The CPIO stretched High Court Stay and Supreme Court judgement to justify denial of answer sheet. There is considerable difference in the context in the case of denial of Examination Copies and that of the stay order (supra) of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court . The stay was granted on the primary objection of the petitioner (Union of India) that the answer scripts ordered to be disclosed had been already weeded out as per relevant policy.
The commission recorded that “In the circumstances, Commission fails to appreciate the contention of the CPIO, as to how the said stay order is being stretched to justify denial of answer sheet in the present case.”
Similarly, the claim that Aditya Bandhopadhyay case applies for answer scripts of qualifying exams was unsubstantiated by Read more ›
There should be greater transparency and accountability in the process of Defence Procurement, in as much as the vendors should be apprised of the reason for withdrawal of proposals or rejection of proposals- CIC
During the hearing on 31/08/2017, the Commission stated that that there should be greater transparency and accountability in the process of Defence Procurement, in as much as the vendors should be apprised of the reason for withdrawal of proposals or rejection of proposals.
The earlier Appeal in this regard and the in the present case (S_C_Sharma_171292) reflected on the lack of any such mechanism in place which leaves the vendors aggrieved and wanting for information from all channels. Although, RTI Act allows for the exemption of Section 8 (1)(d) to deny the information, but as a common proposition, more and more disclosure should be encouraged in such cases to avoid casting aspersions on the procurement process. Read more ›
The Nodal Ministry, Department of Personnel and Training for Right to Information Act has earlier directed all the Ministries to keep the trail of all previous Public Information Officers in their website with effect from 1st January 2015.
One of the items to be disclosed proactively by the public authorities under Section 4(1)(b) pertains to the names, designations and other particulars of the Public Information Officers and its updation on yearly basis. It has been observed that in some of the public authorities, there are frequent changes at the level of the Central Public INformation Officer (CPIOs) and First Appellate Authorities (FAAs). During updation of the names and designations of the CPIOs / FAAs, the public authorities remove the names and designations of the earlier ones from their website.
On a second appeal hearing filed in reference to leakages of Confidential Data filed by the Tax Payer, it was observed that maintaining the privacy, the record keeping in the public authority as explained by the Income Tax Department was in an outdated format and not upgraded utilizing the modern technological tools.
Commission after considering the gravity and seriousness of the issues raised by the Appellant, found that there is an emergent requirement to investigate the root cause of the leakages of Confidential Data filed by the Tax Payers and plug the loopholes forthwith. The commission asked Pr. CCIT to investigate the matter considering that it is essential to protect the Confidential Financial Data filed by millions of Tax Payers from falling into wrong hands in the larger public interest. Read more ›