• karira's Avatar
    18 Hours Ago
    Sorry, missed them earlier. Will upload them later today.
    4 replies | 227 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    18 Hours Ago
    karira replied to a thread RTI Point of View: Can every SHO be SPIO under the RTI Act 2005 in RTI in Media
    Give examples of other States where the SHO of each police station is a PIO. Or even the Income Tax department, where each AO (ITO or AC) is the PIO for that ward/circle.
    3 replies | 246 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    18 Hours Ago
    The previous CAG had also demanded the same right: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/56910-cags-right-information-weak.html Earlier, CAG had requested the Lok Sabha Secretariat to exempt its report on Cola Block allocation, from the purview of RTI Act 2005: https://www.rtiindia.org/forum/114414-new-delhi-howzzat-cag-seeks-exemption-rti.html
    2 replies | 109 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    My experience is that whenever there is a "fire" reported in ANY government office, the most likely cause is the need to destroy some records. If you check, most big scams in the country, have had records destroyed by fire somewhere.
    17 replies | 541 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    Please also read some of the threads in the following search results: https://www.google.co.in/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=draft%20rti%20ration%20shop%20site%3Awww.rtiindia.org NOTE: There are many pages of results !
    18 replies | 583 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    karira replied to a thread Driving Licence in Ask for RTI Query
    This issue has been discussed several times on the portal. Please read some of the threads in the following search results: https://www.google.co.in/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=monocular%20driving%20site%3Awww.rtiindia.org (NOTE: There are many
    9 replies | 283 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    There is something called the National Crime Records Bureau Visit the website.....it already has lots of info. Even if it does not have, you (as a Research Fellow) can approach them directly (NOT under RTI !) and get that information.
    10 replies | 247 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    karira replied to a thread Pending File RTI in Ask for RTI Query
    Posters query is : That he is filing RTIs about pending files or pending decisions but he is not successful...so he wants to know where is he making a mistake. ============ The best solution is to ONLY ask for "inspection" of the relevant file at the first stage. In your RTI application, you mention that at the end of the inspection, you will take certain photocopies of some pages on payment of the prescribed charges. Then inspect the file and read all pages - specially the file notings - very carefully. That will give you the correct position as to why the file is pending at some place. Or at least give you a clue regarding the real reason for the pendency. If it is pending for no reason, then you can lodge a formal complaint to the senior officer of the person with whom the file is pending - or still better, directly confront the officer with whom the file is pending, along with the papers in your hand (which obtained after inspection).
    14 replies | 510 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    This is only a online discussion forum on the RTI Act 2005. We do not have any toll free number. All discussions take place on an open forum only. If you have any RTI related query, please feel free to post it here.
    2 replies | 120 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    Who is behind the CBI closure report in Satish Shetty murder case? Sandeep Shetty alleges an invisible hand of a minister behind the filing of closure report in his brother and RTI activist Satish Shetty’s murder case. The case handled by CBI since last four years was coming to a near conclusion when all of a sudden the agency filed closure report In a suspicious and strange turn of events, after four years of investigations the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), suddenly filed a closure report in the Satish Shetty murder case on 11th August. CBI investigations led to a 10,000 page report; several trips abroad by the investigative agencies and almost zeroing on 13 culprits, which were giving an indication about solving the murder case of the Right to Information (RTI) activist. The CBI spokesperson on Monday told the media that the closure has been filed at the Wadgaon-Maval court as it could not find sufficient evidence to prosecute the accused persons. Just to recall, the 13 accused persons were named by slain RTI activist Satish Shetty in a land grab case along the Pune-Mumbai expressway through forging of documents, in a first information report (FIR) lodged by him at the Talegaon police station in October 2009. The names included the high profile owner of Ideal Road Builders (IRB), Virendra Mhaiskar, who is close to several top notch politicians of Maharashtra, as well as a sub-registrar and others. It has been alleged that the subsequent brutal murder of Shetty on 13 February 2010, was closely linked to his lodging of his FIR of October 2009. In fact, the CBI stuck to this FIR as the motive for Satish Shetty’s murder for a good four years, until as recently as 8 August 2014 and then suddenly changed course in the last three days. The High Court had suo motu taken cognizance of Satish Shetty murder in 2010 and directed the CBI to probe it, which was otherwise being investigated by the Pune Rural Police. It had again, on 8th August, allowed the CBI to open up the land scam case in which, Shetty had lodged an FIR. In fact, CBI itself had made this requisition to the High Court, stating that it (the land scam) might be linked to the Satish Shetty murder and hence needs to be re-investigated. The High Court on 8th August, directed the agency to go ahead with the re-opening of the case and submit its report within four weeks. However, instead, the CBI submitted a closure report at Wadgaon–Maval court on the basis that there is no evidence against the 13 accused. All this in a matter of just three days, that is between 8th and 11th August 2014! Moneylife spoke with Sandeep Shetty, brother of Satish Shetty who is doggedly pursuing the case to seek justice. Here are the excerpts from the interview... Moneylife (ML): How do you react to CBI’s sudden closure of your brother, Satish Shetty’s murder case? Sandeep Shetty (SS): It is very shocking that the CBI should have made a turnaround in three days flat. Where is justice left? Earlier, we thought the local police might be influenced by some higher-ups, but now the CBI too has bent backwards to please those in political power. It is impossible for the investigative agency to take action on its own, as the High Court has directed on 8th August that it should submit the report to it in four weeks time. Even if you say that suddenly no evidence was found, the CBI cannot file a closure report; it should have submitted such a report to the High Court. This is clear case of contempt of Court and hence the closure report is invalid. In fact, the Wadgaon-Maval court has no powers to accept the report, which needs to be submitted to the District Court that in turn has to call me for hearing before accepting the report. I am going to contest it (the CBI action) and it will indeed be the biggest scandal if the District Court accepts the closure report. I’m also going to Wadgaon-Maval Court today to get the copy of the closure report. I am also going to file a petition to the High Court to re-investigate the case. I would be talking to my lawyer for advice. ML: You have directly alleged that the closure is a result of political clout. Why do you say so? SS: That’s because the CBI has been investigating the case since the last four years and on 20 December 2013 it specifically told the High Court that Satish’s murder is directly related to the FIR Satish has lodged against Mhaiskar and others in 2009. Again, a few days back, on 8 August 2014, the CBI told the High Court that prima facie Satish’s FIR is the basic motive for his murder. This gave me hope that the case was on its way to getting solved and the culprits would be booked and punished as per Law. However, what else can one derive when in three days flat the CBI completely changed its stance and said that there is no circumstantial evidence against the accused, who were very much the accused until 8 August 2014. We all know Nitin Gadkari’s links with the the Ideal Road Builders-IRB group of companies and it’s all in the public domain wherein IRB had loaned large amounts of money to Gadkari’s controversial Purti group of industries. Hence, I strongly feel that Gadkari’s pressure on the CBI resulted in the latter doing a complete u-turn unlawfully. Would you believe that any government agency can do such a startling and brazen turnaround on its own, especially when it was sticking to its ground for a good four years?
