To:
Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskkar
Deputy Secretary & Joint Registrar (Nodal CPIO)
Central Information Commission
at New Delhi
17-Sep-2012
Sir
From the website of the Commission I note that you are the Nodal CPIO
for all matters relating to decisions taken by the Commission in its
weekly meetings,
It appears that a meeting was held recently by the Commission in the wake of the
Supreme Court Judgment in "Namit Sharma versus UoI" whereby all
Information Commissions have been directed to "henceforth" function
only in Benches of 2 or more, at least one of the members being a
"legal member".
As the functioning of the Commission in Benches is in any case only
carrying on under the interim stay order of the Supreme Court in SLP
30152/2011where I am a party, I would request you to immediately send
me the copy of the aforesaid minutes of meeting (or an other basis)
whereby the Commission is now conducting hearings into Appeals and
Complaints in contravention of the Supreme Court's detailed Judgment
of 13.09.2012.
Kindly treat this matter as very urgent and as a request for
disclosure under section 4(1)(b),(c) of the RTI Act 2005 which you are
bound to comply with immediately.
As the matter is also of considerable public interest, you may
alternatively immediately publish the minutes of meeting on the
Commission's website under advise to me.
Thanking you,
yours faithfully
Sarbajit Roy
B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024
Monday, September 17, 2012
Re: [HumJanenge] SC Judgement on CICs
Dear Girish
The easiest way to test a bad mathematical model is to feed it bad data.
The RTI Act was combination of a law for babudom drafted in
conjunction with illiterates (activists). As a result it eventually
degenerated into nothingness.
The SC order has to be interpreted as something introduced by God to
demolish the present increasingly unworkable structure of the RTI Act.
There will be the inevitable counter-thrust from babudom as well as
Parliament.
What will result will either be something workable or something
completely unworkable. The chances are with the latter which in turn
will engender something even greater than RTI - CHAOS !!!
Sarbajit
On 9/17/12, Girish Mittal <rtng.mittal@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> I am not sure if the order of SC is workable.
>
> Retirement age of HC judges is slated to be increased from 62 to 65(bill
> pending in Parliament), while the retirement age of IC is 65 years. So I am
> not how many former HC judges will qualify? Besides, one would want to
> continue in HC or later practise as solicitor/advocate, rather than to
> become an IC. If the argument is that lot of decisions are being challenged
> in courts of law, hence judicial help is required-well, lot of HC cases go
> to division benches and SC. Even this decision is likely to be challenged
> before larger bench.
>
> Also, I wonder if a HC judge would want to be an IC-its like HC judge
> becoming Sessions judge. I don't foresee too many people agreeing for this
> type of job.
>
> Also FAA having degree in law/experience in law. Take for example Municipal
> Corporation in any city. The FAA, is, any superior authority. for example
> Ward Officer in the relevant ward. If FAA has to be a legal degree holder,
> then by default, he is law officer of the organisation, and all appeal
> would lie before him. Imagine the number of appeals to be settled by a
> single law officer. What about places where there is no legal person?? In
> CIC if JS/Law is to be the FAA, I dont think it will make
> any significant difference to non disclosure by CIC. He will continue to
> justify not providing information. Currently also they seek help of JS/Law,
> who I am not sure is legally qualified.
>
> Regards.
>
> Girish Mittal
>
The easiest way to test a bad mathematical model is to feed it bad data.
The RTI Act was combination of a law for babudom drafted in
conjunction with illiterates (activists). As a result it eventually
degenerated into nothingness.
The SC order has to be interpreted as something introduced by God to
demolish the present increasingly unworkable structure of the RTI Act.
There will be the inevitable counter-thrust from babudom as well as
Parliament.
What will result will either be something workable or something
completely unworkable. The chances are with the latter which in turn
will engender something even greater than RTI - CHAOS !!!
Sarbajit
On 9/17/12, Girish Mittal <rtng.mittal@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> I am not sure if the order of SC is workable.
>
> Retirement age of HC judges is slated to be increased from 62 to 65(bill
> pending in Parliament), while the retirement age of IC is 65 years. So I am
> not how many former HC judges will qualify? Besides, one would want to
> continue in HC or later practise as solicitor/advocate, rather than to
> become an IC. If the argument is that lot of decisions are being challenged
> in courts of law, hence judicial help is required-well, lot of HC cases go
> to division benches and SC. Even this decision is likely to be challenged
> before larger bench.
