Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 17 to 24 of 27

Thread: IG in dark over RTI application status

  1. #17
    Posts
    22
    Name:
    Anil Kumar Singh
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Compensation of Rs 50.000 imposed by SIC, West Bengal


    I request all the RTI Applciants /Seekers to save the contents of this thread and use it whenever an opportunity of the same type arises in your cases.

    I hope the application of RTI Act and the clauses therein will be applied equally to all the RTI Applicants/seekers without any discrimination based on Status of the RTI Applicant

    I wish all the State IC's & the CIC also adopt the same attitude as applied in case of Dr.Nazrul Islam IPS.


    I have found the following from Google search on the Net:-
    <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CADMINI%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" http:="" www.rtiindia.org="" forum="" images="" smilies="" redface.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Embarrassment" smilieid="2" class="inlineimg"></o:smarttagtype>Office:WEST BENGAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

    Bhabani Bhaban, 2nd Floor, Alipore
    Kolkata-700 027
    Telefax (033)2479-1966
    Website : www.wbic.gov.in
    E-mail : scic–wb@nic.in

    No. 1694(3)–WBIC/RTI/116/07 (Pt. I) DATE: 17.08.2009

    From: The Secretary & Acting Registrar,
    West Bengallace
    Information Commission

    To: 1. Shri A.G. Ghosh,
    Special Secretary
    &
    Appellate Authority,
    Home Department
    Writers' Buildings
    Kolkata – 700 001.

    2. Shri S.L. Chakraborty,
    Joint Secretary
    &
    State Public Information Officer,
    Home (RTI) Department,
    Writers' Buildings
    Kolkata – 700 001.

    3. Dr. Nazrul Islam, IPS,
    Additional Director General of Police,
    Traffic, West Bengallace
    Bhabani Bhaban,
    Alipore,
    Kolkata – 700 027.

    NOTICE FOR HEARING

    WHEREAS, Dr. Nazrul Islam, the then IGP, E.B., West Bengal preferred a 2nd appeal dated 03.08.2007 as he had not been supplied with any information in respect of his RTI application dated 04.06.2007 to the SPIO, Home Department seeking information relating to his letter dated 23.05.2006 addressed to the C.M., Government of West Bengal and its subsequent appeal dated 04.07.2007 except an intimation from the SPIO, vide No. letter No. 134–RT/1A–33/07 dated 19.06.2007 that the matter was being taken up with the office of the C.M., and

    WHEREAS, the Appellate Authority, Home Department vide his letter No. 251-RT/1A-33/07 dated 29.8.07 informed Dr. Islam that as his representation dated 23.05.2006 addressed to Hon’ble C.M. was not received by the C.M.’s Secretariat, it was not possible to furnish information as sought for relating to that letter dated 23.05.2006, and

    WHEREAS, Dr. Islam, in his further appeal dated 31.08.2007 to this Commission, argued that his letter was forwarded to the D.G. & I.G.P., lace>West Bengallace> by the Additional Director General of Police, E.B., W.B. vide his Memo. No. 239/Con/EB dated 23.05.2006 and was duly received by that office on 23.05.2006 as was informed to him vide Memo No. 154/Con/EB dated 31.08.2007 by the A.D.G.P., E.B., West Bengal and on 24.05.2006, it was sent to the Additional C.S., Home Department vide Memo No. 461/DG/06 dated 24.05.2006 and also an advance copy of the said letter was received in the C.M.’s Secretariat and hence it was not acceptable that the said letter did not reach C.M.’s Secretariat; and

    WHEREAS, this Commission, vide letter No. 1438-WBIC/RTI/116/07(Pt.I) dated 17.09.2007, requested both the SPIO and Appellate Authority to offer their views on the said appeal; and

    WHEREAS, Dr. Islam submitted a reminder dated 17.09.2007; and

    WHEREAS, the Joint Secretary & A.A., Home Department, vide his letter No. 284–RT/1A–33/07 dated 01.10.2007 furnished clarification and submitted that both the SPIO And Appellate Authority initiated action and perusued authorities concerned diligently to obtain materials in order to dispose of the application; and

    WHEREAS, this Commission, vide letter No. 1619 WBIC/RTI/116/07(Pt-I) dated 15.10.2007 sought explanation of D.G.P. and I.G.P., West Bengal about the delay caused in the disposal of the request made by Home (Poll) Department vide No. 217-RT dated 27.07.2007; and