    70 replies | 11897 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    From an email received from Mr Venkatesh Nayak Whistleblower Complaints and the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) Dear all, As you are aware the Government of India (GoI) through the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) issued the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection for Informants (PIDPI) Resolution in 2004 to encourage whistleblowers in govt. departments and PSUs to come forward to file complaints about corruption and mismanagement of public funds and thereby facilitate inquiry/investigation into such complaints. This Resolution was passed after two young professionals employed in PSUs were murdered because they tried to expose corruption. The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is the competent authority to receive PIDPI complaints. This Resolution does not cover the State Governments. I filed an RTI application with the CVC in March 2013 asking for details of PIDPI complaints received and action taken on them. The CVC refused to part with the information citing Sec. 7(9) at both the application and first appeal stages. Later in July this year the Central Information Commission passed an order to the CVC to provide any information on as is basis about disposal of PIDPI complaints. The CVC has sent me a complete list of PIDPI complaints received and action taken on them for the whole year of 2012. All these documents are in the 1st attachment. I have also analysed the manner of receipt and disposal of PIDPI complaints by the CVC for the years 2012, 2013 and up to June 2014 (MS Excel Sheet in the 2nd attachment). The first sheet of the MSExcel file contains the list of Departments and PSUs against whom PIDPI complaints were received in 2013 and up to June 2014 according to the monthly performance report uploaded on the CVC website for each year since 2010. The 2nd sheet contains statistical data about receipt and disposal of complaint. What the CVC has not disclosed either on its website or in the RTI reply is the outcome of the action taken in PIDPI complaints. *My findings of CVC's action taken on PIDPI complaints are as follows:* 1) The CVC has received a total of 470 complaints up to in 2014 up to end June. Adding 38 complaints that were pending from 2013, this comes up to 508 complaints received by the CVC. In 2013 a total of 769 complaints were with the CVC. This included 144 complaints pending from 2012 and 625 fresh complaints received in 2013. However, in 2012, 805 complaints were received by the CVC. *So there was dip of about 23% in the number of PIDPI complaints received in 2013 as compared to 2012. However as more than 400 complaints have been received during the first six months of 2014, the trend seems to be growing again*. 2) DoPT replied to a Parliamentary query in July this year giving the total figures for 2011-2013 (3rd attachment). *The reply did not contain any information about the disposal of these cases*. So, I have compiled some statistics for 2013-2014 about action taken, as well, which are in Sheet 2 of the 2nd attachment. The data for the first four months of 2012 does not open up on any browser on the CVC website. So while the total number of PIDPI complaints received is known for that year the total figures regarding action taken cannot be calculated as the data is not complete. 3) *The datasets for 2013 indicates that only 10% of the PIDPI cases were sent for Investigation and Reporting (I&R), i.e. 73 of 730 cases (pending from 2012 and fresh complaints received in 2013). *According to data furnished to me under RTI after the CIC's order, in 2012, 169 of the total of 803 complaints were sent for I&R (total figures obtained from monthly reports are 805) *This is 21% of the total PIDPI complaints received by the CVC that year. So the number of cases referred for I&R in 2013 are half of those referred in 2012. There is simply no explanation for this dip in the CVC's reports. This is an issue that must be interrogated further. But CSOs cannot do this in the absence of more data.* 4) In 2013 the CVC wound up only 6 of the 730 cases (disposed category) as 'requiring no action'. Data for the last eight months of 2012 shows that only one case was disposed of as requiring no action (data link for the first four months does not open up on any browser). *In 2014 during the first six months 44% of the cases (i.e., 178 of 404 cases) were disposed of as 'requiring no action'. Now this is a very large number. The public in general and most importantly, the whistleblowers themselves have the right to know the reasons for this kind of disposal. I had specifically asked in my RTI application, reasons for closure of cases in 2012- as said above only one case was closed this way. They did not furnish this data claiming the protection of Sec. 7(9) of the RTI Act (which is actually not a ground for refusal at all). There is all the more reason why there must be transparency about such cases because only then whistleblowers will have confidence that their cases were inquired into seriously.* 5) As the CVC gives only total figures of action taken such as disciplinary action, award of minor or major penalty or commencement of prosecution, against officers complained against in its monthly performance reports, *it is not possible to know how many of the PIDPI complaints resulted in which of these consequences for the accused officers. I had asked for this breakup in my RTI application and also argued how under the Whistleblowers Protection Act, the CVC would be required to give such data to Parliament when that law is enforced. The CVC representative told the CIC that when that law becomes enforceable, they will compile such data and that there was no need to do so now. I pointed out hat this kind of reporting must be given in the Annual Report of the CVC. This argument also was discarded. The CIC also did not record any of my arguments in its order and simply directed that information as it exists be given. Certainty and details of action taken on PIDPI complaints alone can encourage more and more whistleblowers to come forward. If there is no transparency about the outcomes in each case, then the whistleblower mechanism will not inspire confidence in potential whistleblowers.* *Top Ministries and PSUs against which whistleblower complaints were made between 2012-2014* From the data available online for the years 2012-2014 it looks like the largest number of PIDPI complaints have been against the following public authorities: *a)* *Ministry of Railways* - 126 PIDPI complaints received in 2012, total number of PIDPI complaints received in later years is not known. Of these we know that 32 complaints resulted in I&R in 2012. In 2013 16 cases were sent for I&R and only 1 case was referred for I&R till June 2014. The outcomes of these cases are not known. *b)* *Banks* - 57 PIDPI Complaints received in 2012 of which 11 were sent for I&R. Outcome is not known. Identity of specific Banks is also not known. 4 cases were referred for I&R against Dena Bank, Punjab National Bank, Syndicate Bank and SBI in 2013. Outcomes are not known. *c)* *CBDT &Income Tax* - 23 PIDPI complaints were received in 2012. It is not know how many were received in 2013 or 2014. 6 of the cases in 2012 and 7 cases in 2013 were referred for I&R. Outcomes are not known. No cases were referred for I&R in 2014 (up to June). *d)* *Damodar Valley Corporation* - 17 PIDPI complaints were received in 2012 and 5 of these cases were sent for I&R. In 2013- 4 cases and in 2014- 1 case sent for I&R. Outcomes are not known. *e)* *NALCO* - 16 PIDPI complaints received in 2012, and 1 was sent for I&R. Outcomes now known. None sent for I&R in 2013-2014 (up to June). *f)* *Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.* - 15 PIDPI complaints received in 2012, and 1 sent for I&R. 3 cases sent for I&R in 2013 and none in 2014 (up to June). Outcomes are not known. *g)* *Ministry of Shipping* - 15 PIDPI complaints received in 2012, and 2 cases sent for I&R. Outcomes now known. None sent for I&R in 2013-2014 (up to June). *h)* *BSNL* - 14 PIDPI complaints received in 2012 and 3 sent for I&R. Outcomes are not known. No case referred to I&R in 2013 and up to June 2014. *i)* *Central Board of Excise and Customs* - 14 complaints received in 2012, and 4 sent for I&R. 4 more cases sent for I&R in 2013. Outcomes are not known. *j)* *Municipal Corporation of Delhi *- 13 PIDPI complaints received in 2012. None were referred to I&R. *k)* *Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation* - 13 PIDPI complaints received in 2012, and 2 cases were referred for I&R. 3 cases were referred for I&R in 2013. Outcomes are not known. None sent for I&R in 2014 (up to June). *l)* *ICAR* - 12 PIDPI complaints received in 2012, and 4 sent for I&R. Outcomes are not known. None in 2013-2014 (up to June) *m)* *Ministry of Defence* - 11 PIDPI complaints received in 2012, and 1 case sent for I&R. 1 case in 2013 and 3 in 2014 (up to June) sent for I&R. Outcomes are not known. In the ultimate analysis if the CVC does not find itself duty bound to publicise details of action taken on whistleblower complaints and the outcomes of its investigation and also its reasons for closing a case without giving any reason, whistleblowing will not become a safer alternative to silence for sincere and honest officers. Also, a large number of PIDPI complaints are sent to the CVO for further action. There is little knowledge in the public domain about what these cases were and what action was taken by the CVOs. The CVC has to do a lot more hardwork to inform people about the details of its achievements to inspire confidence. Incidentally, the DoPT has called for applications to the post of the CVC and VC recently. I hope the appointments are made in a transparent manner and the new appointees direct more transparency in the disposal of PIDPI complaints. This alone will instil faith and confidence in the system for whistleblowers in particular and the public in general. While PIDPI of 2004 applies only to employees of government and PSUs at the Centre, the Whistleblower Protection Act, 2011 applies to the whole of India except Jammu & Kashmir. All States except J&K will have to identify competent authorities for receiving and inquiring into whistleblower complaints. Even citizens and organisations can become whistleblowers under the new law. However this law will not be of any use until the Central Government enforces it through a notification. This law was passed in February. It was gazetted in May after the President gave his assent. There is no word about its enforcement or drafting of Rules and Regulations in the public domain. Meanwhile the National Campaign for People's Right to Information (NCPRI) is drafting a set of basic Rules to send to the Government for adoption. The Whistleblower Act itself was strengthened based on civil society's suggestions to the Parliamentary Standing Committee that vetted the Bill in 2011-2012. *Kindly circulate this email widely.* Thanks *Venkatesh Nayak* *Programme Coordinator*
    4 replies | 227 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    Did you pay the "additional fees " aas demended by the PIO. Please clearly give the various dates involved - like date of RTI application, date when PIO demanded additional ffees, etc.
    2 replies | 166 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    In the box which contains the post, there is a small window with a drop down arrow - just above "Vote for best answer". Clickj on that dropped down arrow and you will get many options...one of them is "solved".
