Re: [HumJanenge] Re: The People's fight against the pliable Attorney General - Ghulam Vahanvati

So is there any hope of a solution?
If not crying is useless.

Sudhakaran

----- Original Message -----
From: "raj kishore vaish" <vmrajkishore@gmail.com>
To: <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 9:59 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: The People's fight against the pliable
Attorney General - Ghulam Vahanvati

Dear Sir,
Do you know about the top corruption of India?
" No body can be punished in india for any crime under any
Law as per Apex court of India in a Contempt Petition No. 203 of 1996,
till this Judgment is alive . Do any crime but get the whole contents
of the matter from the Apex Court. Or President of india or Deptt. Of
justice or Secretary Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha of India."
Thanks with regards.
Yours Faithfully

Raj Kishore Vaish
118, Choubey Tola ,
Sitapur, U.P.
9807952137

On 6/25/11, KN VENUGOPAL <gandhigiri2007@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> this is NOT a reply to your mail.
>
> this is something different but on the same theme.
>
> we have read MAHABHARATHA.
>
> the whole epic is about human nature and if you read the book the chapter
> 4.
> ITS HISTORY AND CHARACTER by PROF. PL VAIDYA and Dr. AD PUSALKAR. you will
> come to know more ABOUT Mahabharats- I am not talking about its content.
>
> let us come to its CONTENT.
>
> Here we have a DHRITHARASHTRA. who was blind in more sensenes than
> physical. and you have a GANDHARI who was his advisor.
>
> over the years in the history of India , and more accurately in the post
> Independence period
> you can see parallels.
>
> in the Indian government run by many personalities you can see a
> DHRITHARASHTRA , who is honest but is sarrounded by DURYODHANA,
> perpetrating
> financial irregularities , DUSHASANA- perverting laws,
> DURBUDHI, intellecutual dishonesty, DURLABHA etc
>
> there are many many DUR--- . IN AND AROUND the circle of government
>
> what do you see in the durbar. -dont be confined to the government , all
> condoning these acts of DUR---.. . of people like VIBHISHANA who look ON
> AND
> ON WITH SELF COMPELLED HELPLESSNESS and a self procalimed sense of LOYALTY
> to the KING.
> in all their service to the KING they are WELL LOOKED AFTER.
>
> Well that is food for thought.- atleast I THOUGHT.
>
> GANDHIGIRI
>
> --- On Thu, 23/6/11, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: The People's fight against the pliable Attorney
> General - Ghulam Vahanvati
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005"
> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Thursday, 23 June, 2011, 7:50 AM
>
>
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/AG-okayed-CBI-exemption-from-RTI-purview/articleshow/8958872.cms
>
> "AG okayed CBI exemption from RTI purview
> TNN | Jun 23, 2011, 07.06am IST
>
> HYDERABAD: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was exempted from
> the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act on the sole
> recommendation of attorney general Goolam Vahanvati.
>
> The RTI exemption for the CBI announced by the central government on
> June 9 was in contradiction with suggestions made by the law ministry
> and also department of personnel and training (DoPT), the nodal agency
> for RTI implementation.
>
> This was unearthed by a Hyderabad-based RTI activist, C J Karira, on
> Wednesday after he went through the files at the DoPT office in North
> Block, New Delhi. Karira was allowed to inspect the documents after he
> filed an RTI application seeking permission for the same. His
> contention was that "transparent functioning" of CBI was crucial given
> that it was probing the country's biggest scams.
>
> The activist took 50 minutes to go through the documents and was also
> allowed to make copies of pages that he felt were important. Karira
> found documents revealing DoPT's denial to give CBI exemption from RTI
> on the grounds that it did not deal either with 'intelligence' or
> 'security' issues — the only two conditions that can make a government
> department RTI-proof.
>
> "The response of the law ministry carried the suggestion that while
> the agency could be exempted from RTI, it should be answerable to
> queries on matters of administration, personnel, budget, etc," said
> Karira, quoting from the files he scanned on Wednesday.
>