>
> Also, I wonder if a HC judge would want to be an IC-its like HC judge
> becoming Sessions judge. I don't foresee too many people agreeing for this
> type of job.
>
> Also FAA having degree in law/experience in law. Take for example Municipal
> Corporation in any city. The FAA, is, any superior authority. for example
> Ward Officer in the relevant ward. If FAA has to be a legal degree holder,
> then by default, he is law officer of the organisation, and all appeal
> would lie before him. Imagine the number of appeals to be settled by a
> single law officer. What about places where there is no legal person?? In
> CIC if JS/Law is to be the FAA, I dont think it will make
> any significant difference to non disclosure by CIC. He will continue to
> justify not providing information. Currently also they seek help of JS/Law,
> who I am not sure is legally qualified.
>
> Regards.
>
> Girish Mittal
>
Re: [HumJanenge] SC ORDER ON INFORMATION COMMISSIONS
Dear sirs
same provision of appointment of HC/SC judge as president and one member with legal background exist in Consumer forums.
as per consumer act , case need to be settled within 120 days of complaint being admitted. On the contrary it is taking 5 years at each level, district, state or national level to get judgement on case. in total 10-12 years to get your case decided
The reasons for delay is on account of huge vacancies of members with legal backgrounds and retired judges ...... in delhi alone most of the consumer court function with legal background members and president and thus cases pendancy have gone to uncontrollable level.
same thing will gona happen with RTI
regards
Mohit
From: capt beniwal <trident142@yahoo.co.in>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 15 September 2012 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] SC ORDER ON INFORMATION COMMISSIONS
| Gupta sir, the SC judges have only ensured 100% re-employment to the judges, and nothing else and they have ignored the provision that SC Judges will not plead in indian Courts after retirement. If they decide case on whims, give observations without reading the relevant sections of RTI Act, what else can be said. They have not struck down any provision of the RTI Act being unconstitutional. The RTI Act provides for appointment of eminent knowledgeable citizens as IC and not only IAS/IPS. thats the problem. there are plenty knowledgeable citizen available in India. May be you can be appointed. SC judge will certainly be unsuitable and waste of knowledge/talent to decide whether reply/information was given in stipulated 30 days or not?. i am sure a school student will tell correctly. but if we want to create further mess yes then we should have judges as ICs. just imagine if a poor begger/mali/sweeper comes to commission in second appeal/complaint, how they will be treated by these people, i can well imagine. regds. beniwal --- On Fri, 14/9/12, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
|
[HumJanenge] Pratibha Patil to return 155 artifacts to Rashtrapati Bhavan by 15 June 2013, reveals RTI reply
Pratibha Patil to return 155 artifacts to Rashtrapati Bhavan by 15 June 2013, reveals RTI reply
| 17/09/2012 07:36 AM | 
To a RTI query by this writer asking about the list of gift items loaned specifically to Pratibha Patil along with the evaluated price of each item, Rashtrapati Bhavan says information not necessary as it is a 'temporary' arrangement
The Rashtrapati Bhavan has officially admitted through a RTI (Right to Information) reply to this writer that "An MoU was signed on 15th June 2012 between Rashtrapati Bhavan and the Vidya Bharti Shaikshnik Mandal, Amravati, for display of 155 artifacts/mementos on a purely temporary basis, which in any case, cease to be operative with effect from 15th June 2013 and all the artifacts presently on loan shall be returned to the Rashtrapati Bhavan Museum thereafter" but refuses to divulge detailed information on the list of artifacts transferred to Ms Patil's museum.
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the President's Secretariat takes this 'temporary' arrangement as an excuse to not provide the list of artifacts given to Ms Patil to display it in her museum in her hometown, Amravati, along with their individual costs and countries that they were gifted from.
The RTI application filed by me on 3 August 2012, specifically asked the PIO of the President's Secretariat, "List of gift items loaned specifically to Ms Pratibha Patil along with the evaluated price of each item; from which country did each gift item come from; what was the purpose of her visit when she received each of the gift item." The reply is "do not arise in view of the answer at (3) above" (which is she would be returning artifacts by 15 June 2013 as the agreement would cease by then.