    WHEREAS, this Commission, vide letter No. 1610-WBIC/RTI/116/07(Pt.I) dated 15.10.2007, also sought clarification from the Joint Secretary., C.M.’s Secretariat about the apparent discripancy noted by the Commission on the statements made by the C.M.’s Secretariat that the letter did not reach them; and

    WHEREAS, the D.G. and I.G.P., lace>West Bengallace>, vide his Memo No. 6128-ADM/C/ADM/C-387-05(Pt 35) dated 30.10.2007/01.11.2007 furnished clarification and a report on action taken in the matter; and

    WHEREAS, the OSD and Joint Secretary, C.M.’s Secretariat informed this Commission, vide No. 888-CMS dated 29.10.2007 that the said representation of Dr. Islam could not be traced out; and

    WHEREAS, Dr. Islam submitted some reminders before the Commission in November and December, 2007; and

    WHEREAS, the Commission, vide letter No. 15-WBIC/RTI/116/07(Pt.I) dated 02.01.2008 addressed to the Additional Chief Secretary and Home Secretary, observed that the representation of Dr. Islam which was submitted through proper channel was then rest with him and accordingly sought his views / comments / action taken in this regard; and

    WHEREAS, in response, the Joint Secretary, Home Department, vide his letter dated 30-RT/1A-33/07 dated 25.01.2008, requested the Commission to ask Dr. Islam to submit a fresh petition expressing his grievances which would be looked into by Home Department expeditiously; and

    WHEREAS, the Commission, vide letter No. 204-WBIC/RTI/116/07(Pt.I) dated 05.02.2008, furnished that letter dated 25.01.2008 of Joint Secretary, Home Department to Dr. Islam with the request to do the needful; and

    WHEREAS, Dr. Islam in his further letter dated 18.02.2008 argued that it was not believable that none of the copies of representation could be traced and demanded that responsibilities for non-tracing of both the copies must be fixed and to inform what action was taken against the persons responsible; and

    WHEREAS, the Commission, vide letter No. 333-WBIC/RTI/116/07 dated 22.02.2008, forwarded that letter to the Joint Secretary, Home Department for taking appropriate measures; and

    WHEREAS, ultimately Dr. Islam, vide his letter dated 11.03.2008, submitted fresh petition for expeditiously looking into his grievances; and

    WHEREAS, the Commission sent that petition to the Joint Secretary, Home Department vide letter No. 2-WBIC/RTI/116/07(Pt.I) dated 13.05.2008 with the request to do the needful ; and

    WHEREAS, it appears that no further action has been taken by the Joint Sectary, Home Department till date;

    NOW THEREFORE, the Commission has decided to conduct a hearing on the appeal dated 03.08.2007 of Dr. Nazrul Islam in the Conference Hall of the Commission at 2nd Floor, Bhabani Bhaban, Alipore, Kolkata – 700 027 on 07.09.2009 at 12:30 P.M.

    Secretary & Acting Registrar
    West Bengallace Information Commission


    If the fines are levied on all the Defaulting CPIO's /PIO's or any other designated authority, as done in the above case then alone will the application of RTI Act of 2005 will be total and Justifiable
    <link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CADMINI%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" http:="" www.rtiindia.org="" forum="" images="" smilies="" redface.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Embarrassment" smilieid="2" class="inlineimg"></o:smarttagtype>fdf2007in


    › Find content similar to: IG in dark over RTI application status


    Last edited by fdf2007in; 03-01-10 at 12:10 AM. Reason: Name wrongly typed and some more additions were left undone at concluding lines

  2. #18
    Posts
    341
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Compensation of Rs 50.000 imposed by SIC, West Bengal


    "The Act does not provide any power to the information commission to avoid imposing penalty . "
    But according to the RTI Act, 2005, if SIC is satisfied that the PIO had 'reasonable ground' to furnish information even after a period of 7 months ; then SIC would be pleased and defaulter PIO would be exempted from penalty. SIC , has got the 'right' not to mention any REASON for not imposing penalty to the erring SPIOs and it would not mention anything in the order in this regard.