> However, the only document at DoPT that strongly recommended CBI's
> exemption from RTI was an 11-page report by attorney general
> Vahanvati, a copy of which was taken by the activist and is in
> possession of TOI. According to the AG's report, intelligence agencies
> are RTI proof because the information they gather is crucial to the
> nation's security.
>
> The report states: "While the main purpose of intelligence gathering
> and assessment is the prevention and occurrence of activities which
> could endanger the security of the country, it cannot be restricted
> only to gathering of intelligence prior to the happening of an event,
> but should extend to post-event intelligence gathered, which falls
> under investigation." It was soon after receiving this report that the
> government granted CBI the RTI ACT exemption.
>
> CBI, too, used Section 24 of the RTI Act for the exemption, which
> states that "nothing contained in the act shall apply to the
> intelligence and security organizations established by the central
> government"."
>
> On Jun 22, 11:26 pm, sroy 1947 <sroy1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> To:
>> 1) HumJanenge/GoogleGroups
>> 2) RTI_India
>> 3) RTIINDIA.ORG
>> 4) RTIACT2005/GoogleGroups
>>
>> Dear Group / Forum Members
>>
>> All of us are stakeholders in the RTI process, either as clients or
>> servers.
>>
>> Today I ("stoy1947") and Mr C.J.Karira ("rtiwanted") inspected the files
>> at
>> DoPT pertaining to exemption of CBI and 2 other Intelligence Agencies
>> from
>> RTI Act. What we read SHOCKED us. We have already placed the AG's legal
>> opinion in public domain in public interest.
>>
>> 1) Contrary to the belief that it was the "babus" of DoPT who wanted the
>> CBI
>> out of the RTI net, we found that the Babudom has consistently opposed
>> this
>> demand to the extent of recording that the CBI could not strictly be
>> considered to be either an "intelligence" or "security" organisation
>> established by Central Govt to fall within section 24. This was endorsed
>> by
>> the opinion of the Ld. Solictor General Mr Gopal Subramaniam on this
>> point
>> (and others).
>>
>> 2) Till as late as 2 months ago, the CBI itself did not seriously press
>> for
>> exemption under the RTI Act. So the question is what changed ? Could it
>> be
>> a
>> string of recent legally bankrupt decisions against CBI by India's first
>> "private sector" Information Commissioner, who is also considered in
>> certain
>> circles to be a fixer par excellence. Is it a coincidence that almost all
>> these cases have a very strong Mumbai connection with the information
>> sought
>> concerning corruption worth thousands of crores of rupees or involves a
>> usual group of NGO RTI activists this IC was in bed with earlier.
>>
>> 3) Is it a coincidence that the Ld AG (who is also from Mumbai)
>> overturned
>> the deeply reasoned opinion of the nations next most senior (and highly
>> respected) Law Officer and gave a patently political, expedient and
>> legally
>> bizarre opinion to somehow get the CBI out of the RTI net till such time
>> as
>> these NGO 'haraamis" can get the CBI amalgamated into the Lokpal
>> apparatus.
>>
>> 4) On behalf of the members of this group, I feel we must say that ENOUGH
>> IS ENOUGH. It is now time for a CITIZENS WAR against lackeys like Mr
>> Vahanvati. I say that we should fight such toadies on their own home turf
>> (the Supreme Court) so that he can explain the GLARING INCONISTENCIES and
>> the INCONVENIENT FACTS ON FILE WHICH HE EVADED OR GLOSSED OVER IN HIS
>> BLINKERED AND SELF-SERVING OPINION..
>>
>> 5) It is bizarre that a primarily CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE agency like the
>> CBI
>> which inquires AFTER THE FACT can be equated with organistions like the
>> RAW
>> or the IB or the NatGrid which gather and analyse INTELLIGENCE BEFORE THE
>> FACT.
>>
>> 6) The moderators of the above mentioned groups / forum have decided to
>> seek
>> the views of our members - RUNNING INTO ALMOST 3 LAKH REGISTERED
>> STAKEHOLDERS on wheter THIS kind of corruption must we tolerated. We
>> don't
>> want your mere moral support,, We need your sweat, toil, tears etc. We
>> need
>> active participants in this WAR against HIGH-LEVEL bootlickers and
>> collaborators.
>>
>> SO please email me OFFLIST at "sroy1...@gmail.com". We really want to
>> know
>> what you think and if you are prepared to help us.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>

