-tight-lipped-officials.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:20:05 GMT Reported by Gulam Jeelani in hindustantimes.com on June 17, 2013

RTI flies in the face of ‘tight-lipped’ officials


If you think that the Right to Information Act (RTI) has secured access to information under the control of public authorities, try filing a query with the district administration.

In Lucknow, the officials, it appears, are still to come to terms with the idea of sharing information with the citizenry. In May, the administration received nearly 40 applications, all concerning arms license. After mulling the queries for over a fortnight, the officials in the arms section of the collectorate either rejected the applications, saying that the information was either unavailable or never gathered in the context in which it was sought or asked the applicants to come and collect the information themselves.

To cite an example, advocate US Tiwari asked the administration how many arms licenses were issued since independence till May 2013. Another applicant Avneesh Dixit, also an advocate, wanted to know about the total members of the rifle club and the total amount of money deposited in the account of the rifle club-sought from the members. The existing district magistrate has initiated submission of a premium amount ranging between Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 35,000 from any rifle owner seeking a license. The money was supposed to be used for the revival of the rifle club, which is still to see the light of the day.

Clearly, these queries concern public interest. But in reply, the administration told the first applicant that the information was not available and in the second case, the excuse was that rifle club account was not audited.

“An applicant Ghanshyam Tiwari had on May 29, asked how many criminals were given licenses while another Delhi-based applicant wanted to know how many licenses were issued by the collectorate on recommendations of ministers and other powerful persons,” an arms clerk said. He admitted that it was not possible to reply to such queries.

Puzzled with the sudden surge in RTI queries, particularly related to arms license procurement, the officials have even conveyed their inability to respond to higher authorities. They are of the opinion that those who are not issued licenses by the district administration are deliberately filing these ‘vexatious’ RTI applications to harass the employees.

“It is being done deliberately after the norms of issuing licenses were scrutinised. That is why some applications ask directly about district magistrate Anurag Yadav,” a clerk said. “We are five people here. What should we do, collect the data sought under RTI, or do our routine work?” he asked.

It is pertinent to mention here that in the absence of a provision in the Act banning applications which neither concern the public nor advocate any change, it is at the discretion of the public information officer concerned as to how to treat these applications.

“The Act makes information officers liable to answer every application (under Sec 20[1] and Sec 20[2]), however absurd it may be,” said Gyanendra Sharma, former information commissioner at the UP State Information Commission.

Source: RTI flies in the face of



]]> akhilesh yadav http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113376-rti-happenings-up-rti-flies-face-tight-lipped-officials.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113375-rti-happenings-sewerage-water-supply-improvement-trust-fails-recover-user-charges.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:08:03 GMT *Sewerage water supply; **Improvement trust fails to recover user charges * As reported by Kuldip Bhatia in The Tribune on dated 17 June 2013 Source : http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20130617/ldh1.htm#1 The fund starved Ludhiana Improvement Trust (LIT) has failed to recover water and sewerage charges from residents. This despite the fact that the Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board has threatened the LIT to snap connections in several colonies due to the non-payment of maintenance charges. The LIT has also failed to check illegal water and sewerage connections. Information obtained under the Right to Information Act by Rohit Sabharwal and Arvind Sharma, president an secretary of the Council of RTI Activists, revealed that the LIT was to recover Rs 47.32 lakh from residents of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Colony. In a reply to the RTI application, the LIT stated that arrears of water supply and sewerage in blocks C, D, E and F in Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar till March 2013 were to the tune of Rs 30,53,195. Further, Rs 13,61,288 was outstanding as user charges against residents of six-storeyed Housefed Flats in the E Block of the colony. Residents of Kabir House Building Society in the F Block of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar are yet to pay Rs 3,18,042 to the LIT. As many as 92 illegal water and sewerage connections are operational for last several years in the D, E, F, G and H Blocks as well as in the commercial pocket of the colony causing huge financial loss to the Trust. The LIT evaded a part of the information on fixing the responsibility of the staff for the non-recovery of user charges saying that the officials were transferred on regular intervals. It lao failed to provide copies of the notices served on residents having illegal water and sewerage connections. LIT officials asserted that notices were served on the defaulting residents and follow-up action was being taken. Sources in the Trust, however, said the officials were not keen to act against the defaulters since the colony would be handed over to the municipal corporation for maintenance. Sewerage water supply; Improvement trust fails to recover user charges

As reported by Kuldip Bhatia in The Tribune on dated 17 June 2013
Source : http://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20130617/ldh1.htm#1

The fund starved Ludhiana Improvement Trust (LIT) has failed to recover water and sewerage charges from residents. This despite the fact that the Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board has threatened the LIT to snap connections in several colonies due to the non-payment of maintenance charges. The LIT has also failed to check illegal water and sewerage connections.

