The National Advisor Council,
by, the Secretary
07-February,2011
Kind Attn: Dr. Rita Sharma
Dear Madam
I am given to understand that my email below has not been received by your office.
Further to my said email, I am shocked to learn that Ms. Aruna Roy has again invited all her old cronies from the NCPRI (National Campaign for Peoples Right to Information) to the NAC to meet DoPT officials concerning draft RTI Rules proposed for amendment.
I am unable to see from website of NAC the powers Ms Roy possesses to behave in this arbitrary and high handed fashion at public expense, so as to shut out all RTI stakeholders who possess a contrary views to her. I have repeatedly asked for a complete section 4 RTI disclosure by NAC on the website. Such disclosure will prevent Ms Roy from functioning in this fashion.
I have also come to know that at a similar meeting of this Working group on 13.Dec.2010 my own work was discussed and plagiarised by NAC and\or Ms. Aruna Roy and passed off to DoPT as her own work.
Yours faithfully
Sarbajit Roy
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
To:
The National Advisory Council, by
the Joint Secretary
03-Feb-2011
Dear Mr Raju,
cc: Ms. Rita Sharma/Secy/NAC for directions
Many thanks for your email in reply,
Kindly note the correct spelling of my name as was given in my referred email as "Sarbajit Roy" for future correspondence.
I beg to state that my grievance was clearly stated to be in the context of "constitution, functions, duties and procedures etc for the National Advisory Council." (all to be declared under RTI suo-moto) As per the documents published on NAC website so far concerning the constitution of NAC, specifically the Cabinet Secretariat orders of 31.May.2004 and 29.March.2010, it appears to me that the present NAC ("NAC-2") is constituted "in pursuance of" the order of 31.May.2004 for the 2 purposes specified therein. The first purpose being for NCMP and the second for providing inputs / support on Govt policy and legislative business respectively.
I was therefore surprised to see from the initial Minutes of Meeting of NAC-2 that the members have arrogated to themselves powers inconsistent with the objectives for which NAC-2 was constituted on 29.May.2010 as specified in the CabSec order. Instead they have broadly referred to unspecified portions of a speech of her Excellency Madam President to Parliament as being the focus/vision of the NAC. It is not clear to me how the NAC is legally empowered to set its own agenda, and I seek clarity from you on this aspect. As it was very well known on 29.May.2010 that UPA-II does not have a NCMP, this could have been clarified in the CabSec order of even date itself by specifying "flagship programmes of Govt" for NCMP..
As a citizen of India, who is being invited by NAC-2 to participate in processes such as submitting comments and objections to proposed legislations like Food Security Bill, Communal Violence Bill etc being drafted by NAC-2, it is mandatory for NAC-2 to completely inform me of the "constitution, functions, duties and procedures etc for the National Advisory Council". The information on the NAC-2 website is incomplete, half-baked and evasive. No reasonable person can meaningfully participate under conditions of such information denial. This information evasion further confirms the words of the Hon'ble Prime Minister I had set out, viz. that NAC-2 is the instrument for Congress Party activists to participate in Government. The necessary converse is that persons not associated with Congress Party have no place in NAC-2's scheme of things and shall be subjected to information asymmetry and discrimination .
Accordingly, I clearly call upon you to inform me immediately the underlying basis (ie. Govt documents) for the following claims in the VISION on NAC website, so that I may submit my comments on NAC's various time bound public processes referred above. I am especially interested in the source of powers of NAC and their delegation to and exercise by NAC, its officers, Chairperson and members (such as I had described for Ms. Aruna Roy).
1) "NAC has been set up as an interface with Civil Society."
2) "The NAC would also give attention to the priorities stated in the address of the President of India to Parliament on 4 June, 2009."
3) "In addition, the NAC would review the flagship programmes of the Government and suggest measures to address any constraints in their implementation and delivery."
Looking forward to your prompt reply.
Yours faithfully
Sarbajit Roy
New Delhi
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Office NAC <office.nac@nac.nic.in> wrote:
Dear S. Roy,
This has reference to your email addressed to Secretary, NAC dated 1.2.2011 bearing the subject "My Grievance concerning the non disclosure of the National Common Minimum Programme on the website of the NAC".
With reference to the grievance you have referred to in your email, I would like to inform you that NAC's vision statement does not refer to National Common Minimum Programme as there is no National Common Minimum Programme for UPA-II
This is for your information.
Yours sincerely,
Sd/
(K. Raju)
Joint Secretary
Shri Sarabjit Ray