--
RKishore Vaish
( Raj Kishore Vaish )
118,Choubey Tola,
SITAPUR, U.P.
09807952137

[HumJanenge] MORE INFORMATION UNDER RTI WILL BE AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITES

MORE INFORMATION UNDER RTI WILL BE AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITES RTI fee can be paid on-line to MCD by credit and Debit cards. MPs, MLAs and Councillors are available on the websites The details of the MP's LAD funds will be displayed in their constituencies by 30th July   M K Gupta           While all the laws regulates the citizens, the RTI Act has the provision of penalizing the govt. staff in case of violation but the main objective of the Act is not to penalize but is to get the information.  This is a simple Act and this is the peoples Act against the Government as in this, the respondent is always government. Says Satyananda Mishra, Chief Information Commissioner. To give information without demand is in the interest of all.  In case we succeed in preparing a common list of such information, it will be possible to put pressure on the govt's departments to suo-motu down-load such information on the websites of different departments.   On the occasion, Shailesh Gandhi, Information Commissioner said that RTI Act is not a weapon but a tool to improve the working of the Government.  This is also in favour of the Government officers and in the public.  He regretted that as per Section 4 of the RTI Act, many information are necessary to be down-loaded suo-motu on the website but no body implement this in letter and spirit.  Moreover, websites are not updated regularly.  He called upon the participants to tell the nature of information which should be available on the website, we will implement that but the public will have to monitor that.  If that can be implemented, we will be able to effect improvement in the government working. Shailesh Gandhi informed that the break up of MPs, MLAs and Councillors are available on the websites.  The details of the MP's LAD funds will be put in their constituencies by 30th July and he said that public should also demand for the updating of the websites regularly.  He also said that in future, the orders will be sent on emails. During the meeting, it was also informed that on every last Friday, record on maintenance of CPWD will be available suo-motu.   A presentation on the section 4 on the basis of IC, Shailesh Gandhi's order was given.  It was also informed that now the RTI fee can be paid on-line to MCD by credit and Debit cards.  IC informed that the action taken on the suggestions will be informed to the participants on their emails.   On the occasion, President of Dwarka Forum Rejimon CK submitted written suggestions to the CIC Satyananda Mishra and IC Shailesh Gandhi.  He also said that the provision of putting penalty is very important as without that, it will be difficult to implement the Act in letter and spirit.  Sushil Kumar, General Secretary stressed the need of timely up-dation of the websites, protection of RTI workers.  M K Gupta  of DF thanks the CIC for taking initiative in organizing the meeting.   Mr Neresh Lamba of Sahabad Mohamadpur said that for the last three years, the website of Delhi Police has not been updated.  Details of welfare schemes and Public Grievance Cell of every department must be available on their websites.  Some representative said that the reasons of sealing and unsealing the property should also be available on the website so that the public can know how some illegal property has become legal overnight and seal has been opened. Jugal Kishore Dividi said that the details of birth and death certificates, issue of voter cards should be available on the website. He also stressed that public private and private partnership should come under the purview of RTI Act. Kuldeep Solanki of Palam, and A.S. Chatwal, RWA, Sector 8, Dwarka also expressed their views.   Meeting ended with the vote of thanks.

Re: [HumJanenge] What clinched the Govt's decision to exempt CBI under Sec 24 ?

Now, what will be the status of pending RTI applications, first and second appeals and complaint filed before the notification as the date of effect of notification has not been mentioned? On Sat, 25/6/11, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote: From: C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] What clinched the Govt's decision to exempt CBI under Sec 24 ? To: "humjanenge@googlegroups.com" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com> Date: Saturday, 25 June, 2011, 7:38 PM It is available as an attachment in this thread: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/74564-government-notification-cbi-exemption-under-sec-24-a-new-post.html RTIwanted From: M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 12:54 PM Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] What clinched the Govt's decision to exempt CBI under Sec 24 ? I request for down-loading a copy of gazettee notification exempting CBI, NIA and NIG from the purview of RTI. I searched the same on CBI and DoPT website but could not find.    Request Mr. C J Karaira, Sarbajit Roy and others for favour.   This will remove doubts about the date of its effectness and status of cases pending before the CIC. .

Re: [HumJanenge] Request to review the illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the cases of Complaint and 2nd

Dear Pradip Ji,
I appreciate your effort but as per opinion, this will not have any
effect until u quote some of the judgements. a useful judgement is
appended. Please quote this judgement in your request.
regards
sandeep