The RTI reply interestingly suggests that it was President Abdul Kalam who started the trend of moving out gifts received in the capacity of being President of India. The CPIO Saurabh Vjay states in his reply dated 6 September 2012, "No such requests have been made by any former President of India. It is, however, stated that in the past, 36 artifacts were handed over during the Presidency of Dr APJ Abdul Kalam for being displayed in the Brahmos Centre, New Delhi." This reply came to the writer's query under RTI seeking "copies of official requests made by Presidents of India for loaning of gifts from 1990 onwards. Provide copies of all such correspondence within the President of India office as well as between President of India office and the relevant district/city authority where the President of India may have resided or the place where she/he wants to display the loanedgift items, form 1990 onwards."
The RTI reply also states that "no such rules and regulations are available for loaning ofgift items received by the President of India. This was in reply to my query, "Copies of Rules/GRs/amendments/correspondence for rules and amended rules regarding gift articles and souvenirs which are received by Presidents of India from other countries and within the country; Copy of rules and regulations for 'loaning' official gifts received by President of India to presidents on their retirement or loaned to any other organisation."
To the query, "How many gift items in total does the 'Tosha Khana' of the President's office have at the moment and what is the total amount in value?" CPIO Saurabh Vijay states in his reply that "as per our records there are about 2,500 gifts in 'Tosha Khana' of the President's Secretariat and as regards the value of these items, no such records are available in the Art section." This is indeed shocking for, as per the ministry of home affairs, any contribution in the form of gifts received by President of India or other dignitaries must be valued within 30 days of receipt of gift.
It may be recalled that a museum is being specially set up in Pratibha Patil's hometown by the family trust, Vidya Bharti Shaikshnik Mandal, run by her politician-son Rajendra Shekhawat.
The writer is filing a first appeal to the President's Secretariat since the information received is inadequate.
Read the previous article here: Pratibha Patil's Museum: Gifts received by VVIPs from foreign countries can be purchased by them but can they be loaned?
The Rashtrapati Bhavan has officially admitted through a RTI (Right to Information) reply to this writer that "An MoU was signed on 15th June 2012 between Rashtrapati Bhavan and the Vidya Bharti Shaikshnik Mandal, Amravati, for display of 155 artifacts/mementos on a purely temporary basis, which in any case, cease to be operative with effect from 15th June 2013 and all the artifacts presently on loan shall be returned to the Rashtrapati Bhavan Museum thereafter" but refuses to divulge detailed information on the list of artifacts transferred to Ms Patil's museum.
The Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the President's Secretariat takes this 'temporary' arrangement as an excuse to not provide the list of artifacts given to Ms Patil to display it in her museum in her hometown, Amravati, along with their individual costs and countries that they were gifted from.
The RTI application filed by me on 3 August 2012, specifically asked the PIO of the President's Secretariat, "List of gift items loaned specifically to Ms Pratibha Patil along with the evaluated price of each item; from which country did each gift item come from; what was the purpose of her visit when she received each of the gift item." The reply is "do not arise in view of the answer at (3) above" (which is she would be returning artifacts by 15 June 2013 as the agreement would cease by then.
The RTI reply interestingly suggests that it was President Abdul Kalam who started the trend of moving out gifts received in the capacity of being President of India. The CPIO Saurabh Vjay states in his reply dated 6 September 2012, "No such requests have been made by any former President of India. It is, however, stated that in the past, 36 artifacts were handed over during the Presidency of Dr APJ Abdul Kalam for being displayed in the Brahmos Centre, New Delhi." This reply came to the writer's query under RTI seeking "copies of official requests made by Presidents of India for loaning of gifts from 1990 onwards. Provide copies of all such correspondence within the President of India office as well as between President of India office and the relevant district/city authority where the President of India may have resided or the place where she/he wants to display the loanedgift items, form 1990 onwards."
The RTI reply also states that "no such rules and regulations are available for loaning ofgift items received by the President of India. This was in reply to my query, "Copies of Rules/GRs/amendments/correspondence for rules and amended rules regarding gift articles and souvenirs which are received by Presidents of India from other countries and within the country; Copy of rules and regulations for 'loaning' official gifts received by President of India to presidents on their retirement or loaned to any other organisation."
To the query, "How many gift items in total does the 'Tosha Khana' of the President's office have at the moment and what is the total amount in value?" CPIO Saurabh Vijay states in his reply that "as per our records there are about 2,500 gifts in 'Tosha Khana' of the President's Secretariat and as regards the value of these items, no such records are available in the Art section." This is indeed shocking for, as per the ministry of home affairs, any contribution in the form of gifts received by President of India or other dignitaries must be valued within 30 days of receipt of gift.