Information obtained under the Right to Information Act by Rohit Sabharwal and Arvind Sharma, president an secretary of the Council of RTI Activists, revealed that the LIT was to recover Rs 47.32 lakh from residents of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Colony.

In a reply to the RTI application, the LIT stated that arrears of water supply and sewerage in blocks C, D, E and F in Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar till March 2013 were to the tune of Rs 30,53,195. Further, Rs 13,61,288 was outstanding as user charges against residents of six-storeyed Housefed Flats in the E Block of the colony. Residents of Kabir House Building Society in the F Block of Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar are yet to pay Rs 3,18,042 to the LIT.

As many as 92 illegal water and sewerage connections are operational for last several years in the D, E, F, G and H Blocks as well as in the commercial pocket of the colony causing huge financial loss to the Trust.

The LIT evaded a part of the information on fixing the responsibility of the staff for the non-recovery of user charges saying that the officials were transferred on regular intervals. It lao failed to provide copies of the notices served on residents having illegal water and sewerage connections.

LIT officials asserted that notices were served on the defaulting residents and follow-up action was being taken.

Sources in the Trust, however, said the officials were not keen to act against the defaulters since the colony would be handed over to the municipal corporation for maintenance.

]]> sabharwal786 http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113375-rti-happenings-sewerage-water-supply-improvement-trust-fails-recover-user-charges.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113354-rti-court-decision-tn-internal-functions-judiciary-will-not-come-under-rti.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 02:41:37 GMT *“Internal functions of judiciary will not come under RTI”* Reported by R sivaraman in thehindu.com on June 17, 2013 http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/internal-functions-of-judiciary-will-not-come-under-rti/article4821726.ece In an order of far-reaching import, the Madras High Court has ruled that internal deliberations of judges relating to administration of judiciary cannot be disclosed to any information seeker under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. It also said the supply of such information under the purview of the RTI would definitely interfere with the proper discharge of the High Court’s role as an independent authority under the Constitution of India. Disposing of an appeal against the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission (TNSIC)’s order, the Division Bench comprising Justices Elipe Dharma Rao and M.Venugopal also stated: “Notes, jottings, administrative letters, internal deliberation and discussions on the administrative side of the High Court cannot be brought under the Right to Information Act 2005.” Originally, R.M.Subramanian of Pudukottai instituted a civil case on a property dispute against the Revenue administration before a civil court in Thirumayam. Though the sub-ordinate court passed an order in his favour, it could not initiate criminal proceedings against the authorities for non-execution of its order. The matter was referred to the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. The High Court, on the administrative side, took a view that the subject was not a fit case for initiating contempt proceedings. Mr Subramanian then sought copies of minutes recorded by Chief Justice and the High Court Judge in charge of the district. *Appeal* *As his request was declined, he preferred the appeal before the TNSIC.* *He contended that though he was permitted to peruse the records, he was not furnished with copies. The TNSIC, in its order, advised him to obtain the copies by filing an application in the High Court.* *Challenging the TNSIC order, the Registrar General (RG) filed the present writ petition as decided by a committee of judges.* “Internal functions of judiciary will not come under RTI”

Reported by R sivaraman in thehindu.com on June 17, 2013
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper...cle4821726.ece

In an order of far-reaching import, the Madras High Court has ruled that internal deliberations of judges relating to administration of judiciary cannot be disclosed to any information seeker under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
It also said the supply of such information under the purview of the RTI would definitely interfere with the proper discharge of the High Court’s role as an independent authority under the Constitution of India.
Disposing of an appeal against the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission (TNSIC)’s order, the Division Bench comprising Justices Elipe Dharma Rao and M.Venugopal also stated: “Notes, jottings, administrative letters, internal deliberation and discussions on the administrative side of the High Court cannot be brought under the Right to Information Act 2005.”
Originally, R.M.Subramanian of Pudukottai instituted a civil case on a property dispute against the Revenue administration before a civil court in Thirumayam.
Though the sub-ordinate court passed an order in his favour, it could not initiate criminal proceedings against the authorities for non-execution of its order.
The matter was referred to the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.
The High Court, on the administrative side, took a view that the subject was not a fit case for initiating contempt proceedings.
Mr Subramanian then sought copies of minutes recorded by Chief Justice and the High Court Judge in charge of the district.
Appeal
As his request was declined, he preferred the appeal before the TNSIC.
He contended that though he was permitted to peruse the records, he was not furnished with copies. The TNSIC, in its order, advised him to obtain the copies by filing an application in the High Court.
Challenging the TNSIC order, the Registrar General (RG) filed the present writ petition as decided by a committee of judges.

]]> akhilesh yadav http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113354-rti-court-decision-tn-internal-functions-judiciary-will-not-come-under-rti.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113353-rti-court-decision-new-delhi-cic-asks-ntro-reveal-ex-employee-s-appraisal-reports.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 02:37:54 GMT CIC asks NTRO to reveal ex-employee’s appraisal reports

Reported by Himanshi Dhawan in timesofindia.indiatimes.com on June 17, 2013
CIC asks NTRO to reveal ex-employee’s appraisal reports - The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a rare exception, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has asked National Technical Research Organization (NTRO) to disclose the annual appraisal report of an ex-employee. The technical intelligence agency is exempt from RTI except in cases of human rights violation and corruption.