On 6/26/11, Pradip Pradhan <pradippradhan63@gmail.com> wrote:
> * *
> *Dear friends*
> *Orissa Information Commission has adopted illegal practice of arbitarily
> disposing and closing the complaint and 2nd appeal cases without hearing
> which has generated a lot of discontement among the citizens in the state.
> In this context, I have written a ** letter ( mentioned below) in protest
> to Orissa Chief Information Commissioner requesting him to review the
> illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the cases of Complaint and
> 2ndappeal and compelling the complainants and appellants to come
> through 1
> st appeal again. *
> **
> * I request all of you to write the same with modification, if needed to
> the Chief Information Commissioner (scic.or@nic.in) in the following
> address.*
>
> * *
>
> *Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra*
>
> *Odisha Chief Information Commissioner*
>
> *Toshali Bhawan, Satya nagar*
>
> *Bhubaneswar, Orissa*
>
> * *
>
> *Regards*
>
> *Pradip Pradhan*
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> *Odisha Soochana Adhikar Abhijan*
>
> *VIM- 316, Sailashree Vihar, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar*
>
> E-mail-
> odishasoochanaadhikar@gmail.com, Web- www.orissarti.com
>
>
>
>
>
> To
>
> *Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra,*
>
> *State Chief Information Commissioner, Orissa*
>
> *Bhubaneswar*
>
>
>
> Sub- *Request to review the illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the
> cases of Complaint and 2nd appeal and compelling the complainants and
> appellants to come through 1st appeal again*
>
>
>
> Dear Sir,
>
>
>
>
>
> Over a few months now, a good number of Appellants and Complainants from
> across the state including myself have felt surprised after receiving the
> orders of Orissa Information Commission whereby our cases were unilaterally
> disposed and closed by the Commission by way of remanding them back to the
> 1st Appellate Authority along with a direction to the latter to provide the
> information within one month of the order so received. Besides, as per the
> said order, in case the complainants/appellants would fail to get the
> required information from the 1st appellate authority in stipulated time,
> they could again approach the Commission by way of filing a 2nd appeal
> afresh.
>
>
>
> It needs to be mentioned here that to start with the aggrieved RTI
> applicants had lodged their respective complaints or second appeals around a
> year back in the hope of getting justice from the Commission. After the
> said cases remained pending for long in the office of Commission, we find to
> our dismay that the Commission without bothering to hear the concerned
> parties as required under the Act has arbitrarily and unilaterally disposed
> and closed hundreds of such cases by way of remanding them to the
> 1stAppellate Authority. Further it has been noticed that in most of
> such cases
> the concerned appellate authorities have neither cared to hear the cases nor
> ensured the supply of information to the concerned applicants as directed by
> the Commission.
>
>
>
> As a result, a large number of complainants and appellants are now bitterly
> frustrated and hopeless about the role of Orissa Information Commission. The
> alternative option of approaching the Commission through a 2nd appeal again
> as suggested by the Commission is not only costly and time consuming, but
> also highly uncertain since they do not know when the repeat of their
> 2ndappeals would be taken up by the Commission for hearing and
> disposal.
>
>
>
> It is pertinent here to visit Section 18 (1) of the RTI Act, as per which
> any person being aggrieved by non-supply of information or by supply of
> false, incomplete or misleading information is entitled to directly lodge a
> complaint before the Commission. Thus the Commission is duty bound to
> receive the complaints and adjudicate them through a due process of law. The
> RTI Act has nowhere allowed the Commission to remand the complaints for
> decision by the 1st appellate authority, which is covered under Section
> 19(1) of the Act. If necessary the Commission may take up some deserving
> cases for further enquiry as required under Section 18 (3) of the Act before
> taking a decision in the matter.
>
>
>
> Similarly, Orissa Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules 2006 has
> clearly laid down that the Commissions shall issue notices to both parties
> for giving them a reasonable opportunity of being heard before pronouncing
> its decision in open proceedings.
>
>
>
> But it is woefully surprising that the Commission without hearing both
> parties adopts the short-circuited path of disposing and closing the cases
> arbitrarily and unilaterally.
>
>
>
> Besides, the Commission's hot-haste manner of closing the cases is not only
> a clear violation of the RTI Act but also an attack on natural justice, to
> which the Information Commissioners of Orissa have been paying lip-service.
> Moreover, the question arises, when the Commissioners provide several
> opportunities of hearing in a row to the defaulting PIOs, why shouldn't they
> hear at least for once the complainant or appellant before remanding their
> cases back to the 1st appellate authority?
>
>
>
> The huge pendency of cases, around 12,000in number in the office of the
> Commission is no doubt a matter of the concern. Presumably it may be a
> strategy of the Commission to dispose the cases quickly in order to reduce
> the pendency. But our experience of last five years tells that it is the
> lack of efficiency, knowledge and forthrightness among the Information
> Commissioners in respect of adjudicating the cases as per the letter and
> spirit of the RTI Act which is mainly responsible for increasing load of
> pending cases in the office of the Commission. Besides, their casual
> attitude towards cases coupled with their temptation to appear as speakers
> and guests in the so-called awareness programmes, which is clearly in
> violation of RTI Act are the additional factors responsible for growing
> pendency of cases.
>
>
>
>
>
> Moreover, as compared to the rate of disposal of the cases by the
> Information Commissioners in different states and at the centre, Orissa
> Commissioners' rate of disposal is very poor, though Orissa Commission is
> more than adequately staffed and funded by the Government compared to other
> Commissions.. I may suggest to you to review the real reasons behind
> pendency of the cases in the office of the State Commission.
>
> .
>
> It is our well considered view that If the Commission at the present
> juncture continues to close the cases in such arbitrary manner as already
> indicated, it will not only destroy the letter and spirit of RTI Act but
> also kill the interest of the people in using it. Thus the dream of ushering
> in of a transparent and accountable system of governance by the use of RTI
> Act shall ever remain a distant dream for the people of Orissa.
>
>
>
> We therefore request you to review once again all the cases arbitrarily
> disposed and closed and stop at once indulging in such illegal practice. May
> we further suggest that the Commissioners should devote more time and
> energy to properly hear and dispose the cases on day-to-day basis so that
> their disposal rate shall register a remarkable increase in days to come and
> the people at large can have a better feel of the Commission as a true
> watchdog of RTI Act in our State.
>
>
>
> *Regards*
>
> *Pradip Pradhan *
>
> * Date- 26.6.2011*
>