    10 replies | 304 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    4 Days Ago
    From an email received from Mr Venkatesh Nayak: Dear all,The Government of India has recently issued a Press Release stating that the Conduct Rules applicable to the three All India Services- Indian Administrative Service (IAS), Indian Police Service (IPS) and Indian Forest Service (IFoS) have been amended (readers may please note that the elite Indian Foreign Service is a Group A Service only). The text of the amendment is given in a Press Information Bureau Release accessible at this link:Press Information Bureau English Releases and copied below. The text of the AIS Conduct Rules, 1968 is accessible at this link: http://persmin.nic.in/DOPT/Acts_Rules/AIS_Rules/Revised_AIS_Rules_Vol_I_Updated_Upto_31Oct2011/Revised_AIS_Rule_Vol_I_Rule_10.pdf The importance of the amendment lies in the requirement for IAS, IPS and IFoS Officers to maintain accountability and transparency amongst other values listed under the new sub-rule 1A. However clause (xii) inserted under sub-rule 2B further down, requires the officers of these three services to maintain confidentiality of information in relation to one's duties as required by existing laws and rules. Particular emphasis is placed on maintaining confidentiality and refraining from disclosing information if it may predjudicially affect the interests protected under Section 8(1)(a) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. What is novel about this amendment? While many RTI activists and experts including the Second Administrative Reforms Commission have recommended replacement of the Oath of Secrecy which officers take while joining the civil service, the newly amended rules somewhat temper that Oath. Officers of these elite services have often asked questions about the contradiction between their oath and the requirements of transparency under the RTI Act. However, these amendments also raise some fundamental questions. If AIS officers acting as Public Information Officers (PIOs), deemed PIOs and First Appellate Authorities (FAA) refuse to provide access to information in an unreasonable manner, i.e., in violation of the provisions of the RTI Act, can aggrieved applicants henceforth allege contravention of the Conduct Rules in addition to demanding imposition of penalty under Section 20 of the RTI Act? As the AIS Rules apply to IAS, IPS and IFoS officers serving in Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) also, can residents of J&K who are denied information under the J&K RTI Act, 2009 demand disciplinary action against AIS officers serving in that State for violating the value of transparency and accountability when they refuse access to information in an unreasonable manner? Readers may please enlighten me whether violation of the requirement of maintaining transparency and accountability as ring-fenced by the twin RTI Acts and other laws and also the grounds specified under clause (xii) of sub-rule 2B amount to ' professional misconduct' and will this become a ground for launching disciplinary proceedings under the AIS (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969. These Rules are available at this link: http://persmin.nic.in/DOPT/Acts_Rules/AIS_Rules/Revised_AIS_Rules_Vol_I_Updated_Upto_31Oct2011/Revised_AIS_Rule_Vol_I_Rule_12.pdf If it does amount to 'professional misconduct', can an aggrieved RTI applicant demand action against an AIS Officer who is either a PIO or deemed PIO or an FAA. Can he/she be a complainant or can the Central/State Information Commission recommend that disciplinary proceedings be launched even for a single instance of unreasonable contravention of the RTI Acts? So who will be the Complainant in such cases is the next question. Text of the PIB Release: "All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 Amended The Government of India has amended All India Services (Conduct) Rules,1968, in rule 3(1) after sub-rule (1) by inserting sub-rule (1A) and rule 3(2) after sub-rule (2A) by inserting sub-rule (2B) and these rules are called the All India Services (Conduct) Amendment Rules, 2014. Under sub-rule (1A), every member of the Service shall maintain:- (i) High ethical standards, integrity and honesty; (ii) Political neutrality; (iii) Promoting of the principles of merit, fairness and impartiality in the discharge of duties; (iv) Accountability and transparency; (v) Responsiveness to the public, particularly to the weaker section; (vi) Courtesy and good behaviour with the public. Under sub-rule (2B), every member of the Service shall:- (i) Commit himself to and uphold the supremacy of the Constitution and democratic values; (ii) Defend and uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of State, public order, decency and morality; (iii) Maintain integrity in public service; (iv) Take decisions solely in public interest and use or cause to use public resources efficiently, effectively and economically; (v) Declare any private interests relating to his public duties and take steps to resolve any conflicts in a way that protects the public interest; (vi) Not place himself under any financial or other obligations to any individual or organisation which may influence him in the performance of his official duties; (vii) Not misuse his position as civil servant and not take decisions in order to derive financial or material benefits for himself, his family or his friends; (viii) Make choices, take decisions and make recommendations on merit alone; (ix) Act with fairness and impartiality and not discriminate against anyone, particularly the poor and the under-privileged sections of society; (x) Refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices; (xi) Maintain discipline in the discharge of his duties and be liable to implement the lawful orders duly communicated to him; (xii) Be liable to maintain confidentiality in the performance of his official duties as required by any laws for the time being in force, particularly with regard to information, disclosure of which may prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of State, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, friendly relation with foreign countries or lead to incitement of an offence or illegal or unlawful gains to any person; (xiii) Perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities." Kindly circulate this email widely. Thanks Venkatesh NayakProgramme Coordinator
    6 replies | 362 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    5 Days Ago
    Once you draft your RTI application, you can upload it here, as an attachment to your post. Our helpful members will guide you further.
    3 replies | 193 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    6 Days Ago
    PAN Card holders address is not given on the PAN card. You can return the PAN card to the address given at the back of the card, under "If this card is lost / someone elses card found, please inform / return to:" Didn't you see that at the back of the card ?
    5 replies | 217 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    6 Days Ago
    Why are you suspecting that your driving licence is "not genuine" ? If you did not give the driver licence test, if you did not hold the learners licence for the prescribed period, if you did not visit the RTO, etc... obviously your licence is fake.
    8 replies | 242 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    6 Days Ago
    Information regarding judicial maters or court judgments and related papers can only be obtained from high Courts ONLY by following the rules prescribed by the court. You will not get such documents/papers via RTI.
    5 replies | 183 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    6 Days Ago
    To see which threads have maximum relies/posts and also maximum views, please do the following: First go to the relevant section/subsection of the forum. For example - Ask for a RTI Query: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/ask-for-rti-query.html On top of the list of threads, you will find a grey coloured title band...stating: Click on the replies/views (on thte top on the grey band) and the threads will sort out as per maximum replies / views. Title / Thread StarterReplies /ViewsLast Post By
    2 replies | 220 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    There is an explanation at the end of Sec 12(3), which deals with any such eventuality: Explanation.—For the purposes of removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where the Leader of Opposition in the House of the People has not been recognised as such, the Leader of the single largest group in opposition of the Government in the House of the People shall be deemed to be the Leader of Opposition.
    2 replies | 250 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Modi Faces Bigger Threat from Wily Civil Servants Than Political Opponents It was a missive, totally un-Modi like, since Narendra Modi has won India and taken full control of BJP through trusted and tested aide Amit Shah. But the citadel that awaits to be stormed is the Delhi-based phalanx of babus, who he is yet to Modify. Last weekend, when the PMO issued a 19-point code of conduct after almost 30 years for India’s steel-framed bureaucracy, it was seen as a warning. Modi is perhaps the first PM who has refrained from mass-scale transfers of senior officials. He surprised his colleagues by deciding to give a six-month extension to Cabinet Secretary Ajit Seth, whose only virtue is his invisibility. Modi has retained all key secretaries in finance, defence, HRD, home and external affairs. He enforced the principle of continuity in the bureaucracy even though some mandarins were UPA loyalists. It is clear that Modi wants to govern through bureaucracy. He has taken over from Manmohan but the Modi government is yet to acquire a shape. The Indian Civil Services is one of the country’s most powerful institutions. A relic of the Raj, it ensured that politicians would never take any initiative without making babus either partners in power or beneficiaries of the system. The over 20,000-member club of All India Services officers comprising IAS, IFS, IRS, IR&AS, IPS etc. are the unelected rulers of India. They get automatic promotions, perks and salaries and create lucrative post-retirement facilities, which even politicians have failed to do for themselves. When Modi advised bureaucrats to be neutral, efficient and honest, it was like telling a tiger to stop hunting. Insiders say there are enough checks on the civil services in place, without the need for new directives. Even the official code of conduct provides summary dismissal of officials found engaging in political activity. They can be sent to jail if guilty of corruption. In one instance, Yashpal Kapoor, the then private secretary to PM Indira Gandhi, acted as an election agent for her. Mrs Gandhi lost her poll petition because she used a government official for election purposes. Rarely is a senior official transferred due to his or her inability to perform duties correctly, because the steel frame hasn’t allowed any accountability matrix for the bureaucracy. Babus can only be moved out if they fail to do the bidding of their political masters. Modi, however, added a significant provision to his proclamation, which, if taken to the logical end, would break the civil service-corporate nexus. One directive is that all conflict of interest situations must be avoided and resolved. It is evident the PM has placed a premium on the character of a civil servant. It is, in fact, the conflict of interest—or creation of future interest—which has been the guiding principle for taking official decisions so far. Post-retirement, most civil servants joined the very corporations they used to deal with in their official capacity. A study of retired babus reveals that over 80 per cent of senior officials took up highly paid jobs after superannuation in the same sectors they had been handling, all which benefited by their decisions. One of the most dangerous fallouts of economic reform has been mandarins playing the markets. Either through relatives or on their own, bureaucrats have been making a killing buying and selling scrips. It is the cleverest legal way of making illegal money because babus know in advance which future policies of the government would positively or negatively affect various sectors. There is suspicion in some quarters that it is the politician-babu-corporate nexus that has prevented the government from imposing the capital gains tax so far. India is perhaps the only democracy where promoters and relatives in politics and civil services make crores without paying a paisa as income tax. The power of bureaucracy was evident when two decades ago, it prevented the finance minister from revealing the names of babus who were allotted promoters’ shares by companies at concessional rates. Some officials holding the shares joined the same companies as directors or consultants. Even now, there are officials who have mastered the art of writing pro-private sector documents for PPP and demand royalty for it. Piercing the steel frame has been a big challenge for all leaders for it’s the apparatchik who makes the apparatus. Modi should remember that the “bureaucracy is a giant mechanism operated