  3. #19
    Posts
    43,880
    Name:
    C J Karira
    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    15 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    168 Post(s)

    Re: Compensation of Rs 50.000 imposed by SIC, West Bengal


    Abhijeet,

    Just a request:

    Can you please file a RTI to that department around 15th January 2010 and get a confirmation that the compensation was actually paid, as ordered by the SIC ?
    Twitter: @cjkarira

  4. #20
    Posts
    26
    Name:
    saroj khettry
    Blog Entries
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Compensation of Rs 50.000 imposed by SIC, West Bengal



    In response to Gautam Bhatta I can not restrain myself to say that officials of Co-operation department are guilty of gangrape of RTI.
    In reply to a request for information the S.P.I.O requested me to file an appeal. He also informed me that he has been directed to do so. Another request was submitted to S.P.I.O TO provide details of the official by whom he was so directed. The S.P.I.O provided the following information " the letter was issued on the order of Appellate Authority of this Department after the matter was placed before him by the then S.P.I.O based on the view of the Law Officer of the Department" It is as such evident that information is provided after consulting the Appellate Authority and Law Officer.

  5. #21
    Posts
    4
    Name:
    surinder mittal
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Compensation of Rs 50.000 imposed by SIC, West Bengal


    Its great and a good lesson for others. but in some states the information commissioners are not imposing penalty as per section 20 of RTI or any compensation. In Punjab The Inf Comm Is working just like a Public Information officer, they are discharging their duty only in collecting the information sought by the applicant but in very rare cases the penalty is being imposed. its very unfortunate. But i congratulate and really appreciate the order of the SIC Bangal.

  6. #22
    Posts
    157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Compensation of Rs 50.000 imposed by SIC, West Bengal


    thankyou . for your kind information

  7. #23
    Posts
    20
    Name:
    TESSA
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Compensation of Rs 50.000 imposed by SIC, West Bengal


    MR. ISLAM YOU COULD GO AFTER THE ERRING GOVT OFFICIALS IN BENGAL BECAUSE YOU ARE Addl DGP. HAD YOU BEEN A COMMON MAN YOU WOULD HAVE NOT PREFERRED APPEALS AFTER THE INITIAL APPLICATION. ALMOST ALL PEOPLE FACE DIFFICULTIES AFTER AN RTI APPLICATION. I AM SURE EVEN THE POLICE DEPT WONT BE READY TO PART WITH ANY INFO TO PUBLIC. ANY WAY GOOD LUCK.

  8. #24
    Posts
    43,880
    Name:
    C J Karira
    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    15 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    168 Post(s)

    Re: IG in dark over RTI application status


    As reported by Shiv Sahay Singh in indianexpress.com on 03 September 2010:
    Nazrul Islam

    Nazrul Islam’s RTI tussle on, no compensation yet

    Nearly 9 months after the West Bengal Information Commission (WBIC) directed the state Home department to pay a compensation of Rs 50,000 to IPS officer Nazrul Islam for the “detriment and harassment” faced by him for not receiving information under the RTI Act, the department is yet to comply to the order.

    Islam is yet to receive any compensation or correspondence from the department, which is directly under Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee.

    The WBIC had passed the order on December 15, 2009. Islam was then the additional director general of police (Traffic).

    On May 23, 2006, Islam had written to Bhattacharjee saying a vigilance inquiry had been initiated against him for acting in an impartial way. He urged Bhattacharjee to act against the then Chief Secretary A K Deb, Vigilance Commissioner Shyamal Dutta and the then IG (Vigilance) M K Mukherjee for their alleged involvement in corrupt activities. On June 4, 2007, Islam filed an RTI application seeking information on the notings made by Bhattacharjee in regard to his letter and the action taken.

    When Islam received no reply in the next 30 days, he appealed to the State Public Information Officer of the Home department. In August 2007, he filed a second appeal with the WBIC, but it did not hear the issue. Following this, Islam had sent nearly two dozen reminders but to no avail.

    Next, Islam moved the Calcutta High Court. On August 27, 2009, the court directed to WBIC to dispose of all his appeals within four weeks. Following this, the Commission finally started proceedings and passed the order on December 15, 2009.

    In its order, the WBIC had rapped the Home department. “The Commission considers that the Home department, being one of the most important departments, shall have to pay a price for such procrastination,” it observed.

    After the order, Islam requested that the Commission should deduct the amount from the person responsible for the incident and not the department.

    “I request that the amount should be deducted from the salary of the person responsible, because the name of the department, which is inanimate, cannot be the offender and the person responsible is the offender,” Islam had written to the WBIC. He is yet to receive any reply.

    In May 2010, Islam again filed an RTI application asking what action the department has taken regarding the Commission’s order. At present, Islam is posted in New Delhi as the RPF executive director (security).

    “The order issued by West Bengal Information Commission is still valid,” said Sujit Sarkar, State Information Commissioner.
    Twitter: @cjkarira

Tags for this Thread



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