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Request to review the illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the cases of Complaint and 2nd

 

Dear friends

Orissa Information Commission  has adopted illegal practice of  arbitarily disposing  and closing the complaint and 2nd appeal cases without hearing which has generated a lot of discontement among the citizens in the state. In this context,  I have written a  letter  ( mentioned below)  in protest  to Orissa Chief Information Commissioner requesting him  to  review the illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the cases of Complaint and 2^nd appeal and compelling the complainants and appellants to come through 1^st appeal again. 

 

 I request all of you  to write the same with modification, if needed  to the Chief Information Commissioner  (scic.or@nic.in)  in the following address.

 

Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra

Odisha Chief Information Commissioner

Toshali Bhawan, Satya nagar

Bhubaneswar, Orissa

 

Regards

Pradip Pradhan

 

 

 

Odisha Soochana Adhikar Abhijan

VIM- 316, Sailashree Vihar, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar

                                                                  E-mail- odishasoochanaadhikar@gmail.com, Web- www.orissarti.com

 

 

To

Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra,

State Chief Information Commissioner, Orissa

Bhubaneswar

 

Sub- Request to review the illegal practice of arbitrarily closing the cases of Complaint and 2^nd appeal and compelling the complainants and appellants to come through 1^st appeal again

 

Dear Sir,

 

 

Over a few months now, a good number of Appellants and Complainants from across the state including myself have felt surprised after receiving the orders of Orissa Information Commission whereby our cases were unilaterally disposed and closed by the Commission by way of remanding them back to the 1st Appellate Authority along with a direction to the latter to provide the information within one month of the order so received.  Besides, as per the said order, in case the complainants/appellants  would fail to get the required information from the 1^st appellate authority in stipulated time, they could again  approach the Commission by way of filing a 2nd appeal afresh.  

 

It needs to be mentioned here that to start with the aggrieved RTI applicants had lodged their respective complaints or second appeals around a year back  in the hope of getting justice from the Commission. After the said cases remained pending for long in the office of Commission, we find to our dismay that the Commission without bothering to hear the concerned parties as required under the Act has arbitrarily and unilaterally disposed and closed hundreds of such cases by way of remanding them to the 1^st Appellate Authority. Further it has been noticed that in most of such cases the concerned appellate authorities have neither cared to hear the cases nor ensured the supply of information to the concerned applicants as directed by the Commission.

 

As a result, a large number of complainants and appellants are now bitterly frustrated and hopeless about the role of Orissa Information Commission. The alternative option of approaching the Commission through a 2^nd appeal again as suggested by the Commission is not only costly and time consuming, but also highly uncertain since they do not know when the repeat of  their 2^nd appeals would be taken up by the Commission for hearing and disposal.

 

It is pertinent here to visit Section 18 (1) of the RTI Act, as per which any person being aggrieved by non-supply of information or by supply of false, incomplete or misleading information is entitled to directly lodge a complaint before the Commission. Thus the Commission is duty bound to receive the complaints and adjudicate them through a due process of law. The RTI Act has nowhere allowed the Commission to remand the complaints for decision by the 1^st appellate authority, which is covered under Section 19(1) of the Act.  If necessary the Commission may take up some deserving cases for further enquiry as required under Section 18 (3) of the Act before taking a decision in the matter.

 

Similarly, Orissa Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) Rules 2006 has clearly laid down that the Commissions shall issue notices to both parties for giving  them a reasonable opportunity of being heard before pronouncing its decision in open proceedings.

 

But it is woefully surprising that the Commission without hearing both parties adopts the short-circuited path of disposing and closing the cases arbitrarily and unilaterally.

 

Besides, the Commission's hot-haste manner of closing the cases is not only a clear violation of the RTI Act but also an attack on natural justice, to which the Information Commissioners of Orissa have been paying lip-service. Moreover, the question arises, when the Commissioners provide several opportunities of hearing in a row to the defaulting PIOs, why shouldn't they hear at least for once the complainant or appellant before remanding their cases back to the 1^st appellate authority?

   

The huge pendency of cases, around 12,000in number   in the office of the Commission is no doubt a matter of the concern. Presumably it may be a strategy of the Commission to dispose the cases quickly in order to reduce the pendency. But our experience of last five years tells that it is the lack of efficiency, knowledge and forthrightness among the Information Commissioners in respect of adjudicating the cases as per the letter and spirit of the RTI Act which is mainly responsible for increasing load of pending cases in the office of the Commission. Besides, their casual attitude towards cases coupled with their temptation to appear as speakers and guests in the so-called awareness  programmes, which is clearly in violation of RTI Act are the additional factors responsible for growing pendency of cases. 