by pygmies and cowards”. Therefore, his agenda should have been to replace pygmies with giants. If a party needs a strongman with verve and vision, the bureaucracy needs an equally towering personality to lead it. For past three decades, fearless and innovative officers have lost the battle to sycophants and incompetents. India has seen impressive Cabinet Secretaries and principal secretaries like A N Verma, Brajesh Mishra, B G Deshmukh, Vinod Pandey and Naresh Chandra. They led from the front and were au courant with the mind and mission of their PMs. Since they were first-raters, they also chose first-raters to assist in running the government. Now second-raters have taken over and they look for third-raters so that they do not outshine their bosses. For a change, the steel frame showed signs of cracks after Modi took over. Initially, they cowered perspiring in their AC rooms for the call from South Block, informing them about their transfers. They were relieved they were not relieved of their jobs. Modi preaches and practises delivery. As Gujarat CM, he successfully rode the bureaucracy tiger. He neither set nor amended any rules of conduct for them. Yet his babus exceeded his expectations. So, when he walked into 7 RCR, the bureaucracy was expecting its achche din of doing no work about to end. It is used to conjuring up new ideas for the new leader, to generate fresh jobs for themselves and escape scrutiny. Babus understood the real message behind Modi’s slogan ‘Minimum Government, Maximum Governance’ well. It meant he would demolish many departments and secretaries to create a lean, mean establishment. Before Modi could implement his vision, they counselled him to embark on the path of ‘advice first, act later’. The bureaucracy abhors initiative and innovation. It despises any exercise which ensures better results. Modi faces a bigger threat from the wily civil servant than from any political opponent. He must keep it in mind that “powers once acquired are never relinquished easily, just as bureaucracies once created never die or vanish”. Read more: Modi Faces Bigger Threat from Wily Civil Servants Than Political Opponents - The New Indian Express
    10 replies | 312 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Banks refuse National Intelligence Grid access to consumer data In a move which will preserve consumer privacy, banks have denied giving Anti-Terror National Intelligence Grid (Natgrid) direct access to their data base. Natgrid, which was set up in wake of 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks in 2008, wanted direct access to bank accounts in terror related cases. “The issue pertaining to creating institutional framework for sharing of information relating to the banks with Natgrid was examined by Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in consultation with the Indian Banks Association (IBA),” minister of state in the ministry of finance Nirmala Sitharaman told Lok Sabha in a written reply. She revealed that RBI and bankers were “unanimously of the opinion that it would not be possible for banks under the current legislative framework to disclose customer information.” “Accordingly, it was advised that in line with international practices it may not be possible for banks to allow any agency direct access to its database,” said the minister. Further, Ms Sitharaman said that under the “extant legislative framework it may not be possible for banks to share customer related information like name and address of the customer and account number of the customer with any government agency.” According to sources, some officials in the finance ministry believed that if such an access was provided to the intelligence agencies it will shake the confidence of the people and investors in Indian banking system, which could have a long term impact. There has already been concern among the general people about phone tapping and snooping by various intelligence and governmnet agencies. The issue of privacy has been raised by industrialist Ratan Tata in Supreme Court when his conversation with Niira Radia was leaked to the media. Read More: Banks refuse National Intelligence Grid access to consumer data | The Asian Age
    1 replies | 204 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Attached is a Circular dated 28 July 2014 regarding single window system for sanction of prosecution for Group A services. Also attached is the list of services categorised as Group A services.
    0 replies | 113 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Many of the above amendments will help RTI Activists in following up on the "information" they receive under RTI. Now they can complain to the cadre controlling authority for violation of the above rules - which , if found true, can result in disciplinary action against the officer.
    6 replies | 362 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Extracts: (1A) Every member of the Service shall maintain:- (i) high ethical standards, integrity and honesty; (ii) political neutrality; (iii) promoting of the principles of merit, fairness and impartiality in the discharge of duties; - (iv) accountability and transparency; (v) responsiveness to the public, particularly to the weaker section; (vi) courtesy and good behavior with the public. (2B) Every member of the Service shall:- (i) commit himself to and uphold the supremacy of the Constitution and democratic values; (ii) defend and uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of State, public order, decency and morality; (iii) maintain integrity in public service; (iv) take decisions solely in public interest and use or cause to use public resources efficiently, effectively and economically; (v) declare any private interests relating to his public duties and take steps to resolve any conflicts in a way that protects the public interest; (vi) not place himself under any financial or other obligations to any individual or organisation which may influence him in the performance of his official duties; (vii) not misuse his position as civil servant and not take decisions in order to derive financial or material benefits for himself, his family or his friends; (viii) make choices, take decisions and make recommendations on merit alone; (ix) act with fairness and impartiality and not discriminate against anyone, particularly the poor and the under-privileged sections of society; (x) refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices (xi) maintain discipline in the discharge of his duties and be liable to implement the lawful orders duly communicated to him; (xii) be liable to maintain confidentiality in the performance of his official duties as required by any laws for the time being in force, particularly with regard to information, disclosure of which may prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of State, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, friendly relation with foreign countries or lead to incitement of an offence or illegal or unlawful gains to any person; (xiii) perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities.
    6 replies | 362 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Attached is the official amendment to the CCS Rules.
    6 replies | 362 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Modi's 19 Commandments for Babus: Be Politically Neutral NEW DELHI: After empowering the Babus for effective governance, Narendra Modi-led government has issued a new set of rules which mandate that a bureaucrat shall maintain political neutrality and good behaviour with the public. The 19 commandments were included by amending the All India Service (Conduct) Rules, 1968 for IAS, IPS and Indian Forest Service officers. The gazette notification issued on August 6 inserted these 19 provisions in the existing rules, which says that every member of All India Service shall maintain high ethical standards, integrity and honesty as well as political neutrality. The Officer shall maintain promoting the principle of merit, fairness and impartiality in discharge of duties. The officer shall maintain accountability and transparency and responsiveness to the public, particularly to the weaker sections. It warns the officer that he should “not place himself under any financial or other obligations to any individual or organisation which may influence him in the performance of his official duties.” It goes on to say that members of the All India Service shall not misuse his position as civil servant and not take decisions in order to derive financial or material benefits for himself, his family or his friends. “Make choices, take decisions and make recommendations on merit alone,” Modi’s new commandments to bureaucrats noted. The new set of rules also mentioned that officer shall commit himself to and uphold the supremacy of the constitution and democratic values. “Defend and uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of state, public order, decency and morality. Maintain integrity in public service and take decisions solely in public interest and use or cause to use public resources efficiently, effectively and economically,” the gazette notification said. The new commandments have asked the bureaucrats to “refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices. Read More: Modi's 19 Commandments for Babus: Be Politically Neutral - The New Indian Express
    6 replies | 362 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Centre plans amendment to Consumer Protection Act Authority, through the amendment to Consumer Protection Act, 1986, can impose penalty, conduct probe into violation of consumer rights The Union ministry of consumer affairs, in a bid to quickly dispose off cases and thereby give much-needed relief to consumers, has proposed amendments to the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The ministry proposes to replace the present Central Consumer Protection Council by the Central Consumer Protection Authority by delegating it with punitive powers, Food & Consumer Affairs Minister Ram Vilas Paswan told Business Standard on the sidelines of a retail and FMCG conference. This Act might be called the Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act, 2014. The authority can act against those traders who are violating consumer rights and can impose administrative penalty. Besides, the authority can conduct investigations, either suo-motu or on a complaint, into violations of consumer rights and conduct search and seizure of documents/records/articles and other forms of evidence, summon delinquent manufacturers, advertisers and service providers to record oral evidence and direct production of documents and records. This apart, the authority can order recall of goods or withdrawal of services found to be unsafe or hazardous and order reimbursement of the price of the goods (or services) so recalled, to purchasers of such goods or services. “In the present set-up, there are district fora, state commissions and the National Disputes Redressal Commission which compensate consumers for losses due to unfair trade practices or negligence. The experience is that a case which would have been resolved in no time, keeps on lingering due to adjournments and paperwork. Therefore, the ministry is mulling to set up the Central Consumer Protection Authority. The objective of the Central Authority will be to prevent the exploitation of consumers and violation of their rights and to promote, protect and enforce the rights of consumers. Cases can be resolved through mediation and conciliation,” Paswan said. Paswan said that currently, retired judges were appointed on the consumer fora, state commissions and National Disputes Redressal Commission. However, the ministry was considering appointing members through the state public service commission at the state level and through the Union Public Service Commission at the national level. Currently, 621 district consumer fora, 35 state consumer commissions and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions at the apex level are functioning. “Till July 23, 2014, a total of 41,69,564 cases have been filed and 38,01,037 cases have been disposed in all these consumer fora, thereby achieving a disposal rate of over 91 per cent,” he informed. M S Kamath, secretary, Consumer Guidance Society of India said, “It is not the law which has failed but the people who are running the system have failed it miserably. According to the regulation, the district forum is supposed to get rid of a minimum 75 cases a month. However, the output is 30 to 35 cases in most district fora which include cases which are dismissed by default or decided ex parte.” On the minister's proposal to revamp the present structure, Kamath, who has been fighting cases since 1989 onwards, opined that the government would be only replacing one set of incompetent people with another, whose competence was not known or established. Shirish Deshpande, chairman, Mumbai Grahak Panchayat suggested that the minister and ministry needed to sit down with various consumer organisations before finalising the amendments. Read More: Centre plans amendment to Consumer Protection Act | Business Standard News
    6 replies | 329 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Attached is the DoPT circular on filing of annual returns.