It may be recalled that a museum is being specially set up in Pratibha Patil's hometown by the family trust, Vidya Bharti Shaikshnik Mandal, run by her politician-son Rajendra Shekhawat.
The writer is filing a first appeal to the President's Secretariat since the information received is inadequate.
Read the previous article here: Pratibha Patil's Museum: Gifts received by VVIPs from foreign countries can be purchased by them but can they be loaned?
(Vinita Deshmukh is the consulting editor of Moneylife, an RTI activist and convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book "To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte" with Vinita Kamte. She can be reached atvinitapune@gmail.com.)
Sunday, September 16, 2012
[HumJanenge] SC Judgement on CICs
Dear Friends,
I am not sure if the order of SC is workable.
Retirement age of HC judges is slated to be increased from 62 to 65(bill pending in Parliament), while the retirement age of IC is 65 years. So I am not how many former HC judges will qualify? Besides, one would want to continue in HC or later practise as solicitor/advocate, rather than to become an IC. If the argument is that lot of decisions are being challenged in courts of law, hence judicial help is required-well, lot of HC cases go to division benches and SC. Even this decision is likely to be challenged before larger bench.
Also, I wonder if a HC judge would want to be an IC-its like HC judge becoming Sessions judge. I don't foresee too many people agreeing for this type of job.
Also FAA having degree in law/experience in law. Take for example Municipal Corporation in any city. The FAA, is, any superior authority. for example Ward Officer in the relevant ward. If FAA has to be a legal degree holder, then by default, he is law officer of the organisation, and all appeal would lie before him. Imagine the number of appeals to be settled by a single law officer. What about places where there is no legal person?? In CIC if JS/Law is to be the FAA, I dont think it will make any significant difference to non disclosure by CIC. He will continue to justify not providing information. Currently also they seek help of JS/Law, who I am not sure is legally qualified.
Regards.
Girish Mittal
Re: [HumJanenge] AN INDIAN CORRUPTION STORY
Dear Shri Venkatraman NS,
Thanks. We fully agree with you. We are of the view that there should
be strict accountability so that the wrong doers should be careful.
As you have mentioned that RTI Act has not been able to reduce the
level of corruption and nepotism in the country to any visible extent,
it is because we promise a lot and then forget. We are of the view
that the Citizens' Charters introduced in 1997 could contribute to
reduce corruption in petty in public services, but no body is serious
in its implementation. Now, about 14 States have enacted RTS Acts, but
the awareness is almost negligible.
Thanks & regards,
S K Agarwal
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Venkatraman NS
<nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> To
>
>
> RTI Group
>
>
>
> AN INDIAN CORRUPTION STORY
>
>
>
> Though it is a few years now since RTI Act has been enacted, this has not been able to reduce the level
>
> of corruption and nepotism in the country to any visible extent. Obviously, it implies that laws however strong it may be, cannot defeat the forces of corruption , unless there would be determined and strong minded activists willing to make the necessary sacrifice for the sake of the cause. Let not anyone think that I am belittling the RTI Act but only express my deep anguish at the state of affairs in the country.
>
>
> While Himalayan corruption gets some media attention, thousands of petty corruption taking place all over India everyday go unreported. Common men suffer heavily due to this sort of corruption. What is needed is concerted campaign urging people to resist corruption at the individual level at day today life and corrupt politicians and bureaucrats should be humiliated by the individuals at every opportunity and such people should be boycotted. This is not a difficult job but a sustained micro level campaign is necessary.
>
>
> Read the story below that took place in August,2012 and this is the typical pattern of corruption in India , exposing the innocent and law abiding citizens who feel frustrated and hopeless.
>
>
>
> A gentleman applied for legal heirship certificate to the Tahsildar office . He was asked to fill the form with around ten details. He filled it up and brought the form next day to the Tahsildar office. He was asked to produce some more details with proof. He brought it again to the office after three days. He was then told that some information were not complete and therefore he has to resubmit the form. He did this again and brought it the next day and he was asked to come after ten days. When he went after ten days, he was asked to come after another ten days.