 

 

Moreover, as compared to the rate of disposal of the cases by the Information Commissioners in different states and at the centre, Orissa Commissioners' rate of disposal is very poor, though Orissa Commission is more than adequately staffed and funded by the Government compared to other Commissions.. I may suggest to you to review the real reasons behind  pendency  of the cases in the office of the  State Commission. 

. 

It is our well considered view that If the Commission at the present juncture continues to close the cases in such arbitrary manner as already indicated, it will not only destroy the letter and spirit of RTI Act but also kill the interest of the people in using it. Thus the dream of ushering in of a transparent and accountable system of governance by the use of RTI Act shall ever remain a distant dream for the people of Orissa.

 

We  therefore request you to review once again all the cases arbitrarily disposed and closed and stop at once indulging in such illegal practice. May we further suggest  that  the  Commissioners should devote  more time  and energy to properly hear and dispose the cases on day-to-day basis so that their disposal rate shall register a remarkable increase in days to come and the people at large can have a better feel of the Commission as a true watchdog of RTI Act in our State.    

 

Regards

Pradip Pradhan                  

 Date- 26.6.2011

 

Re: [HumJanenge] 3 POSITIVE points which Baba, Anna and IAC will never ask for

Dearv Sirs,

As far the present days fight against corruption, I have the following suggestion:

 

QUOTE

All politicians who draw Public monies for Local Area Development Fund (MPs or MLSs) must maintain and display the record of their funds as under:

"Period of Allotment of LAD / Sum Alloted / Projects undertaken / Proposed date of Completion / Estimated Cost / Money Spent till date / Balance"

All such information must be prominantly displayed for General Public viewing and displayed out-side their (i) Residence, (ii) Office (iii) Area where the LAD work is undertaken; &, updated every fortnight.   

 

Regards,

Krishan Mitroo MBA (Disaster Management)

Mob.#b09971144399.      
    

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:22 PM, Narayan Varma <narayanvarma2011@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks, I am always open to learn. I shall contemplate on these 6 points sure.
NVARMA

On 14 June 2011 07:08, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Varma

I am disappointed that you could not come up with any simple points.

Just before you, another member Mr M.K.Devasahyam (a devout Christian) has given 3 simple points to be a better person/citizen

1) Be Pure - Do not TAKE Bribes
2) Be Honest - Do not GIVE Bribes
3) Be Patriotic - Insist that Government works as agreed in the compacts between citizens and their notional representatives.

I agree with him 100% and I live my own life fully as per his rules.. There is not even 1 paise of difference between him and me, although his 3 points and my 3 points do not match at all..

BUT - we must take MKD's points to a HIGHER plane, so which of our members.will assist us ?

Sarbajit

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:51 AM, Narayan Varma <narayanvarma2011@gmail.com> wrote:

"simple POSITIVE / Unconventional solutions" are easy words but difficult to define and thousands of opinions shall be there for the same.                   I have no such solutions, In our own little field, all should engage in  human services, may be India then becomes happier  nation.

On 13 June 2011 08:39, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Varma-ji

Will it really do any good writing / emailing Gurus ? What can they do/think that  you cant do for yourself. The role of a Christ (or Krishna or Mohummad  or Government) is not to feed you loaves and fishes for your entire life, but to ignite the potential your Maker has given you so that you make your own bread and catch your own fish.

For instance, a Baba claimed that 95% of his demands on Black Money were conceded by Govt but only the NEGATIVE demand for demonetizing 500 and 1000 rupee notes was left. The great trouble such foolish measures will cause for ordinary citizens and discredit the nation is secondary. My poser is when Govt has 2 rupee coins and 20 rupee notes, why have they failed on the POSITIVE step of issuing 200 Rupee notes? Is it that MoF/RBI concede that inflation is so much that we must directly jump from 100 to 500 ? Has Baba / Anna / Guru ever agitated for simple steps like these ? Why not eliminate money altogether ?

So I put it to you plainly - Do you (or anyone here) have any simple POSITIVE / Unconventional solutions that will tackle the problems we face ?.

Sarbajit

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:41 AM, Narayan Varma <narayanvarma2011@gmail.com> wrote:

The first para very true. Need to be more adopted and propagated Pl give email id of so many GURU etc. you have addressed.,so that other members can write to them about it individually.
Narayan Varma

On 13 June 2011 01:30, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Baba, SrSri, Anna, Swami-A, Swami-S, GuruV, GuruM ....

