• karira's Avatar
    4 Hours Ago
    This is India.......anything is possible. Specially if it is CIC. There is one case where the CPIO filed a second appeal against an order of the FAA AND the IC actually did pass an order.
    10 replies | 69 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    5 Hours Ago
    Yes ! This is not the only citation. In my (second) first appeal filed with FAA of CIC, I have cited two others, where CIC has decided that if FAAs orders are not being followed, it should be the FAA who should file second appeal.
    10 replies | 69 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    5 Hours Ago
    karira replied to a thread RTI Happenings: New Delhi: With no CIC, RTI appeals pile up in RTI in Media
    Reference the above news report, the RTI application filed by Commodore (Retd.) Lokesh Batra, the CPIOs reply and the compilation of data are attached to this post.
    1 replies | 32 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    8 Hours Ago
    Anyone who is aggrieved by such unauthorised returns by the CIC, should immediately do the following: 1. Shoot of a email directly to Secretary CIC explaining all details. 2. Send the same by hard copy and follow up till you get the diary number 3. Lodge a complaint on the public grievance portal - to the effect that CIC employees are shirking their work, working inefficiently and working without any procedure/practice.
    5 replies | 1051 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    8 Hours Ago
    The CIC has ruled that if the CPIO does not follow the FAAs orders, then the FAA should file a second appeal in the CIC. It has also provided compensation to the appellant for this. Facts The appellant has sought the following information regarding the appointment of the Bhure Kha, Gourav Shukla, Rameshwar, Subhash Joshi and Prahlad Rathore:- 1. Provide the certified copies of the rulings/orders/guidelines adopted by the department regarding the appointment of Grameen Dak Sewak. 2. Provide the certified copies of the applications and the documents given by the mentioned Dak Sewak. 3. Provide the names and designations of the officers under whose observance the appointment of the said Grameen Dak Sewak were appointed. 4. Provide the certified copy of the appointment letter and the notesheet prepared by the officers of the committee regarding the appointment of the said Grameen Dak Sewak. 5. Provide the details of the rulings which were obstructed during the appointment of the said Grameen Dak Sewak and also provide the copies of the notings prepared by the officers regarding the same. 6. What actions were taken against the officers who were found guilty regarding the appointment of the said Grameen Dak Sewak. Grounds for the Second Appeal: The CPIO has not provided the desired information. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present Appellant: Mr. Ravi Kumar through VC Respondent: Absent The appellant stated that inspite of the FAA’s order dated 3/5/2013 the information sought by him in his RTI application dated 1/3/2013 has not been provided. He further stated that he has been waiting for the information since long and should be compensated for inconvenience and detriment caused to him due to non-provision of the information. The CPIO is not present inspite of being put on notice for this hearing. Decision notice: It is seen that a Coordinate Bench of the Commission in its decision dated 08/11/2012 has held as under:- “4. We have carefully considered the facts of the case. While the decision of the CPIO initially not to disclose the information might have some basis in view of the fact that the selection process was on and the records of the selection constituted Cabinet papers, there was no case for not disclosing the information once the Appellate Authority so directed. It must be clearly understood that whenever the public authority is of the view that the order of the Appellate Authority cannot be implemented, the only course open is to challenge the order before the CIC. We wish the public authority had done this instead of deciding not to implement the order of the Appellate Authority.” Respectfully following the aforesaid decision we direct the CPIO to comply with the FAA’s order dated 03/05/2013 and provide the information sought by the appellant in his RTI application dated 01/03/2013, free of cost, within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. From the foregoing it is apparent that the appellant has not received any information in response to the FAA’s order dated 03/05/2013. For the inconvenience caused to him, he deserves to be compensated. Therefore, in exercise of the powers vested in the CIC in Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act we direct the department to compensate him by an amount of Rs.1000/- for the inconvenience and detriment caused to him. Accordingly, the CPIO should ensure that this amount is remitted to the appellant by demand draft/pay order within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. BASANT SETH Information Commissioner Citation: Mr. Ravi Kumar v. Department of Posts in File No. CIC/BS/A/2013/001964/5925
    10 replies | 69 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    8 Hours Ago
