The Police arrest Private persons to prevent them from absconding
and tampering with witnesses. Govt servants are less prone to evade
arrest in such cases.
Under the law, the Principal or General Manager etc are "occupiers"
of premises, so if any accident or other offence involving loss of
life or limb
takes place there, the police is well within the law to arrest them
and produce
them before a magistrate within 24 hours.
PS: We all know why these things take place. The law, as it stands,
permits these practices. In any case, it should act as a deterrent.
PPS: It has to first be established that it is an "accident".
On Aug 18, 8:14 pm, Venkatraman NS <nsvenkatchen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> * *
>
> * **ACCIDENTS AND ARRESTS - CAN THIS ISSUE BE RAISED UNDER RTI ACT ?*
>
> *I am concerned about the following practice and I wonder whether I can
> ask the concerned government department under RTI Act to explain the action.
> *
>
> *I would welcome any advice in this regard.
> *
>
> * *
>
> *It has become a regular practice for the Tamil Nadu police to arrest the
> Managing Director of a company or Principal of an educational institution in
> case of any accidents happening in the premises of the institution or in
> any activity even remotely connected with the institution. Recently, head
> of a school in Chennai was arrested when a student died in the swimming pool
> within the campus and head of an educational institution was arrested when
> a few workers died in the building construction activity being carried out
> for the institution . In another case , principal of a school was arrested
> when the student died in the school bus accident. Many other similar
> instances have taken place.*
>
> * *
>
> *Of course, in the case of any accident taking place in the government
> promoted institution , no government officer has been arrested. When
> several persons were burnt in a train accident, no officer of the railways
> was arrested .*
>
> * *
>
> *The police now adopt the practice of arresting the chief officer of the
> private institutions even before conducting an enquiry and establishing his
> link to the accident. This knee jerk action of the police appears to be
> arbitrary, unjustified and has created great fear in the minds of many
> persons serving in private companies and institutions.*
>
> * *
>
> *When people are arrested before completion of enquiry and even when
> they cooperate with the investigation, it sends wrong signals and results
> in violation of the established practices of law enforcing agencies.*
>
> * *
>
> *It is high time that there must be some strong protest about such
> arbitrary and whimsical action of the police and proper guidelines must be
> laid in such cases.*
>
> * *
>
> *The police is well within its rights to enquire and file cases in case of
> suspicion against anyone in case of such accidents, but it is absolutely
> improper to arrest as if they are criminals or law breakers before
> completing the investigation.*
>
> * *
>
> *Further, obviously, the police are making a difference in their
> approach between
> the case of private institutions and government bodies. One wonders whether
> the police would arrest any bureaucrat , serving as Managing Director of a
> government owned company, in the event of any unfortunate accident taking
> place there. *
>
> * *
>
> *N.S.Venkataraman
> *
Saturday, August 18, 2012
[HumJanenge] ACCIDENTS AND ARRESTS - CAN THIS ISSUE BE RAISED UNDER RTI ACT ?
ACCIDENTS AND ARRESTS - CAN THIS ISSUE BE RAISED UNDER RTI ACT ?
I am concerned about the following practice and I wonder whether I can ask the concerned government department under RTI Act to explain the action.
I would welcome any advice in this regard.
It has become a regular practice for the Tamil Nadu police to arrest the Managing Director of a company or Principal of an educational institution in case of any accidents happening in the premises of the institution or in any activity even remotely connected with the institution. Recently, head of a school in Chennai was arrested when a student died in the swimming pool within the campus and head of an educational institution was arrested when a few workers died in the building construction activity being carried out for the institution . In another case , principal of a school was arrested when the student died in the school bus accident. Many other similar instances have taken place.
Of course, in the case of any accident taking place in the government promoted institution , no government officer has been arrested. When several persons were burnt in a train accident, no officer of the railways was arrested .
The police now adopt the practice of arresting the chief officer of the private institutions even before conducting an enquiry and establishing his link to the accident. This knee jerk action of the police appears to be arbitrary, unjustified and has created great fear in the minds of many persons serving in private companies and institutions.
When people are arrested before completion of enquiry and even when they cooperate with the investigation, it sends wrong signals and results in violation of the established practices of law enforcing agencies.
It is high time that there must be some strong protest about such arbitrary and whimsical action of the police and proper guidelines must be laid in such cases.
The police is well within its rights to enquire and file cases in case of suspicion against anyone in case of such accidents, but it is absolutely improper to arrest as if they are criminals or law breakers before completing the investigation.
Further, obviously, the police are making a difference in their approach between the case of private institutions and government bodies. One wonders whether the police would arrest any bureaucrat , serving as Managing Director of a government owned company, in the event of any unfortunate accident taking place there.