3 small POSITIVE steps (followed in many progressive countries) is all it takes to generate the momentum to reduce corruption to the point where it will cease to affect the ordinary citizens (ie those who pay bribes for daily services, school admissions, building sanctions etc), reduce inflation, and put the fear of God into dishonest public servants.

Why have all these Babas and Swamis not agitated for these POSITIVE steps while instead only demanding NEGATIVE laws which will turn India into a POLICE STATE controlled by fascist forces ?

.

--
Narayan Varma
56B Mittal Tower,
210 Nariman Point
Mumbai 400 021
RTI PCGT helpline 09322882288           
 my cell   09821096052

--
Narayan Varma
56B Mittal Tower,
210 Nariman Point
Mumbai 400 021
RTI PCGT helpline 09322882288           
 my cell   09821096052

--
Narayan Varma
56B Mittal Tower,
210 Nariman Point
Mumbai 400 021
RTI PCGT helpline 09322882288           
 my cell   09821096052

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: The People's fight against the pliable Attorney General - Ghulam Vahanvati

AG Mr Vahanvati is,incidentalli,not a highly respected top Law Offficer of the coyuntry.The SC doesn't accord him much respect either,except what the protocol requires.

Once the matter goes to SC AG will be left to fend for himself with others looking the other way or taking contrarian view,as there will be no supporting evidence with others(Law Ministry/MHA/CVC etc) to corroborate the (whimsical)views of AG.

What public interest would be served by openness will be sharply contrasted with the opposite of it(harm to public/national interest).

With exemption already available for INVESTIGATION component of info for CBI(as for State police) why should a veil of secrecy be established on the organisational functioning and its financial transactions?The PM asked first time about the functioning and expenses of NTRO and shocking revelations have emerged(TV channels have already shown it) thereafter.

Public has full right about the way public money is spent.Public has full right about the way an organisationis structured on rational futuristic basis and has a full right to improve upon the same through participative mode.Isn't war considered too serious a business to be left to the Generals,and likewise the functioning of CBI just left secretly in the hands of some handpicked few people.Do the topbrass of CBI ,just after retirement become nincompoofs,and lose the right to see how the organisation they served ,for long, is performing?Will they lose every right to work towards its betterment,through their hundreds of years of accumulated wisdom?

And whats the purported loss? Any tangible case or statistics to buttress the argument of exclusion?

Data-based,info-based,knowledge-based decision making goes for a six when people like Mr Vahanvati give their skewed opinion.They may use fallacies skillfully but can't comwe to grip withflawless logic in aid of their designs(maybe HIS MASTER'S VOICE or HER MASTER'S VOICE).

We know nuances of law as much possibly Mr Vahanvati does.We can,on the strength of superior knowledge of the organisation of CBI and its functuoning counter his unfounded apprehensions quite appropriately.

spm

On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 8:50 AM, KN VENUGOPAL <gandhigiri2007@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