    The CIC has ruled (based on earlier SC judgment) that Educational qualification certificates & other documents of an employee are private and third party. Full decision is appended below: Information sought: The appellant has sought the following information/documents related to Sh. Ravinder Kumar:- (i) Copy of Marksheets. (ii) School Leaving Certificate. (iii) Entrance letter and other related documents. Grounds for the Second Appeal: The CPIO has not provided the desired information due to the denial of third party. Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing: The following were present Appellant: Absent Respondent: Mr. J. Mandal CPIO’s representative through VC The CPIO’s representative stated that the appellant in his RTI application dated 09/03/2013 had sought copies of the documents supplied by Shri Ravinder Kumar for obtaining employment as GDS and they had carried out the process as outlined under Section 11 of the RTI Act but the employee has objected to the disclosure. He further stated that the information is personal in nature and exempt under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act as no larger public purpose is involved. The appellant is not present for canvassing his case/contesting the CPIO’s representative’s submissions. Decision notice: It is fairly obvious that the educational qualification certificates & other documents of an employee are in the nature of personal information about a third party. The employee might have filed these documents before the appointing authority for the purpose of seeking employment, but that is not reason enough for this information to be brought in to the public domain to which anybody could have access. The appellant has not demonstrated any larger public purpose which the disclosure of this information would serve. Hence, we concur with the submissions of the CPIO’s representative that the information is exempt from disclosure. The matter is closed. BASANT SETH Information Commissioner
    1 replies | 39 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    8 Hours Ago
    The IC has nicely analysed each and every part of Sec 8(1)(j). Useful for future references.
    2 replies | 52 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    13 Hours Ago
    In a well argued order, IC SA has ruled that salary details and official address are disclosable under RTI: Information about salary and official address of public servant is public in nature and shall be disclosed to any person including spouse. Salary details including deductions contained in Salary slip or certificate and residential address of the public servants is personal information, and also third party information. Only after proof of larger public interest such information also can be given…. The spouses do have right to get any information about each other though they are involved in marital disputes/civil, criminal cases filed mutually against them. They can also seek information if in public domain to help them to prove or disprove the charges. But the information about their person unconnected with the discharge of public duties cannot be sought unless they establish a larger public interest. Filing of 50 RTI applications reflects the personal animosity but not public interest. This decision is also important because iot analyses Sec 8(1)(j) threadbare !
    2 replies | 52 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    14 Hours Ago
    It is the first one listed on this page. Just click on the link: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/docs/cat/2-court-judgements-rti-issues/
    3 replies | 89 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    14 Hours Ago
    karira replied to a thread lost RC book in Non RTI Issues
    This information is already widely available in the public domain. Just visit the RTO, from where the RC book was issued and enquire about the procedure to get duplicate RC. The same should also be available on the website of the RTO / Transport department of the state.
    4 replies | 56 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    14 Hours Ago
    Before you start drafting your RTI application, please read some of the threads in the following search results: https://www.google.co.in/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1KYPB_enIN603IN603&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=speed%20breakers%20site%3Awww.rtiindia.org (NOTE: There are many pages of results !)
    3 replies | 50 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    14 Hours Ago
    This issue has been discussed before on the portal. Please read: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/86109-toll-bridge-exemption-physically-challenged-person.html
    4 replies | 47 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    17 Hours Ago
    As per "insider information", all the present seven (7) ICs in the CIC have applied for the post of Chief IC. It will now be interesting to see what the Selection committee does. More importantly, what will the rest of the ICs do, if they are not selected for the post of CIC.
    2 replies | 345 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    18 Hours Ago
    I want to guide you but unfortunately cannot make anything out of this thread. Please put in point form.
    13 replies | 347 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    19 Hours Ago
    karira replied to a thread Educational Loan in Non RTI Issues
    This portal is dedicated to discussing issues related to the RTI Act 2005.