    6 replies | 627 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    Puducherry follows the Central RTI Rules. The correct payees Name should be "Accounts Officer, XXXXXXX" XXXXXXX: Name of Public authority ================ Best is to resend your RTI application with the correct payees name as per RTI Rules. Just state at the end of your RTI Application: "Attached is a IPO Nr.....dtd....for rs. 10.00 towards payment of application fees for this RTI application. The name of the payee is as per the RTI Rules notified in the Gazette dated 31 July 2012." ============== At the application stage , there is no need to give any citations.
    9 replies | 363 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    In Syndicate ‘CMD-bribe’ Bank, a father made way for daughter on the board Less than three weeks after the father relinquished his directorship, the daughter was appointed on the board. This is not the case of the promoters of a private, family-owned enterprise, where such practices are commonplace, but something that unfolded on the board of the state-owned Syndicate Bank two years ago. On July 17, 2012, the Bangalore-based bank had announced the appointment of Jasleenn Suri as a director on its board. Her father, Bhupinder Singh Suri, who had served as a director on the board for six years, vacated his seat just 20 days earlier on June 26, 2012. Put together, the father-daughter duo have held the post of director on the board of Syndicate Bank for more than eight years now. Both father and daughter were appointed as shareholder directors in the bank, by the government — which has a holding of 67.39 per cent stake in the bank. Syndicate Bank is currently in the eye of a storm after its chairman S K Jain was arrested for accepting bribe. On how they qualified for the job, the details on the bank’s website are sketchy. Bhupinder Singh Suri owns the Gymkhana Service Station on Race Course road in New Delhi, right across the Prime Minister’s residence. Jasleenn claims to have done her MBA from Amity Business School in Noida, while her profile on the Syndicate Bank website says, “She has diversified exposure of over 15 years in varied sectors spanning across Retail & Investment Banking, Real Estate, Petroleum and Retail. She was involved in planning and implementation of the BPCL’s – New Generation Retail Outlet & concept of convenience stores under the Brand Name In & Out.” An email sent to Jasleenn Suri seeking information about her appointment did not elicit any response. The Syndicate Bank too did not respond to an email seeking details about her appointment. The bank spokesperson merely said, “Ms Jasleenn Suri was elected as a Shareholder Director under Section 9 (3) (i) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertaking) Act 1970 on 17.07.2012 and assumed charge on 18.07.2012.” This is not the only appointment on the board that appears to be in violation of corporate governance rules. There are two directors on the board of Syndicate Bank who have been Congress workers. Read More: In Syndicate ‘CMD-bribe’ Bank, a father made way for daughter on the board | The Indian Express
    5 replies | 182 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    karira replied to a thread Oh those PIOs in Ask for RTI Query
    Please share the contents of one of your RTI applications so that members can guide you correctly.
    10 replies | 328 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    LiveLaw Delhi HC issues notice on a PIL filed by Prof. Shamnad Basheer, seeking overriding powers of RTI Act against other Statutes and for declaring S.144 of Patent Act ultravires Delhi High Court today issued notice in a Public Interest Litigation filed by Prof. Shamnad Basheer, founder of SpicyIP and leading academician in the country, with path-breaking research in the field of Intellectual Property Rights, praying inter alia to declare that the mechanism under the Right to Information Act, 2005 overrides all other mechanisms under any other statute or rule for discharge of information from public authorities to the extent of inconsistencies therein and to declare Section 144 of the Patents Act, 1970 is ultra vires the Constitution of India Senior Counsel Salman Khurshid appeared for Prof. Basheer and opened arguments in the matter today pointing out how the RTI mechanism was being frustrated by Government agencies. He was accompanied by joy Basu senior counsel. The court issued notice to the government. Matter posted to 29th October and the government has been given time to respond by then.The petition also praying the acceptance of the RTI applications which were rejected on the ground that there is already an information dispensation mechanism provided under the Patents Act, 1970 and Rules, enacted prior to the RTI Act. This has been alleged to be violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, apart from the provisions of the RTI Act. Prof. Basheer sought to investigate the status of “commercial working” of certain patented drugs in India, used in treatment of several life threatening diseases such as Cancer, AIDS, Diabetes and Hepatitis. Pursuant to this, the Petitioner requested for certain public information held by Controller General of Patent, Designs & Trade Marks as the same was not available in the public domain. Four applications were hence filed before four different public authorities functioning under the CGPDTM.Out of the four applications, no information was provided by IPO, New Delhi since the application was made as per RTI Act. Information was provided by IPO, Mumbai and IPO, Kolkata as per Patents Rules, 2003 (although application was made under RTI Act). IPO, Chennai provided information under the RTI Act and Rules thereunder. This is hence, termed as arbitrary, illegal and inconsistent procedures from Central Public Information Officers (‘CPIOs’) of various public authorities under CGPDTM.The petition alleges that the provisions of the Patents Act are thoroughly inconsistent with the scheme and object of the RTI Act and contravene the constitutional mandate to promote easy and affordable access to public information.It also submits that the decision in the case of Registrar of Companies & Others v. Dharmendra Kumar Garg & Another, where the court held that the provisions of the RTI Act are inapplicable due to the presence of pre-existing mechanism under the Companies Act, 1956, is bad in law. It seeks a declaration that Section 144 of the Patents Act, 1970 is ultra vires the Constitution of India.It also submits that mechanisms prior to RTI Act do not adequately safeguard citizens’ constitutional right to information, adding that there is a significant difference in chargeable fees for obtaining information under the RTI Act and Rules in comparison to Patents Act and Rules. The petitioner contends that the undated public notice, which directed them to visit their official website to get the information requested by them, is illegal, arbitrary and does not have the force of law.It is further submitted that there is no provision or procedure under the Patents Act and Rules which entitles the public to obtain patent working information submitted as per Section 146(2) read with Rule 131, i.e. FORM-27.Form 27 is a declaration by the patentee or its licensee(s), describing the extent of commercial exploitation, alternatively called “working of the patent” in India in the past calendar year. Form 27 needs to be filed in relation to each granted patent. The online database providing free public access to FORM-27s is very limited and provides information only for the calendar year 2012 and 2013.Hence, the quashing of the undated public notice tilted ‘Information under Public Domain’ is sought in the petition. The petition seeks a declaration that the mechanism under the Right to Information Act, 2005 overrides all other mechanisms under any other statute or rule for discharge of information from public authorities to the extent of inconsistencies therein. It also seeks a direction to CGPDTM to entertain all applications for access to information under the RTI Act and provide the information sought under the terms of the RTI Act and not as per the Patent Act and Rules. The petition is filed through Advocate Sai Vinod and ​Abhimanyu bhandariTalking to LiveLaw about the scope of the petition, Prof. Shamnad stated, “Both Sai and me have been RTI crusaders for a while now, and as part of our work with SpicyIP and P-PIL, we’ve deployed the RTI mechanism to the hilt in exposing deep flaws with our current IP regime and administration. We understand the potency of the RTI and are very keen in ensuring that it is not frustrated by