N.S.Venkataraman
Re: [HumJanenge] Pendency in the Central Information Commission
To:
Mr Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar
Deputy Secretary cum Joint Registrar
Central Information Commission
New Delhi
Cc:
1. Mr Satyananda Mishra
Chief Information Commissioner
2. Ms. Anita Gupta
Transparency Officer
Date: 30 May 2012
Dear Sir,
COMPLAINT AGAINST ANTIQUATED INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE OF THE CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
As per the "suo-motu" disclosure under Sec 4(1)(b)(ii) on the Commissions website, one of your duties is "Monitoring of website of the Commission".
Since it is one of your duties, I lodge the following COMPLAINT with you.
1. On the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/assets-of-ics.htm (DECLARATION OF ASSETS)
- IC Information Commissioner and IC Basant Seth have been given the same serial numbers
- The asset details of IC Rajiv Mathur and IC Vijai Sharma have not been uploaded although they were administered the oath of office more than 3 months ago
2. From the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/PublicNotices.htm it appears that the last time the Commission issued a public notice was in September 2009.
Please upload all the public notices issued after that date. It is difficult to believe that the Commission has not issued any public notices for two and a half years !
3. On the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/HCRulings.htm (HIGH COURT RULINGS) many recent HC rulings related to RTI and CIC have not been uploaded. I know of several such important rulings, which should be on the CIC website but no one in your office has taken the trouble of uploading them. The Commission has a Joint Secretary (Law) – Mr Akash Deep Chakravarti – and I am sure he keeps himself updated of the important and latest cases.
Similarly on the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/SCRulings.htm (SUPREME COURT RULINGS) the latest decision of the SC on powers of the Commission to direct disclosure of information, has not been uploaded.
4. On the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/Reports/MPR-Jan12.htm (MONTHLY DISPOSAL) the last Monthly statistics are for January 2012 – 5 months old !
On the other hand, "Minutes of Meetings" of the Commission show that on 18/5/2012, the Commission already discussed the April 2012 disposal rates !
Is there some "STATE SECRET" in the disposal statistics for February, March and April 2012, that ordinary citizens are being denied access to them ?
5. Under the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/procedure.htm ("WHAT DO WE DO"), only Sec 18 of the RTI Act has been reproduced. I am sure, you must be aware, that the Commission also has powers under Sec 19, Sec 20 as well as recommendatory powers under Sec 25. All these should be mentioned also on that same page.
6. In the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/state_chief__information_commissioners.htm (CICs OF STATES) the information contained is antiquated. It seems it has never been updated at all !
All those CICs and ICs of States have demitted office.
If you cannot regularly update such information on the Commissions website, it is better not to have such information at all.
7. In the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/EnqyReports.htm (ENQUIRY REPORTS OF CIC) the last enquiry report is of 28/11/2008. Is it that CIC has not ordered any Enquiry since then – for three and a half years ?
8. In the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/cic_netizen/cic_minutes.asp (MINUTES OF MEETINGS) the Minutes are being updated very very late, as shown in the following table (only for the year 2012):
I do not know the reasons for such delays, but uploading the Minutes 30 days after the meeting has taken place (or even 15 days ), has no meaning at all.
9. As per the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/Events.htm (EVENTS) the last "event" was on 23rd January 2009 – over three and a half years ago. Are you really sure that no "event" has taken place since then ?
10. Probably that is why the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/ForthComingEvents.htm (FORTHCOMING EVENTS) leads to a blank page !
11. The link: http://www.cic.gov.in/Legal%20Opinions.htm (LEGAL OPINIONS) contains only one opinion – dated 17-07-2007 . Is it possible that there are no "Legal Opinions" for the last 5 years ?
12. In the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/ArticlesOfCIC.htm (RELATED ARTICLES) the last article that has been uploaded is by one Mr T.N. Krishnamoorthi – on 6th March 2009 !
13. There are two "RELATED LINKS" available at: http://www.cic.gov.in/RelatedLinksOfCIC.htm
Neither of them work !
14. From the link: http://www.cic.gov.in/LMOrders.htm (LANDMARK ORDERS OF THE SIC's) it appears that only one SIC has passed a landmark order - EVER ! And that too, in 2008 !
From the above examples, it is quite obvious that the CIC website contains antiquated information and is not updated on a regular basis.
As someone who is responsible for "Monitoring the website of the Commission", you should be aware that the DARPG had released"Guidelines for Indian Government Websites" in February 2009 and these are now an "integral part of the CSMOP". These guidelines can be downloaded from:
http://darpg.nic.in/darpgwebsite_cms/Document/file/Guidelines_for_Government_websites.pdf
These guidelines require (the word used is "MUST") that the Government websites be regularly updated.
The above mentioned guidelines also require that there should be a "User Feedback" section. Since there isn't one on the Commissions website, I have had to write this long letter to you !
