Re: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel

I do not know whether Shri Arvind Kejriwal and his team members have objected to it or not and this can be replied by them only but that is not the question here.   By the way, have you ever objected to this?  From your reply, its seems that you have no complaint on this account and are comfortable on the issue. --- On Wed, 4/5/11, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote: From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com Date: Wednesday, 4 May, 2011, 9:53 PM Dear Guptaji 1) Haryana Govt charges Rs. 50 possibly because Delhi High Court (and some other High Courts) also charges Rs. 50 as application fee. 2) For many years since 2002 under Delhi RTI Act the application fee was Rs.25 and Rs.5 per page was photocopying charge. Not a single RTI activist like Arvind Kejriwal , Manish Sisiodia etc who used DRTI extensively then ever complained. Today after 9 years surely  Rs. 50 and Rs.10 respectively is justified by inflation even assuming a WPI of 6% each year. Sarbajit On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:47 PM, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote: Here, Rs. 10/- per page for a photocopy is unreasonable.  Every body will agree to this but what remedial steps should be taken.   Haryana govt. takes Rs. 50/- are RTI fee. Some state charge fee even for first appeal.    Apparently, these tacts have been employed to discourage the applicants.   Sarbajit ji, let all of us mull over it and find out some way. --- On Wed, 4/5/11, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote: From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com Date: Wednesday, 4 May, 2011, 2:02 PM States cannot amend the RTI Act - it is a Central Act of Parliament. The variation in fees for photocopying charges is by the provision that each State Govt can prescribe these fees. The CORE TEST (from the Act) is that these fees must be REASONABLE. Sarbajit On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Baritlum Ama <baritlumama@gmail.com> wrote: Since each state has got its own prerogative to amend the Act,so the government has increased the fee of the document from Rs,2/= to Rs.10/= per page.The exorbhitant increase in the price of the fee has deterred most of the activists in seeking the formation.Please guide us how to repeal the Notification of the Govt. Thanks On 5/3/11, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote: > Cabinet note not secret: Info panel > Maha Watchdog Overrules itself. > > MUMBAI: A cabinet note on the basis of which a council of minister takes a > decision and subsequently passes a government > resolution is not confidential and anyone can have access to a copy of it > under the RTI Act. > The verdict was passed on Friday by a full bench of the Maharashtra > information commission, presided over by chief information commissioner > Vilas Patil. The new decree overrules Vikas Patil's predecessor Suresh > Joshi's ruling in 2006 that said a cabinet note was a confidential document > and a citizen could not get access to it by applying under the Right To > Information Act. > The latest decision was arrived at after a much deliberation, with Vilas > Patil, his Aurungabad counterpart D B Deshpande, Amravati information > commissioner Bhaskar Patil and Nagpur information chief P W Patil > maintaining that the note should not be kept secret. However, Navi Mumbai > info chief Navinkumar and his Nashik counterpart M H Shah tried to argue it > should not be made public. > The view of the majority prevailed and it was decided that an RTI applicant > is eligible to obtain a copy of the cabinet note, an official told TOI on > Saturday. > The issue was raised after a resident, Archana Gawda, in 2007, filed a query > under the RTI Act, seeking a copy of the cabinet note of the repeal of the > Urban Land Ceiling Act and the states decision on the proposal. The general > administration department, however, refused to send her a copy saying, > according to the rules of business and provisions of the RTI Act, a cabinet > note was confidential and hence out of RTI purview.