government agencies. Unfortunately our patent office appears more keen on making money through this process and have begun charging a ransom for access to valuable patent information. They also appear to be deliberately delaying our request for information on sensitive pharmaceutical drugs. Despite 7 months going by, they have not responded to my RTI asking for vital information on important anti cancer and anti HIV drugs patented by MNCs. Such information is really critical for our debates on patents and public health and disclosure of such information lies at the very heart of the patent system.” Mr. Basheer stated,“I must say it is an extremely proud moment for me to have Sai Vinod, my student whom I taught not so long ago, represent me as my lawyer in this matter. In fact it was Sai who prompted me to file this and did most of the wonderful leg work that made this PIL possible. I also want to thank Abhimanyu Bhandari (we did the BCL together at Oxford) for taking this up probono without batting an eye lid. And for roping in two terrific senior counsels Salman Khurshid and Joy Basu. Thanks also to Abhimanyu’s junior Anchal for her work on this. I cannot thank them all enough for taking up this important matter on a pro bono basis. We need more such lawyers who are public spirited champions!”The verdict will be a certainly be a milestone settling the inconsistencies in the law in any and hence, will be eagerly awaited. (The Petition is attached to this post)
    2 replies | 212 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Week Ago
    From an email received from Mr Avinash Prabhune - the man behind taking on the Railways (from Nagpur): Hon Supreme court dismissed SLP against Railways for not providing discount to Passengers travelled through High capacity coaches. Former railway minister Lalu Prasad Yadav on February 26, 2008 had announced 6% discount in fares for passengers travelling in high capacity coaches wherein berths were extended from 72 to 81. The decision came into force from April 1, 2008. However, despite a Railway Board circular to this effect, discount was not paid to travellers. Nagpur City resident, Avinash Prabhune, Nagpur, who had sought information under RTI in 2009, revealed that 6,000 coaches were converted into high capacity coaches in 16 zones. Total 4.68 Crores passengers have travelled through these High capacity coaches. As per information received under RTI, Railways had not provided discount to around 60.87 lakh passengers in three zones - South Central Railway (SCR), North Frontier Railway (NFR) and Northern Railway (NR). The matter came to light when the petitioner, while travelling to & fro from Nagpur to Delhi on March 15 and 17, 2009 was not granted discount during his journey in high capacity coaches. Prabhune fought back for 18 months to get a refund of 39 in June 2010 after directions from Hon CIC, New Delhi. Hon CIC directed railways to pay an amount of Rs.4266/- towards travel expenses incurred by the Complainant in attending the hearing. The matter against 16 Zonal Railways was heard by Hon CIC on 22/09/2011 (ORDER COPY ENCLOSED) JUST FOR YOUR REFERENCE –MATTER OF Hon COURT RECORDS - It was petitioner’s submissions that "The refund of 39 itself establishes mistake of rail administration. In case of fare hike, railways collect difference amount from passengers. The same principle should follow in case of discount". Railways should have issued Refund vouchers through TTE to every passenger entitled for discount. In general, Refund rules are provided for meeting the situations of exigency/ exceptions. Rail administration cannot be permitted to take shelter of those provisions for covering the failures of administration. The lakhs of passengers cannot be asked to claim the refund as per refund rules because it was the duty of Rail administration to provide discount to the passengers. " AV Prabhune of Nagpur, then filed a PIL before Hon High Court Nagpur in Jan 2012 praying that railways be told to deposit discount amount in Prime Minister's Relief Fund and take action against officials for failure in implementing the budget commitment. The amount may run into crores if discount money is taken into account for remaining 13 zones," who appeared in person. The railway administration said individual passengers after the completion of their journeys had the option of claiming refund under the refund rules by sending original tickets to the chief commercial manager (refund) of journey or by producing these tickets after completion of the journey at the destination station. The passengers were duly informed of this fact by audio visuals through messages which was shown in bold caption in reservation chart and by announcing through public announcement system. Railways also claimed that necessary arrangements were made in the software of display on the reservation chart that such passengers could take refund of the difference of the fare at the destination station. The Hon High court dismissed the PIL saying, "Railways followed all the guidelines issued on subject from time to time. There is no failure in implementation of these instructions." Then Prabhune filed review petition before Hon High court on 21/01/2013. Hon High court dismissed on 27/09/2013. Thereafter, Prabhune filed Special Leave Petition (SLP-civil) before Hon Supreme court on 19/12/2013. Following Questions of the Law/Grounds (I to V) were submitted in SLP before Hon Supreme Court. (just For your reference only –MATTER OF RECORDS- I) Whether Hon’ble High court is required in a law to consider evidence submitted by Petitioner on record & ought to have recorded reasons with speaking orders for negating the evidence of Petitioner taking into account the established facts that about 60.87 Lakhs passengers were not provided discount in fares? –MATTER OF RECORDS - - as per RTI Information received – It is matter of records (placed as evidence before both Hon courts) that Northern railways(36 Lakhs), North east Railways (8 Lakhs), South Central railways (16 Lakhs) passengers were not provided discount in fares. II) Whether Hon’ble High court is required in a law to ensure compliance of it’s own directives dt 26/07/2013 issued to Respondents, before passing final order in the matter on dt 27/09/2013? –MATTER OF RECORDS - - In review petition before Hon High Court , on 26th July 2013, Hon Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari & Hon justice Sh A S Chandurkar had directed Railways to place additional material in this regard within 4 weeks on record i.e. income generated through sale of the tickets to those passengers and the subsequent discount to which they were entitled, who have travelled in high capacity coaches. Railways had not filed any document on record on this issue even after 8 Weeks. Hon High Court bench comprising Hon Justice A.B. Chaudhari & Hon justice Sh P.B. Varale dismissed Review petition on 27th Sept 2013 without ensuring compliance of its own directions. III) Whether Hon’ble High court is required in a law to pass final orders in PIL/ Review Petition after receipt of replies from all 17 Respondents instead of relying upon the reply of only 3 (PIL)/1 (Review) Respondents? MATTER OF RECORDS –just For your reference only- In PIL before Hon High Court , on 19th Dec 2013, Hon Justice P.B. Hardas & Hon Justice A.B. Chaudhari & In review petition before Hon High Court , on 27th Sept 2013, Hon Justice A.B. Chaudhari & Hon justice Sh P.B. Varale dismissed PIL & REVIEW PETITION. IV) Whether Hon’ble High court is required in a law in the interest of justice to consider Petitioner’s submission regarding deliberate misrepresentation & suppression of facts by Respondent No 2 & 14 ? MATTEROF RECORDS –just For your reference only- In PIL before Hon High Court , on 19th Dec 2013, Hon Justice P.B. Hardas & Hon Justice A.B. Chaudhari. & In review petition before Hon High Court , Hon Justice A.B. Chaudhari & Hon justice Sh P.B. Varale dismissed REVIEW PETITION on 27th Sept 2013,. V) Whether Hon’ble High court is required in a law to consider Petitioner’s suffering in the present matter since last 3 years & ought to have passed well reasoned order with reference to the submissions made in Para No 5 & 7 of PIL Petition? It was listed on 01st August 2014 before COURT NO 1 (Hon CHIEF JUSTICE COURT) comprising HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE R.M. LODHA, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH, HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, Hon Supreme court dismissed SLP & affirmed the order of Hon High Court. Hon Supreme court dismissed SLP with non speaking order on the issues raised by the petitioner in SLP.