>
>
>
> The tired applicant asked the clerk straightaway what exactly he would want. Then the clerk told him "with reluctance" that donation of Rupees one thousand was required for a "noble cause". Expecting this, the applicant immediately gave
>
> Rs. 1000/-. He was then given a receipt as donation for a flag hoisting ceremony and the receipt had no number and no signature.
>
>
>
> Then, a copy of the receipt was put in the file along with the application and immediately sent to higher authority. Obviously, the higher authority looking into the file and receipt would know that "the donation" has been paid.
>
>
>
> In the next few days, the clerk went out of the way to call the applicant over telephone , spoke to him very affectionately like a brother and said that his certificate was ready.
>
>
>
> As the applicant did not want to look at the face of the clerk again, he sent someone else to collect the certificate. Thus ended one more story of Indian corruption.
>
>
> N.S.Venkataraman
>
> Nandini Voice For The Deprived
>
> Email:- nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com
Thanks. We fully agree with you. We are of the view that there should
be strict accountability so that the wrong doers should be careful.
As you have mentioned that RTI Act has not been able to reduce the
level of corruption and nepotism in the country to any visible extent,
it is because we promise a lot and then forget. We are of the view
that the Citizens' Charters introduced in 1997 could contribute to
reduce corruption in petty in public services, but no body is serious
in its implementation. Now, about 14 States have enacted RTS Acts, but
the awareness is almost negligible.
Thanks & regards,
S K Agarwal
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Venkatraman NS
<nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> To
>
>
> RTI Group
>
>
>
> AN INDIAN CORRUPTION STORY
>
>
>
> Though it is a few years now since RTI Act has been enacted, this has not been able to reduce the level
>
> of corruption and nepotism in the country to any visible extent. Obviously, it implies that laws however strong it may be, cannot defeat the forces of corruption , unless there would be determined and strong minded activists willing to make the necessary sacrifice for the sake of the cause. Let not anyone think that I am belittling the RTI Act but only express my deep anguish at the state of affairs in the country.
>
>
> While Himalayan corruption gets some media attention, thousands of petty corruption taking place all over India everyday go unreported. Common men suffer heavily due to this sort of corruption. What is needed is concerted campaign urging people to resist corruption at the individual level at day today life and corrupt politicians and bureaucrats should be humiliated by the individuals at every opportunity and such people should be boycotted. This is not a difficult job but a sustained micro level campaign is necessary.
>
>
> Read the story below that took place in August,2012 and this is the typical pattern of corruption in India , exposing the innocent and law abiding citizens who feel frustrated and hopeless.
>
>
>
> A gentleman applied for legal heirship certificate to the Tahsildar office . He was asked to fill the form with around ten details. He filled it up and brought the form next day to the Tahsildar office. He was asked to produce some more details with proof. He brought it again to the office after three days. He was then told that some information were not complete and therefore he has to resubmit the form. He did this again and brought it the next day and he was asked to come after ten days. When he went after ten days, he was asked to come after another ten days.
>
>
>
> The tired applicant asked the clerk straightaway what exactly he would want. Then the clerk told him "with reluctance" that donation of Rupees one thousand was required for a "noble cause". Expecting this, the applicant immediately gave
>
> Rs. 1000/-. He was then given a receipt as donation for a flag hoisting ceremony and the receipt had no number and no signature.
>
>
>
> Then, a copy of the receipt was put in the file along with the application and immediately sent to higher authority. Obviously, the higher authority looking into the file and receipt would know that "the donation" has been paid.
>
>
>
> In the next few days, the clerk went out of the way to call the applicant over telephone , spoke to him very affectionately like a brother and said that his certificate was ready.
>
>
>
> As the applicant did not want to look at the face of the clerk again, he sent someone else to collect the certificate. Thus ended one more story of Indian corruption.
>
>
> N.S.Venkataraman
>
> Nandini Voice For The Deprived
>
> Email:- nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com
Re: [HumJanenge] Re: [rti4empowerment] PUBLIC GRIEVANCE: Constitution of Benches
| through the judgement the SC judges have ensured 100% reemployment/housing/perks for themselves after retirement. if the RTI Act does not want even a advocate to be around then why an ex-judge be as IC. even constitution does not allow SC judge to practice after retirement. they may be appointed to national level commissions only, which are in any case made in plenty now a days. Its nothing else but indirectly also Killing the RTI Act. the Act only wants eminent educated citizen to be ICs and not only IAS/IPS. rgds. beniwal --- On Sat, 15/9/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)