The applicant, Odisha-based Subhendushree Routroy, had sought his annual performance appraisal reports for 2008, 2009 and 2010. He was sacked from NTRO and he argued that access to his annual appraisal reports was a human rights issue. The argument was upheld by the commission.

In his order, chief information commission Satyananda Mishra said, "Termination from service has created survival problems for him (Routroy). In this background, his need to have access to his own performance appraisal reports becomes very important and relevant as it would give him an idea of how the authorities rated his performance and whether he would have any opportunity of ever getting employment in any similar institution in future. In some sense, the denial of this information to him may result in the violation of his human rights, that is, the right to live and survive.''

Routroy had asked for his reports citing a Supreme Court decision. He said access would improve his chances for future employment. NTRO had denied the information on the grounds that although the appellant had the right to get copies of his appraisal reports according to the SC decision, he had no such right under the RTI Act since NTRO was included in the second schedule of the Act. Agencies that are part of the second schedule are exempt from the RTI Act except in cases of corruption or human rights violation.

Section 25 of the Act says, "Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to the intelligence and security organizations specified in the second schedule being organizations established by the central government or any information furnished by such organizations to that government provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section.'' It also lays down the condition that in case the information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the CIC within 45 days.

The commission has asked the agency to give the information within 10 working days.

]]> akhilesh yadav http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113353-rti-court-decision-new-delhi-cic-asks-ntro-reveal-ex-employee-s-appraisal-reports.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113352-rti-court-decision-new-delhi-trace-records-death-commutation-cic.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 02:36:10 GMT Reported by Deccanherald.com on 17 June 2013
Trace records of death commutation: CIC

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has asked the government to trace records of death convicts whose sentence has been commuted to life term by the President since 1970 in order to disclose the details under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The CIC rejected the government plea that it could not furnish the details as records were available from 1981 onwards. The commission said the government should trace the records as information is disclosable and records are not that old. Information Commissioner Sushma Singh directed the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to provide details to Narinder, a life convict, who is lodged in the Agra central jail for the last 17 years.

Narinder filed an RTI application in the President’s secretariat seeking the list of convicts in whose case death penalty had been commuted to life imprisonment after consideration of their mercy petitions by the President since 1970 and sought the copies of such orders.

The President’s secretariat transferred the application to the MHA, which in turn replied that details of the cases were available from 1981 onwards. It further said the information could be provided on payment of Rs 22 for photocopy charges.

Narinder challenged the decision of the MHA given to the chief public information officer (CPIO), appellate authority, contending that complete details should be provided to him free of cost. The CPIO did not allow his plea stating that only those applicants holding a BPL card were provided information free of cost.

When the matter reached the CIC, the applicant agreed to pay the required fees but insisted on being provided information from 1970.

The commission allowed his plea and rejected the CPIO argument. “The information requested by the appellant is disclosable information. Moreover, the records are not so old that they cannot be traced,” it said.

]]> Sajib Nandi http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113352-rti-court-decision-new-delhi-trace-records-death-commutation-cic.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113350-rti-happenings-cong-attacks-mp-cm-over-rti-information-issue.html Mon, 17 Jun 2013 02:31:30 GMT Cong attacks MP CM over RTI information issue

Reported by zeenews.india.com on June 17, 2013
Cong attacks MP CM over RTI information issue

Bhopal: Opposition Congress today alleged that state Public Works Department officials were refusing to divulge information under RTI Act pertaining to Madhya Pradesh chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan and his kin as they had been directed against doing so.

In a statement here, Congress's leader of Opposition in MP Assembly, Ajay Singh, also alleged that Chouhan had caused a file to disappear which was related to Aditya Construction company, reportedly registered under the name of Chouhan's brother, Rohit Singh Chouhan.

Singh said that when an applicant sought information about Aditya Construction under RTI Act, the PWD department, in a written reply dated May 31, 2013, told him that no such contractor was registered with them.

But when the same information was sought earlier by Congress MLA Purshottam Dangi, PWD had in a reply dated March 17, 2012, said that Aditya Construction was owned by Rohit Singh Chouhan and registered with the department as an 'A-3' category contractor.

The category was later changed to 'A-4' and then to 'A-5', Singh added. Singh said that the inconsistency in information provided by PWD about the same entity needed an explanation.

Singh demanded action against those involved in the file's disappearance and also asked the CM to provide correct information under the RTI Act, failing which he threatened to take legal action.

]]> akhilesh yadav http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/113350-rti-happenings-cong-attacks-mp-cm-over-rti-information-issue.html