    1 replies | 281 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    RTI की सबसे ज्यादा अपीलें यहां निपटाई जाती हैं! भोपाल। देश में सूचना के अधिकार के लिए हजारों आवेदन हर रोज होते होंगे लेकिन आवेदन के बाद सभी की सुनवाई हो जाए या सूचना मिले, यह शायद ही संभव हो पाता है। किसी को भ्रष्ट तंत्र के कारण सूचना नहीं मिल पाती तो किसी को डरा धमका दिया जाता है या कई सूचना के आवेदन ऐसे ही फाइलों में दबे रह जाते हैं। औऱ किसी को लोक सूचना अधिकारी के दफ्तर का चक्कर काटते हुए पूरी जिंदगी बीत जाती है लेकिन शिकायत या उसकी सुनवाई ही नहीं हो पाती। लेकिन क्या आपको पता है कि देश में एक ऐसी भी जगह है जहां पर लोगों की अपील का निपटारा जल्द से जल्द किया जा रहा है। जानकारी के मुताबिक मध्य प्रदेश के ग्वालियर से। प्रेस रिलीज के मुताबिक राज्य में ग्वालियर एक ऐसा जिला हैं जहां पर जनसुनवाई के दौरान सूचना आयोग की ओर से आरटीआई आवेदन का सबसे ज्यादा निपटारा किया गया है। राज्य सूचना आयोग द्वारा शनिवार को ग्वालियर स्थित कलक्ट्रेट कार्यालय में सुबह 11 बजे से आयोजित लोक अदालत में अब तक की लोक अदालतों की अपेक्षा सर्वाधिक अपीलों का निराकरण किया गया। Read More: Most of the RTI appeal settlement is being done in Gwalior Madhya Pradesh | RTI ?? ???? ?????? ?????? ???? ?????? ???? ???! - Oneindia Hindi
    0 replies | 270 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Punjab govt to take action against 3 IAS officers for Red Cross fund misuse The Punjab government has decided to initiate disciplinary action against a serving and two retired IAS officers for improper use of Red Cross Society funds. These are Vikas Garg, and retired officers KS Sidhu and Harkesh Singh Sidhu. This information was provided in the Punjab and Haryana high court by the state government in an ongoing case. The scandal had been exposed by Hindustan Times in 2007. Submitting that the competent authority had taken a decision to initiate action against the officers under the All-India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, and the All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958, the government informed the court, “The matter is under process.” The division bench comprising acting chief justice Ashutosh Mohunta and justice HS Sidhu directed the state government to file a status report by September 11. The impropriety found against Vikas Garg is that during his tenure as Patiala deputy commissioner (DC), using Red Cross funds, a Toyota Innova vehicle worth Rs. 10 lakh was purchased by raising loan against a fixed deposit receipt (FDR) that was yet to mature. Read More: Punjab govt to take action against 3 IAS officers for Red Cross fund misuse - Hindustan Times
    9 replies | 7062 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Padmashree: Shivraj's Padma proposals personal info, says MHA BHOPAL: "Recommendations from Shivraj Chouhan for Padmashree awards this year is a personal information," is how home ministry said in its bizarre reply to a query under Right to Information Act. In a query under right to information Act, Neemuch-based activist Jinendra Surana asked the office of prime minister about recommendations made by chief ministers of Madhya Pradesh between 2003 and 2014 (Uma Bharti, Babulal Gaur and Shivraj Singh Chouhan). The letter was forwarded by the office of prime minister (PMO) to the home ministry. Home ministry in its reply dated July 4, said recommendations are only stored for one year hence the information related to years 2003 to 2013 is not available. Read More: Padmashree: Shivraj's Padma proposals personal info, says MHA - The Times of India
    0 replies | 285 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    North Central Railway has maximum derailment casualties LUCKNOW: Ministry of Railways' response to an RTI query on number and causes of derailments in Indian Railways shows that 421 train derailments took place between 2007 and 2012 in various zones of railways. As many as 123 passengers were killed and 833 injured in the accidents. Rail fractures turned out to be the most common cause. Applicant Salim Baig had sought four point information on reasons for derailments, officers responsible for accidents, preventive measures by railways and compensation paid to victims from Ministry of Railways on May 10, 2012. Read More: North Central Railway has maximum derailment casualties - The Times of India
    0 replies | 245 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Supreme Court dismisses plea against railways on refund of fare NAGPUR: The Supreme Court has dismissed petition filed by city consumer rights activist against refund of discounted fare for passengers travelling in high capacity coaches wherein berths were extended from 72 to 81. Former railway minister Lalu Prasad Yadav on February 26, 2008, had announced 6% discount in fares for passengers travelling in high capacity coaches. The decision came into force from April 1, 2008. However, despite Railway Board circular to this effect, discount was not given to travellers. TOI was the first to report the matter in 2009. Petitioner Avinash Prabhune, Nagpur, through information under RTI in 2009, learnt that 6,000 coaches were converted into high capacity coaches (side middle berths) in 16 zones. His contention was that railways did not provide discount to around 60.87 lakh passengers in three zones - South Central Railway (SCR), North Frontier Railway (NFR) and Northern Railway (NR). The matter came to light when Prabhune, while travelling to & fro from Nagpur to Delhi on March 15 and 17, 2009, was not granted discount during his journey in high capacity coaches. Prabhune fought for 18 months to get a refund of Rs 39 in June 2010. Read More: Supreme Court dismisses plea against railways on refund of fare - The Times of India
    1 replies | 281 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    '172 Plaints of Paid News in LS Polls, Only 1 Case Confirmed' A total of 172 complaints of paid news were received by the Chief Electoral Officer of Maharashtra during recently held Lok Sabha elections, but only one out of them could be confirmed as the case of paid news, revealed an RTI query. The query was filed by RTI activist Anil Galgali seeking details of the complaints received by the CEO against candidates in Lok Sabha polls and the number of candidates disqualified for indulging in paid news. In response to the query, Shirish Mohod, an officer of Under Secretary rank in the state government, said that while a total of 172 complaints of paid news were received by the Media Certification and Monitoring Committee (MCMC) set up by the State Election Commission, only one complaint was ascertained as the paid news case. He, however, did not disclose the name of the candidate concerned and the action taken in this regard. While notices seeking an explanation were issued to 83 out of 172 candidates by the Returning Officers (ROs) of the concerned constituencies, only two candidates admitted to having spent the amount and showing it in their account of expenses. Read More: http://www.outlookindia.com/news/article/172-Plaints-of-Paid-News-in-LS-Polls-Only-1-Case-Confirmed/853669
    0 replies | 362 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Clueless city corporation gives Vishaka guidelines a go-by MANGALORE: The Mangalore City Corporation (MCC) has several committees but is quite oblivious to the fact that it should constitute the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) to protect its women workforce from sexual harassment. Most government officials are clueless about the Vishaka guidelines, which were put in place to protect women from sexual harassment at workplaces. The Sexual Harassment at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013 was notified on December 9 last year by the state government. The blunder came to light when advocate Vivekananda Paniyala sought answers from MCC whether they had ICC, through RTI. The corporation information officer confirmed that MCC did not have ICC or a complaints box to receive plaints of harassment from its women employees. The guidelines were stipulated by the Supreme Court of India. The Sexual Harassment Act requires an employer to set up ICC at each office or branch of an organization employing at least 10 employees. Read More: Clueless city corporation gives Vishaka guidelines a go-by - The Times of India
    0 replies | 221 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    UP govt overrides RTI to hide truth behind communal riots Lucknow: The truth behind the recent communal riots in Saharanpur, as also in Muzaffarnagar and several other cities of UP in the last three years, will never be known to the common man. For, the Akhilesh Yadav government has refused to share any information regarding the riots demanded by an activist through an RTI query. Not only that, the state government has emphasised that such information related to communal riots can neither be made public nor shared in the assembly. This blatant assertion by the state government came to light when the RTI activist was flatly refused information that she had sought about the communal riots in the last three years. Read More: Runtime Error
    0 replies | 280 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Probe against Rajeev Mehta on fast track DEHRADUN: The Uttarakhand government has put on fast track the probe into alleged financial irregularities committed in 2004 by secretary general of the Indian Olympic Association Rajeev Mehta, who was arrested and later let off in Glasgow during the recently-held Commonwealth Games. "The probe against Mehta for his alleged irregularities during the 2004 state-level games has been fast-tracked. Further action will be taken against him after he comes back from Glasgow," a government source told TOI on Tuesday. The probe had been initiated on the basis of a report prepared by the treasury office in 2004. TOI has a copy of the report which an RTI activist accessed from the state government. Read More: Probe against Rajeev Mehta on fast track - The Times of India
    0 replies | 164 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    RTI in patent matters; HC seeks response from Centre on PIL The Delhi High Court today sought responses from the Centre, the Controller General of Patent, Designs & Trade Marks and others on a PIL seeking a direction that they be asked to provide information under the Right to Information Act. "We will issue notice in the matter", a bench, comprising Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath, said after senior lawyer Salman Khurshid advanced brief arguments in the case. The court issued notices to the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and the Controller General of Patent, Designs & Trade Marks (CGPDTM), Central Assistant Public Information Officer on the PIL filed by Shamnad Basheer. Read More: RTI in patent matters; HC seeks response from Centre on PIL | Business Standard News
    2 replies | 212 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    RTI: Delhi HC admits PIL over patent office’s disclosure policy PIL wants India’s patents office to follow the Right to Information Act in order to make its information disclosure system more transparent Mumbai: The Delhi high court on Wednesday admitted a public interest litigation (PIL) that wants India’s patents office to follow the overarching Right to Information (RTI) Act in order to make its information disclosure system more transparent and easily accessible to the public. “It is an important issue and deserves consideration,” said chief justice G. Rohini about the petition that claims the disclosure policy followed by the patents office flouts the RTI Act. The PIL, filed by a group of lawyers, argued that the Office of Controller General of Patents Designs and Trademarks, which deals with crucial market monopoly decisions, often denies vital information of relevance to the public by invoking provisions in the Patents Act. The court sent a notice to the Central government asking it to respond by 29 August, when the case will be next heard. The petition alleged that the patents office has been following rules laid out in the Patents Act in order to block key information related to the working of patents. The department, exploiting provisions in the intellectual property (IP) law, also ignores the time frame stipulated by the RTI Act for disseminating information and charges a much higher fee for disclosures, it alleged. This is despite the fact that the RTI Act trumps all other information dispensation mechanisms under other specific legislation, including the Patents Act, the PIL claimed. ​ The lawyers group led by Shamnad Basheer, former IP chair at the National University of Juridical Sciences in Kolkata and founder of intellectual property blog Spicy IP, was represented by Salman Khurshid, senior advocate and former minister for law and justice. “A patent is a 20-year monopoly and this monopoly is granted on the promise that the public would benefit through the patent information submitted by the patentee. Transparency and disclosure of patent information therefore lie at the heart of the patent regime,” said Basheer. ​ Patent information is vital and it should be made available in an easy and affordable manner to the public, he added. The patents office argued that it has its own specific legislation governing the dissemination of information to the public, and therefore the RTI Act does not apply. The patents office currently charges at least 100 times the fee charged under the RTI Act, making it prohibitively expensive for the common man to seek information, the PIL said. Read More: RTI: Delhi HC admits PIL over patent office?s disclosure policy - Livemint
    2 replies | 212 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    This issue has been discussed several times on the portal. Please read some of the threads in the following search results: Google (NOTE: There are any pages of results !)