this is NOT a reply to your mail.   this is something different but on the same theme.   we have read  MAHABHARATHA.   the whole epic is about human nature and if you read the book the chapter 4. ITS HISTORY AND CHARACTER by PROF.  PL VAIDYA and Dr. AD PUSALKAR. you will come to know more ABOUT Mahabharats- I am not talking about its content.   let us come to its CONTENT.   Here we have a DHRITHARASHTRA. who was blind in more sensenes than   physical. and you have a GANDHARI who was his advisor.   over the years in the history of India , and more accurately in the post Independence  period you can see   parallels.   in the Indian government run by many personalities you can see a DHRITHARASHTRA , who is honest but is sarrounded by DURYODHANA, perpetrating financial irregularities , DUSHASANA-  perverting laws, DURBUDHI, intellecutual dishonesty, DURLABHA etc   there are many many DUR--- . IN AND AROUND the circle of government   what do you see in the durbar. -dont be confined to the government , all condoning these acts of DUR---.. . of people like VIBHISHANA who look ON AND ON WITH SELF COMPELLED HELPLESSNESS and a self  procalimed sense of LOYALTY to the KING. in all their service to the KING they are WELL LOOKED AFTER.   Well  that is food for thought.-  atleast I THOUGHT.   GANDHIGIRI --- On Thu, 23/6/11, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote: From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: The People's fight against the pliable Attorney General - Ghulam Vahanvati To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com> Date: Thursday, 23 June, 2011, 7:50 AM http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/AG-okayed-CBI-exemption-from-RTI-purview/articleshow/8958872.cms "AG okayed CBI exemption from RTI purview TNN | Jun 23, 2011, 07.06am IST HYDERABAD: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was exempted from the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act on the sole recommendation of attorney general Goolam Vahanvati. The RTI exemption for the CBI announced by the central government on June 9 was in contradiction with suggestions made by the law ministry and also department of personnel and training (DoPT), the nodal agency for RTI implementation. This was unearthed by a Hyderabad-based RTI activist, C J Karira, on Wednesday after he went through the files at the DoPT office in North Block, New Delhi. Karira was allowed to inspect the documents after he filed an RTI application seeking permission for the same. His contention was that "transparent functioning" of CBI was crucial given that it was probing the country's biggest scams. The activist took 50 minutes to go through the documents and was also allowed to make copies of pages that he felt were important. Karira found documents revealing DoPT's denial to give CBI exemption from RTI on the grounds that it did not deal either with 'intelligence' or 'security' issues — the only two conditions that can make a government department RTI-proof. "The response of the law ministry carried the suggestion that while the agency could be exempted from RTI, it should be answerable to queries on matters of administration, personnel, budget, etc," said Karira, quoting from the files he scanned on Wednesday. However, the only document at DoPT that strongly recommended CBI's exemption from RTI was an 11-page report by attorney general Vahanvati, a copy of which was taken by the activist and is in possession of TOI. According to the AG's report, intelligence agencies are RTI proof because the information they gather is crucial to the nation's security. The report states: "While the main purpose of intelligence gathering and assessment is the prevention and occurrence of activities which could endanger the security of the country, it cannot be restricted only to gathering of intelligence prior to the happening of an event, but should extend to post-event intelligence gathered, which falls under investigation." It was soon after receiving this report that the government granted CBI the RTI ACT exemption. CBI, too, used Section 24 of the RTI Act for the exemption, which states that "nothing contained in the act shall apply to the intelligence and security organizations established by the central government"." On Jun 22, 11:26 pm, sroy 1947 <sroy1...@gmail.com> wrote: > To: > 1) HumJanenge/GoogleGroups > 2) RTI_India > 3) RTIINDIA.ORG > 4) RTIACT2005/GoogleGroups > > Dear Group / Forum Members > > All of us are stakeholders in the RTI process, either as clients or servers. > > Today I ("stoy1947") and Mr C.J.Karira ("rtiwanted") inspected the files at > DoPT pertaining to exemption of CBI and 2 other Intelligence Agencies from > RTI Act. What we read SHOCKED us. We have already placed the AG's legal > opinion in public domain in public interest. > > 1) Contrary to the belief that it was the "babus" of DoPT who wanted the CBI > out of the RTI net, we found that the Babudom has consistently opposed this > demand to the extent of recording that the CBI could not strictly be > considered to be either an "intelligence" or "security" organisation > established by Central Govt to fall within section 24. This was endorsed by > the opinion of the Ld. Solictor General Mr Gopal Subramaniam on this point > (and others). > > 2) Till as late as 2 months ago, the CBI itself did not seriously press for > exemption under the RTI Act. So the question is what changed ? Could it be a > string of recent legally bankrupt decisions against CBI by India's first > "private sector" Information Commissioner, who is also considered in certain > circles to be a fixer par excellence. Is it a coincidence that almost all > these cases have a very strong Mumbai connection with the information sought > concerning corruption worth thousands of crores of rupees or involves a > usual group of NGO RTI activists this IC was in bed with earlier. > > 3) Is it a coincidence that the Ld AG (who is also from Mumbai) overturned > the deeply reasoned opinion of the nations next most senior (and highly > respected) Law Officer and gave a patently political, expedient and legally > bizarre opinion to somehow get the CBI out of the RTI net till such time as > these NGO 'haraamis" can get the CBI amalgamated into the Lokpal apparatus. > > 4)  On behalf of the members of this group, I feel we must say that ENOUGH > IS ENOUGH. It is now time for a CITIZENS WAR against lackeys like Mr > Vahanvati. I say that we should fight such toadies on their own home turf > (the Supreme Court) so that he can explain the GLARING INCONISTENCIES and > the INCONVENIENT FACTS ON FILE WHICH HE EVADED OR GLOSSED OVER IN HIS > BLINKERED AND SELF-SERVING OPINION.. > > 5) It is bizarre that a primarily CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIVE agency like the CBI > which inquires AFTER THE FACT can be equated with organistions like the RAW > or the IB or the NatGrid which gather and analyse INTELLIGENCE BEFORE THE > FACT. > > 6) The moderators of the above mentioned groups / forum have decided to seek > the views of our members - RUNNING INTO ALMOST 3 LAKH REGISTERED > STAKEHOLDERS on wheter THIS kind of corruption must we tolerated. We don't > want your mere  moral support,, We need your sweat, toil, tears etc. We need > active participants in this WAR against HIGH-LEVEL bootlickers and > collaborators. > > SO please email me OFFLIST at "sroy1...@gmail.com". We really want to know > what you think and if you are prepared to help us. > > Sarbajit