    4 replies | 117 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    karira has just uploaded Bombay HC: Deemed Universities are PAs under RTI! The Bombay HC has ruled that Deemed Universities are public authorites under RTI and have to provide information under R
    3 replies | 89 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    The Karnataka Consumers forum had petitioned the Karnataka HC to quash the circular of KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION directing District Forums not to hear matters related to RTI. The Karnataka HC has now ruled that since the National Consumer Forum (NCF) has constituted a larger Bench to hear the matter, the complainant can approach the Commission to withdraw the circular, once the NCF has decided the matter. ================= IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014 BEFORE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE K.L.MANJUNATH AND HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH WP NO 9069 OF 2013 ( GM-CON) BETWEEN KARNATAKA CONSUMERS FORUM (R) NO.93, 9TH CROSS, GOKULAM 1ST STAGE MYSORE 570 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT DR SRI S P THIRUMALA RAO S/O DR S D PASHUPATHI AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS ... PETITIONER (By Sri. P S DINESH KUMAR, ADVCATE) AND 1.THE REGISTRAR KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION BASAVA BHAVAN BANGALORE 560001 2.THE SECRETARY KARNATAKA INFORMATION COMMISSION GATE-2, ROOM NO.333, 3RD FLOOR, M S BUILDING BANGALORE 560001 2 3.THE REGISTRAR NATIOANL CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION UPBHOKTA NYAY BHAVAN F BLCOK GENERAL POST OFFICE COMPLEX INA, NEW DELHI 110023 ... RESPONDENTS (By Sri G B SHARATH GOWDA FOR R2) THIS W.P. IS FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29.8.2012 VIDE ANNEXURE-F. AND TO DECLARE THAT THE COMMUNICATION BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND OTHER DISTRICT FORUMS VIDE ANNEXURE-E IS ILLEGAL AND NOT BINDING ON THE DISTRICT FORUMS. This petition coming on for preliminary hearing this day, MANJUNATH J., made the following ORDER The learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the Circular dated 29.08.2012 issued by the Registrar, Karnataka State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Bangalore wherein the circular is issued to all the District Forums not to entertain any complaint lodged by a person under the provisions of RTI Act. So far as this question is concerned, the National Forum had taken view earlier not to entertain such complaints.2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that now the National Consumer Forum has referred the matter to the larger bench. If it is so, after disposal by the larger Bench, it is open for the petitioner to move the Consumer Forum for withdrawal of the Circular dated 29.8.2012 if the National Forum holds that such complaint could be maintained by the State and District Consumer Court. With these observations, the petition is disposed of.Sd/-JUDGE Sd/-JUDGE Nm
    374 replies | 35101 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    karira has just uploaded Deli HC Division Bench: AWHO is not a public authority under RTI! A division Bench of the Delhi HC has heard a intra court appeal (LPA) and set aside the single judge order declaring AWH
    0 replies | 49 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    karira has just uploaded Question papers of "specialised" exams not to be disclosed under RTI! The Delhi HC has ruled that question papers of "specialised" exams - such as a specialised trade or course - cannot be di
    0 replies | 56 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    karira replied to a thread rti in Ask for RTI Query
    Yes you can file a RTI request for information with the PIO of the Village Panchayat.
    3 replies | 107 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    There is no "online" display of passport information by the RPO !
    4 replies | 114 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    The decision of the CIC referred to in the above news report is attached to this post.
