Re: [HumJanenge] Fwd: Orissa Information Commissioner is hand in glove with corrupt bureaucracy

Prahaladji, When the government office at fault it always avoids the application to answer. It is very difficult to deal with corrupted and lazy government servants. I too had very bad experience of BSNL and the ACIC New Delhi. In fact they are not supposed to call the complainant/applicant. They can give their orders based on the content of the application. They are also supposed to give speaking order.   Unless we are spending full time with RTI, we have no gain. Common mass hardly can have any benefit unless the state government is very strict. Off course the state Government performs better than Central Government offices in Gujarat.   If whole of the PIOs are independent of the departmental units then only we we can get better benefit.   6/11, shiv prasad <shiv_sr5@yahoo.co.in> wrote: From: shiv prasad <shiv_sr5@yahoo.co.in> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Fwd: Orissa Information Commissioner is hand in glove with corrupt bureaucracy To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com, pradippradhan63@gmail.com Date: Thursday, 9 June, 2011, 10:00 AM Are you realy conserned about curuption? Is it vanish by using arm as suggested by one of group member? It is certainly not. The only cause of these coupuption or even any crime is the degrading moral value of individual which is the result of moral less education and moral less leaqder. If you realy concerned then reply on my email?   Shiv Shankar From: anil chamadia <namwale@gmail.com> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com Sent: Wed, 8 June, 2011 6:36:59 PM Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Fwd: Orissa Information Commissioner is hand in glove with corrupt bureaucracy Dear, Media Studies Group had filled applications under RTI act before all distric magistrate for some information related to media persons in districts but could not get a single information from any district. we also filed appeal against this attitutes of district authorities but again the reply are same. we can imagine the behaviour of state authorities towards RTI act. anil chamadia On 6 June 2011 15:30, Pradip Pradhan <pradippradhan63@gmail.com> wrote: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Fm: prahallad Padhi <prahalladpadhi60@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 3:20 PM Subject: Orissa Information Commissioner is hand in glove with corrupt bureaucracy To: odishasoochanaadhikar@gmail.com, pradippradhan63@gmail.com Orissa Information Commissioner is hand in glove with corrupt bureaucracy Dear friends Let me share with you   how the Orissa Information Commissioner Mr. Jagadanand  is acting  to protect corrupt bureaucracy at the cost of  the interest of complainant-citizens and going against letter and spirit of RTI Act.   While attending a number of meetings and having seen the  advertisement  on RTI  in media, I was under impression that RTI is a biggest tool in the hand of citizens  to check corruption  in the country. Information Commissioners have been appointed  to protect RTI in the state. But after using RTI to expose corruption in development work in Bolangir, I experience  that it is false propaganda. It is more astonishing how  the Information Commission itself working day and night to subvert the spirit of RTI.   On dated 29.11.08., I had submitted RTI Application  to the PIO, office of Junior Engineer, Soil Conservation, Khaprakhol, Bolangir  seeking information related to DPAP Watersheds, NREGA  implemented  in Khaprakhol  and copy of vouchers, cash books, muster rolls  of the schemes  for the period from 2002 to 2008.  Within stipulated time period, the PIO who received the application on 8.12.2008  intimated  to me  on 5.1.2009 to deposit Rs. 60,000/- towards  cost of the information. Accordingly, I went  to the office to deposit the said amount  thrice  but found his absence. One day, I went to his house and found PIO and requested him to receive the amount. He refused to receive the amount citing no reasons. When I asked him when he would be available in the office , he did not reply anything.     Finding no information, I  filed complaint case to the Orissa Information Commission on 29.1.2009. After around one year,  my complaint case ( CC No. 117/2009, disposed on 26.7.2010)  was heard by Mr. Jagadadanand  on 22.4.2010 and 20.6.2010. I was absent in the first hearing and  got the letter of second hearing on same day. . On 3rd hearing on 26.7.10, Mr. Jagadanand heard the case in Sambalpur. Due to my personal problem, I could not  go to the hearing but made fax  message describing details of the problem created by PIO, his refusal to receive the amount  and failure  to provide me information and my appeal to penalize him. Without considering my appeal,  the Commission disposed  the case neither ensuring information nor imposing penalty on PIO.   After around 9 months of interval, I received  a copy of the decision  of my case on 27.4.2011. You can see how sincere Mr. Jagadanand is  in his work.   I got astonished having gone through the decision  that " The Complainant is advised  to seek specific information rather than seeking huge amount of diversified information  in RTI Applications  so as to enable  cost effectiveness  for the applicant  as well as compliance  by the Public authority within the stipulated time  as per mandate of the RTI Act".  I could not understand why the Commission  has written in his decision about specific information. The information which I sought has not been objected by the PIO. Rather PIO has written a letter to me to deposit the amount. In RTI Act, there is no such provision of seeking specific  information  from the Public Authority. Section 6 ( 1) of RTI Act says " A person  who desires  to obtain any information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language x x x x x x x x x x  accompanying such fee as may be prescribed.  It reveals that the intention of Mr. Jagadanand is to protect corrupt officials by hook or by crook  going against the letter of the Act.   Mr. Jagadanand  again has written in his  decision that " Taking into account the fact and circumstances  of this case, the Commission is of the opinion that the initial response sent to the complainant  is within the stipulated time as per the provision of section 7(1) of the RTI Act and there appears no further issue to adjudicate". The essence of this sentence is  , as I mean that as  the PIO has responded  the  application  within stipulated time,  the  penalty  can not be imposed on him. This arbitrary analysis and interpretation of the Act by the Commission is totally wrong. As per section 20 (1) of RTI Act, the penalty can be imposed on PIO on the ground of refusal to receive the application, not furnished the information within stipulated time, knowingly given incorrect, incomplete information or misleading information or destroyed the information, obstructed in any manner etc.   The intention of Mr. Jagadanand 's wrong interpretation of RTI Act  is to  satisfy the  interest of corrupt bureaucracy in our state. For this work, he is given Rs. 1,30,000 per month.   Thanks Prahallad Padhi Bolangir, Orissa M-94372-40802 -- Anil Chamadia 09868456745 09503834595