    3 replies | 193 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Govt. has asked the IOA and the NSFs to place Sec 4(1)(b) information on their websites Government has declared all National Sports Federations (NSFs) receiving grant of Rs.10 lakh or more in a year as Public Authorities under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information (RTI), Act 2005. Further, as per the provisions under Section 4(2) of the RTI Act, 2005 it has been made incumbent upon all the public authorities to suo-moto disclose information on the various activities carried out by them. This is the requirement of good governance and transparency in sports bodies. In view of the above, the Govt. has asked the IOA and the NSFs to place the following information on their website latest by 20-08-2014:- (i) Complete details of officials who were sent to CWG by IOA/NSFs along with the amount paid such as air fare, boarding and lodging, local transportation, daily allowance etc. (ii) List of players(alongwith support personnel) who actually participated in Commonwealth Games. Further, the IOA and NSFs have been asked to place the following information on their website with regard to all international events to be held in India and abroad:- (i)List of core probables and basis of their selection. (i) Details of coaching camps organized including venues, dates and list of participants. (ii) Notification of selection criteria for such events well in advance along with the details of time and venue for selection. (iii) List of the athletes selected. (iv) Details of athletes, support personnel and other officials sent to the event along with the amount paid to them towards air fare, boarding and lodging, local transportation, daily allowance etc. This is required to be placed on the website within 15 days of the conclusion of the event. (v) Performance criteria which formed the basis of selection, actual performance in terms of timing, distance, etc. and the position obtained by each athlete/team. Read More: Press Information Bureau English Releases
    1 replies | 310 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    The question to be answered is what is meant by the word "directory" in sec 4(1)(b)(ix). CIC orders are binding in nature, unless they have been challenged in a Court.
    7 replies | 222 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Why are you starting multiple threads and making multiple posts on the same subject/issue ?
    9 replies | 533 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Answer scripts of others will not be given to you UNLESS you bring in "larger public interest" - like cheating, impersonation, corruption, etc. There is no point in going to court over this order. CIC orders can only be challenged in High Court by way of a Writ Petition.
    4 replies | 197 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    No, residential address of CPIO/FAA is not required under Sec 4(1)(b)(xvi). However, there is an order of the CIC requiring to publish residential addresses of ALL employees under Sec 4(1)(b)(ix) - unless they are occupying "sensitive" posts, where it can be exempted under Sec 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act 2005. Please read; http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/20434-residential-addresses-officers-have-suo-motu-disclosed.html
    7 replies | 222 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    In that case, DO NOT start multiple threads on the same topic/issue !
    6 replies | 483 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    Are you trying to get an arms licence through RTI ? OR Are you trying to get information about some arms licence using RTI ?
    6 replies | 483 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    CBI sets up probe against own officers for letting off Bhushan Steel MD The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has ordered an internal inquiry against its own officers probing the bribery scandal involving Syndicate Bank’s now-suspended chairman & managing director, S K Jain. The latest inquiry relates to CBIofficials not arresting Neeraj Singhal, vice-chairman & managing director of Bhushan Steel, one of the companies that were allegedly trying to settle their loan dues by paying a bribe. The CBI team had orders from Director Ranjit Sinha to arrest Singhal but they allowed him to leave from his Delhi bungalow last Saturday. The investigation to find out the reason for this lapse will be conducted by a separate team of the agency’s officers. Jain, along with eight others, including Prakash Industries Chairman & Managing Director Ved Prakash Agarwal, were arrested in this case on Saturday. On Friday last week, 200 CBI officers, some senior officers and sub-inspectors, and independent witnesses raided 20 places across Bangalore, Bhopal, Mumbai and Delhi. Read More: CBI sets up probe against own officers for letting off Bhushan Steel MD | Business Standard News
    0 replies | 85 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    CBI sets up probe against own officers for letting off Bhushan Steel MD The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has ordered an internal inquiry against its own officers probing the bribery scandal involving Syndicate Bank’s now-suspended chairman & managing director, S K Jain. The latest inquiry relates to CBIofficials not arresting Neeraj Singhal, vice-chairman & managing director of Bhushan Steel, one of the companies that were allegedly trying to settle their loan dues by paying a bribe. The CBI team had orders from Director Ranjit Sinha to arrest Singhal but they allowed him to leave from his Delhi bungalow last Saturday. The investigation to find out the reason for this lapse will be conducted by a separate team of the agency’s officers. Jain, along with eight others, including Prakash Industries Chairman & Managing Director Ved Prakash Agarwal, were arrested in this case on Saturday. On Friday last week, 200 CBI officers, some senior officers and sub-inspectors, and independent witnesses raided 20 places across Bangalore, Bhopal, Mumbai and Delhi. Read More: CBI sets up probe against own officers for letting off Bhushan Steel MD | Business Standard News
    0 replies | 127 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Weeks Ago
    karira replied to a thread RTI Of my documents in Say Hello
    Can you clarify as to why you have a doubt about the validity of your BBA marksheet ? If you gave attended classes, got the hall ticket, appeared in the exam on your own, got the marksheet from the University/Board, then how come you still have a doubt about its validity ?
    9 replies | 424 view(s)
More Activity
About Shakti Prakash

Basic Information

Date of Birth
June 30, 1967 (47)
Personal Information

About the Personal Details.

Location:
agra
Your Real Name:
Shakti Prakash

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1
Posts Per Day
0.00
General Information
Last Activity
10-01-2008
Join Date
09-02-2008
Referrals
1

1 Friend

Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1

Shakti Prakash's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Last Updated
No results to show...
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...

Activity Information
  • Total Points:
  • 6
  • Activity Level:
  • 1
  • To Next Level:
  • 14
  • Percent Into Level:
  • 0% Achieved
  • Daily Activity:
  • 0 / 4.57 (0%)
  • Weekly Activity:
  • 0.3 / 32.02 (0.94%)
  • Monthly Activity:
  • 2 / 141.8 (1.41%)
Points
  • Points for Attachment:
  • 0
  • Points for Posts:
  • 0
  • Points for Posts (Own Threads):
  • 0
  • Points for Threads:
  • 0
  • Points for Thread Ratings Given:
  • 0
  • Points for Thread Ratings Received:
  • 0
  • Points for Polls Posted:
  • 0
  • Points for Poll Votes:
  • 0
  • Points for Confirmed Friends:
  • 0
  • Points for Reputation (Given):
  • 0
  • Points for Reputation (Received):
  • 0
  • Points for Referrals:
  • 0
  • Points for Days Registered:
  • 0
  • Points for Blogs:
  • 0
  • Points for Blog Comments:
  • 0
  • Points for Mentions Given:
  • 0
  • Points for Mentions Received:
  • 0
  • Points for Tags Given:
  • 0
  • Points for Tags Received:
  • 0
  • Points for Profile Completed:
  • 0
  • Points for Contests Won:
  • 0
  • Points for Registration:
  • 0
  • Points For [DBTech] DragonByte Gallery Uploads:
  • 0
  • Points For Award Bonuses:
  • 0
  • Points For Thanks Given:
  • 0
  • Points For Likes Given:
  • 0
  • Points For Thanks Received:
  • 0
  • Points For Likes Received:
  • 0
  • Points For Problems Posted:
  • 0
  • Points For Problems Solved:
  • 0
  • Points For Solutions Validated:
  • 0
1 Achievements
Achievement Earned on 06-22-2014 08:03 AM
Started off by making 1st Post
Achievement Earned on 06-22-2014 08:03 AM
0 Awards
Currently Held Trophies
Previously Held Trophies


About RTI INDIA

    RTI INDIA: Invoking Your Rights. We provide easy ways to request, analyze & share Government documents by use of Right to Information and by way of community support.

Follow us on

Twitter Facebook youtube Tumblr RTI Microblog RSS Feed Apple App Store Google Play for Android

Newsletter Subscription