    1 replies | 100 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    Disclose communication on request to probe ex-CJI: CIC New Delhi, 23 November: The Central Information Commission has directed the Law Ministry to disclose the action taken on a request to probe former Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishnan for alleged misconduct, saying correspondence between the Executive about a former CJI is not privileged correspondence. Information Commissioner Sridhar Acharyulu said that even if it is assumed for a moment that the information regarding 'action taken' on a request for probe against a former CJI is privileged, such 'privilege' is not expressly provided as a ground for rejection of a request for information under Section 8(1) of the Right to Information Act. The case pertains to a request by RTI activist Subhash Agrawal for a probe against Balakrishnan for alleged misconduct while he was the CJI through the public grievance portal of the government. Through his RTI application, Agrawal had sought copies of correspondence, file notings, documents, etc. on action taken on his submission regarding the probe. The information was not provided by the ministry. But Acharyulu held that, “the information sought has nothingto do with the privilege of Parliament or state legislature. “The correspondence between Executive about a former CJI is not privileged correspondence as per any provision of RTI Act or Constitution of India. It is not information given in fiduciary capacity.” He said that even if any disclosure of such information about probe against a former CJI would cause harm to 'protected interest', Section 8(2) of the RTI Act allows disclosure of the same if the larger public interest is involved. Acharyulu said that non-disclosure of what Agrawal has sought would neither serve any public interest and nor would it harm any protected interest. He said that, in fact, public interest in its disclosure would outweigh the probable harm, if any, to protected (if at all protected) interests. Quoting from a Supreme Court decision, the Information Commissioner said, “As rightly pointed out by Justice Bhagwati, the Commission holds that the government's privilege to withhold disclosure of documents is subject to right to information of the individual. “Commission directs the Department of Legal Affairs to provide the action taken information about request for probe against former Chief Justice of India, K G Balakrishnan,” Acharyulu said. The Commissioner said that the Supreme Court had, in the case of S P Gupta vs Union of India, considered examination of the correspondence between the CJI and the government to determine whether the requisite consultation for the appointments had taken place. “Apexcourtdismissed the argument that such correspondence formed part of advice given by the Council of Ministers and could not be disclosed by virtue of Article 74(2) of the Constitution. “The Court held that while the exact advice given by the Council of Ministers to the President could not be examined by the Court, the material on which such advice was based was not excluded from the judicial purview,” he said. Read More: The Statesman: Disclose communication on request to probe ex-CJI: CIC
    1 replies | 100 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    Check the GATE admission brochure...that should have all the details. If it does not have, then call the IIT which is conducting GATE this year.
    2 replies | 79 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    What school is it ? Private or Government or Government aided ? Is there any "larger public interest" in getting the marks memo of a third party ?
    11 replies | 266 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    First check the TRAI website. Some of the information will already be available there.
    4 replies | 111 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    Just redraft all queries and ask for: 1. File notings related to the SC Judgment No....dated..... 2. List of actions taken based on supreme court judgment .................................. Also file separate RTI to CBDT (Central Board of Direct Taxes) on the same issue.
    4 replies | 132 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    karira replied to a thread PM salary in Ask for RTI Query
    Is it very difficult to do this : Let me google that for you
    2 replies | 138 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    karira replied to a thread indian cdc in Ask for RTI Query
    Can you please post more details and clarify what is the application about ? What is CDC ? Although you may be familiar with the subject and all the terms that you are using....most members will not understand your abbreviated query !
    3 replies | 99 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    Some of your queries are indeed seeking opinion and interpretations. In this case the Bank is not uploading the credit information to CIBIL, so there is no credit report. If you feel that this action of the Bank (not uploading reports) violate any RBI circular, then the best is to first complain to RTI (ordinary complaint). Wait for some time and then file a RTI seeking action taken on your complaint.
    3 replies | 102 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    For what period did you ask the information on bad loans ?
    13 replies | 598 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    There is enough information on this on the NPS and some other websites. Is it very difficult do the following ? Let me google that for you
    3 replies | 166 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    CIC orders Tihar Prisons to comply with Section 4 Disclosure under the RTI Act The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the Tihar Prisons in Delhi to strictly comply with its obligations of proactive disclosure of information under Section 4 of The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act). This decision (1st attachment) is accessible on the CIC's website at: http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2013_001155-SA_M_142347.pdf I had sought disclosure of the prison manual and rules and regulations of the Tihar Prisons in December 2012 as the same were not available on its website. I had also asked for updating the content of the information disclosed on its dedicated website as they had not done so. The PIO replied that the Prison Manual is available with private publishers. Unhappy with the decision I filed appeals and the matter escalated to the CIC. last week, the CIC has ordered the Tihar Prisons to strictly comply with the obligation of proactive disclosure of information under Section 4 of the RTI Act. Strangely, during the pendency of this case, the official website of Tihar Prisons became password protected and their officials who appeared before the CIC did not even know about this development. I had to demonstrate this fact using the CIC's computer and Internet connection. The appeal letter and addendum submitted to the CIC when the matter came up for hearing are attached for your reference (2nd and 3rd attachments). In September this year CHRI organised a conference on RTI and transparency of police and prison websites across India. Prison departments across are amongst some of the poorly performing of public authorities. I have attached a PPT on this subject which was presented at the conference (4th attachment). I have also attached two comparative charts of the status of the official websites of the Police and Prisons Departments across the country for your reference (2 sheets in the MS Excel file in the 5th attachment). A lot needs to be done for improving transparency in these two departments which have the power to restrict people's fundamental rights for the purpose of law enforcement. They have a duty to be extra transparent given the nature of their official functions. Please circulate this email and the attachment widely. Thanks Venkatesh NayakProgramme Coordinator Access to Information Programme Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative
    0 replies | 91 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    1 Day Ago
    जजों के आगे माननीय लगाना जरूरी नहीं -शहर के एक आरटीआई कार्यकर्ता को मिले जवाब में हुआ खुलासा रोहित मिश्र, लखनऊ आपने जजों के नाम के आगे अक्सर 'माननीय' लगा देखा होगा। हालांकि ये जरूरी नहीं कि उनके नाम के आगे माननीय लगाया ही जाए। ये लोगों की इच्छा के ऊपर है कि वे जजों के नाम के आगे 'माननीय' इस्तेमाल करना चाहते हैं या नहीं। करीब दो महीने पहले राजधानी के ही आरटीआई कार्यकर्ता संजय शर्मा ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट से इसका जवाब मांगा था। पेशे से इंजीनियर संजय ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट को पत्र लिखकर जानकारी चाही थी कि आखिर क्या कारण है कि जजों के नाम के आगे अनिवार्य रूप से माननीय लिखा रहता है। केंद्रीय जनसूचना अधिकारी (सीपीआईओ) और सुप्रीम कोर्ट के एडिशनल रजिस्ट्रार अजय अग्रवाल ने इसके संबंध में जवाब भेजा है कि जजों के नाम के आगे माननीय लगाने के लिए स्पष्ट तौर पर कोई नियम/आदेश/शासनादेश या अधिनियम मौजूद नहीं हैं। संजय ने इस जवाब के बाद कहा है कि जजों के नाम के आगे माननीय लगाना व्यक्ति की इच्छा होनी चाहिए। अगर कोई किसी जज के नाम के आगे माननीय नहीं लगाना चाहता तो उसे न्यायाधीश की बेइज्जती नहीं मानना चाहिए। राष्ट्रपति को भेजेंगे ज्ञापन संस्था तहरीर (ट्रांसपेरेंसी, एकाउंटेबिलिटी एंड ह्यूमन राइट्स इनीशिएटिव फॉर रेव्योल्यूशन) के संस्थापक संजय कहते हैं कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट से मिले इस जवाब के बाद वह राष्ट्रपति प्रणब मुखर्जी को इस संबंध में एक ज्ञापन देने जा रहे हैं। संजय कहते हैं कि जजों के नाम के आगे माननीय लगाना एक तरह का चलन है क्योंकि इसके बारे में जनता को जानकारी नहीं है। ऐसे में जनता को इस तथ्य के बारे में जानकारी दी जानी चाहिए कि ये शर्त नहीं है कि जजों के नाम के आगे माननीय लगाया जाए। ये व्यक्ति के ऊपर होना चाहिए कि वह किसी माननीय कहना चाहता है और किसे नहीं। नहीं है किसी भी जज की संपत्ति का रिकॉर्ड संजय ने अपनी आरटीआई में मुख्य न्यायाधीश समेत दूसरे जजों की संपत्ति के ब्योरे के बारे में भी जानकारी चाही थी। संजय कहते हैं कि पर्सनल एंड ट्रेनिंग डिपार्टमेंट ने जुलाई में लोकपाल और लोकायुक्त एक्ट के तहत सभी पब्लिक सर्वेंट्स को उनकी संपत्ति का ब्योरा घोषित करने के लिए कहा था। हालांकि अभी तक इस बारे में जजों ने कोई जानकारी नहीं दी है। संजय की आरटीआई के जवाब में अजय अग्रवाल ने कहा है कि इस तरह की कोई जानकारी उनके पास नहीं है। 'ये लोगों के ऊपर छोड़ दिया जाना चाहिए कि वे जजों के नाम के आगे माननीय लगाते हैं या नहीं। जहां तक मैं सोचता हूं कि जजों के नाम के आगे माननीय लगाना गैर बराबरी का प्रतीक है और मनवाधिकार के साथ ही भारत में समानता के अधिकार का हनन है।' Read More: ???? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ????? ???? - Navbharat Times
    0 replies | 97 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    You can get this information by filing a RTI application with the office of the Transport Commissioner Karnataka. Your RTI application has to be as per the RTI Rules and Fees for Karnataka. These are available in the Guide section of the portal. Please read: Guide http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/ http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/frequently-asked-questions.html http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/blogs/karira/4403-transparency.html
    1 replies | 85 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    OLA cabs is NOT a public authority under RTI. You will not get any information from them under RTI.
    2 replies | 93 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    Six parties ignore CIC summonses NEW DELHI: Cocking a snook at the Central Information Commission (CIC), none of the six national political parties were present to respond to summonses of non-compliance. The CIC had issued a third notice in September this year seeking to know why political parties had not complied by its June 3 order that recognized them as public authorities under the RTI Act. A full bench of the commission comprising information commissioners Vijai Sharma, Manjula Parashar and Sharat Sabharwal heard the views of complainants Association of Democratic Reforms (ADR), activist Subhash Agrawal and intervener RK Jain who demanded issuing show-cause notice to the political parties. After the detailed hearing, where Agrawal and ADR demanded imposition of penalty on the political parties and compensation, the commission reserved the order. Jain also said that CIC should use its power of civil court to summon these parties and seek explanation for non-implementation of its directives. Agrawal demanded maximum penalty under provision of RTI act and providing exemplary compensation under provision of RTI act. He also urged CIC to recommend to the central government, election commission, central board of direct taxes (CBDT) and others concerned, abolition of direct and indirect financing by Union and state governments to the political parties. "No further government-accommodations may be allotted to any political party. Existing ones may be vacated say within three years...Political parties may be made to submit their complete fiscal details including incoming and outgoing funds to election commission for making these public through website," he said. The ADR said this is a clear case of open defiance of a statutory authority by the six political parties and is not conducive to the functioning of a democratic society. Describing the non-compliance as "open defiance" by political parties ADR's Jagdeep Chhokar said that the compensation should be exemplary and meaningful. ADR has demanded a compensation of Rs 44.10 crore from all 6 political parties calculated at 5% of the party's annual income. The CIC on June 3 last year had declared Congress, BJP, CPI, CPI(M), NCP and BSP as public authorities answerable under RTI act and given them six weeks to comply with the mandatory requirements under the law for the processing of information seeking applications. But none of the parties followed the directives. Read More: Six parties ignore CIC summonses - The Times of India
    197 replies | 16068 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    karira started a thread RTI Happenings: Telengana: RTI a costly affair? in RTI in Media
    RTI a costly affair? HYDERABAD: Obtaining information through Right to Information (RTI) just became a costly affair. An activist, who had earlier this month sought information on developmental works was left flummoxed after the Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewage Board (HMWS&SB), in their reply, asked him to pay a whopping Rs 32,470 for providing the demanded statistics. In a series of five questions, a social activist Mohammed Abdul Akram of Yugantar (NGO) sought data on the number of completed and pending projects in Moghalpura, and the budgeted amount earmarked for each. He had also requested information on the list of borewells sanctioned from 2009 to 2014, apart from requesting details on the number of sanctioned bore-wells which were yet to be dug. Instead of furnishing the information, HMWS&SB general manager of O&M division 1, Miralam S V Ramana Rao on November 11 gave the applicant a list of charges which the water works department would reportedly incur in providing the information. What is ironic is that out of the Rs 32,470 "fee", only Rs 60 was mentioned as cost component for typing and printing the information. Invoking section 7 (3) of the RTI Act in reply to the NGO activist, the HMWS&SB said that it would need a technical officer (TO), a manager, an attendant and a data processing officer (DPO) to procure the information and that the entire procedure would take eight days. Calculating salaries of each staff member for the same period, the applicant was asked to shell out Rs 17,240 as changes for deputing the TO, Rs 4,434 for the manager, Rs 7,672 for the attendant and Rs 3,064 for the DPO. "The information I sought was simple. I have not asked for any technical plans. By unjustifiably charging me, it seems the HMWS&SB is trying to block information," Akram claimed. When TOI tried to contact the HMWS&SB general manager of O&M division 1, Miralam S V Ramana Rao, he remained unavailable for comments. Read More: RTI a costly affair? - The Times of India
    0 replies | 109 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    Private hospitals siphon off hundreds of crores in AP, T Despite Officials Uncovering Scam Last November, The Two Govts Are Yet To Act Private hospitals in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh siphoned off hundreds of crores of public money between 2007 and 2014, but the two state governments do not want to act on it.It was the vigilance and enforcement department of united AP that took the lid off the scam in November 2013. Their report, submitted to the higher authorities, exposed how private referral hospitals cheated the state on two counts. First, they did not comply with the rule of providing free treatment to 5% Below Poverty Line (BPL) patients and second, they resorted to excess billing of government employees and later sought reimbursements. The first category of fraud was detected by the vigilance officials after they randomly inspected 69 out of 827 private referral hospitals in 21 districts and found that all 69 were guilty of non-compliance of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) they entered into with the state that gave them recognition as referral hospitals for government employees, retired pensioners, MLAs, ex-MLAs and their dependents. The report, signed by the then director general R.P Thakur, says that three hospitals inspected out of 198 private referral hospitals in Hyderabad claimed they had provided free medical treat ment to BPL in-patients and outpatients, but also claimed those bills under the Aarogyasri scheme. “Hardly any of the 827 private referral hospitals followed the free treatment rule, as per the conditions laid down in the MoU signed with the state in 2005. If one were to calculate the loss, it would run into hundreds of crores,“ said Shankar Rajasekharan, trustee of NGO Right to Health (RTH), which analysed the vigilance report in possession with TOI. After Hyderabad, the maximum number of guilty hospitals was found in East Godavari (65), Kurnool (63), Krishna (61), Visakhapatnam (44), Warangal (41), Karim nagar (41) and Chittoor (41). However, the second part of the fraud is more extensive.On page 18, the vigilance report notes that the private hospitals collected excessive charges from government servants against the prevailing central government health scheme (CGHS) rates.This fraud was detected when vigilance officials randomly investigated 39 patients treated by Hyderabad-based referral hospitals. They concluded that they caused a loss of Rs 81 lakh to the state by collecting this amount in excess of the actual cost of treatment, which stood at Rs 32 lakh, a percentage rise of 253% against what is permissible! What's shocking is that the exact magnitude of the overbilling fraud by private referral hospitals in the two states was officially pegged at Rs 524.95 crore from 2007 to 2014 in a reply under the Right to Information (RTI) query put up by the NGO. The year-wise break-up of excess bills collected for treating government employees stands at Rs 13.05 crore (2007), Rs 45.90 crore (2008), Rs 49.11 crore (2009), Rs 72.88 crore (2010), Rs 93.82 crore (2011), Rs 89.74 crore (2012), Rs 105.57 crore (2013) and Rs 54.84 crore (2014 upto May). Meanwhile, both the Directors of Medical Education (DMEs) of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, who are the supervising authority to check such medical frauds, washed their hands off the matter. “During my tenure as the DME of integrated AP when the vigilance report came in, I issued necessary instructions to prevent referral hospitals from overbilling. However, recovery of the excess amount is not in my hands and I can do so only if the state instructs me,“ said Dr G Shanta Rao, DME, AP .On his part, Dr Putta Srinivas, DME of Telangana, took a defensive line, saying he will comment on the issue only after examining the file.
    0 replies | 90 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    @skmishra1970 I am aware of all that. My queries are specific: Who represented them ? Do you have any hard copy (or link) where they are confirmed as present and arguing ?
    143 replies | 16355 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    2 Days Ago
    There can be no penalty or disciplinary action against PIO for violation of Sec 4(1)(b) - suo motu declaration. Penalty / disciplinary action can only be based on Sec 20(1) and Sec 20(2) of the RTI Act. Please read those sections.
    2 replies | 73 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    First of all many Thanks for a very good job and your persistent efforts. I am very interested in collecting information regarding the appearance of Counsel of Federation of Information Commission in India. What is their locus ? How did they intervene ? Can you give me any link (or hard copy of document) showing there appearance. (If not now, please take time - no problem) Please treat this as a important request.
    143 replies | 16355 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    Please read the related news item (in English) here: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/132622-maharashtra-info-panel-gives-rs-5-lakh.html
    1 replies | 69 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    The full order of the SIC (in Marathi) is available on the portal here: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/132623-maharashtra-sic-orders-rs-5-lkahs-compensation.html
    2 replies | 160 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    Attached is an order of the Maharashtra SIC ordering a compensation of Rs 5 Lakhs to a appellant. The order is in Marathi language. No English or Hindi translation is available at the moment. If any Marathi speaking member can help and translate the order and post it here in this thread - it will be of great help to members.
    1 replies | 69 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    Info panel gives Rs 5 lakh compensation to RTI applicant The state information commission (SIC) has awarded a compensation of a whopping Rs5 lakh to a right to information applicant. The compensation is to be paid by Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL) to Ambernath resident, Nitin Desai for the harassment meted out to him while providing information to him. The amount is highest ever compensation given to an individual in the state as of now. Earlier a compensation of rupees one lakh was given to a charitable trust by state chief information commission. In 2013, it became the highest ever compensation to be given till date. The Rs5 lakh compensation order was delivered on October 30 by state information commissioner (Konkan bench), Thanksi Thekkekara. The compensation was awarded after the applicant was first denied information and then given some misleading information. Desai had sought information on transformer installed on his land. Around 300 sq ft of land was taken up to install the transformer and it could not be used. Desai sought information about the permission. The information was sought in 2012. However, MSEDCL's public information officer (PIO) did not provide any information. During the hearing, the PIO stated that verbal permission was taken from the applicant before using the land. The commissioner stated, as per rules, provision for verbal permission did not exist at all. During the hearing, a show cause notice was served on the PIO asking why a compensation of Rs20 lakh should not be provided to the applicant. During the hearing, the commission was of the view that Rs5 lakh compensation should be provided by public authority from its expenses and a report of the same should be given to the commission by December 1, 2014. A fine of Rs25,000 was also imposed on the PIO. When dna contacted Desai, he was not available for comment. "Awarding compensation is okay. But at the end of the day it is the tax payers money which will be used for paying it. The amount should be recovered from the employee concerned. Otherwise it will be recovered from us and will not affect him," said Vivek Velankar, an RTI activist. Read More: Info panel gives Rs 5 lakh compensation to RTI applicant | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis
    2 replies | 160 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days Ago
    It is attached to this post.
    8 replies | 226 view(s)
  • karira's Avatar
    3 Days 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=husbadn+wife+rti+site:www.rtiindia.org https://www.google.co.in/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=498a+site:www.rtiindia.org (NOTE: There are many pages of results !)
    2 replies | 85 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 Uploaded Last Updated
No results to show...
No results to display...
No results to display...
No results to display...

Activity Information
  • Total Points:
  • 11
  • Activity Level:
  • 1
  • To Next Level:
  • 9
  • Percent Into Level:
  • 10% Achieved
  • Daily Activity:
  • 0 / 21.18 (0%)
  • Weekly Activity:
  • 0.05 / 148.25 (0.03%)
  • Monthly Activity:
  • 1.2 / 635.36 (0.19%)
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