Since this is a "Feedback" on the website of the Commission, I expect that you take into account my comments and also inform me regarding the action you take.
Even if you do not plan to take any action on my comments, please at least inform me so.
Thanking You,
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: s.mishra <s.mishra@nic.in>; satyananda mishra <satyanandamishra@hotmail.com>
Cc: humjanenge <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 18, 2012 9:35 AM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Pendency in the Central Information Commission
To:
Shri Satyananda Mishra-ji
Chief Information Commissioner of India
Central Information Commission
August Kranti Bhawan
New Delhi
By EMAIL
18-Aug-2012
Respected Sir
On behalf of the members of the "Humjanenge" RTI mailing lists, having
13,971 subscribers, of which I am a Moderator, I am constrained to
report / suggest as follows, in the larger public interest.
Our members are AGGRIEVED that since April 2012 the Hon'ble Commission
has stopped the practice of reporting its monthly disposals and also
the pending backlog on "cic.gov.in" . It is pertinent that the last
disclosed statistics reveal that upwards of 3,000 fresh cases are
being received each month, the monthly disposal is allegedly about
2,000 cases, and the backlog of 25,000 cases would take at least 1
year to clear.
We are now caused to say that the monthly figures published so far are
spurious, fictitious and are not borne out by the number of decisions
independently published on the Commission's other website
"rti.india.gov.in".
To illustrate, the Commission's other website reveals that from
1-July-2012 till today decisions / orders for 2,783 matters have been
published. Our members at cost of great time and personal effort have
determined that about 1310 matters (47%) are either merely a)
transfers to a First Appellate Authority or b) determination that case
has been previously decided.
The net effective disposal rate works out to 1473 matters in 29
effective working days, ie a SHOCKING disposal of ONLY 50 decisions
per day for the Commission as a whole. On the average it appears that
each information Commissioner is only deciding 7 matters per day. At
this rate the pending backlog will take over 3 years to get cleared.
As it seems that none of the Information Commissioners at the present
time are qualified or knowledgeable in Statistical methods, we submit
that the Commission must dispose of at least 300 pending cases every
day if the present backlog has to be cleared within the next 12
months. This translates into about 35 cases each day per Information
Commissioner, including yourself.
Our members are also AGGRIEVED that whereas Information Commissioners
such as Ms. Sushma Singh are promptly disposing of Complaints within
10 days of receipt, other Commissioners, including yourself, take up
to a year to address them. The citizens ought not to be subject to
such arbitrary actions on part of the Commission especially since the
Commission's pro-active disclosure u/s 4(1)(b)(iv) of RTI Act is so
incomplete and evasive on this aspect.
Our members are further AGGRIEVED that whereas enlightened
Commissioners like Smt. Sushma Singh have readily grasped the concept
that Complaints u/s 18 are an EXTRA-ORDINARY remedy needing prompt and
PRIORITY action, the rest of the Commission still persists in equating
Appeals and Complaints as equivalent and according the same priority
to both.
Finally, our members are AGGRIEVED that Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar, despite
being from the Indian Statistical Service has deliberately suppressed
and manipulated the statistics of disposals by the Hon'ble Commission
to bring about this sorry state of affairs.
We therefore suggest that this email be placed before the Commission
at its next meeting and you exercise your powers under Section 12(4)
of the Act to direct that each Commissioner must endeavour to dispose
of at least 25 cases each day from here on so that some semblance of
sanity is maintained. We also suggest that Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar be
transferred out and another Statistical Services officer be deputed in
his place.
with best wishes
Sarbajit Roy
New Delhi
[HumJanenge] Re: Pendency in the Commission
Dear Mr Roy.
What you've written to the CIC is mind boggling. I am forwarding your email to my cousin in India who is at the National Advisory Council, requesting the huge pendency at CIC is brought to notice of Chairperson UPA.
Sanjeev Santoshi
Glasgow (UK)
What you've written to the CIC is mind boggling. I am forwarding your email to my cousin in India who is at the National Advisory Council, requesting the huge pendency at CIC is brought to notice of Chairperson UPA.
Sanjeev Santoshi
Glasgow (UK)
Re: [HumJanenge] Fw: DON'T CALL THE POLICE
3-4 days back, there was a news item (Pub quite prominently as is the media wont in matters related to Faujis) in Chennai editions of both TOI & Deccan Chronicle stating that police arrested a 24 yr old ARMY MAN based on the complaint of a 26 yr old divorcee for cheating since he refused to marry her as promised.
Isn't there some constitutional guarantee for faujis from arrest or even if arrested to be H/O to def authorities within a specified no of hrs unless accused of either Rape or Murder?. Have I, for over 45 yrs been harbouring an illusion?
Col K V C Nair
From: VINOD KHARE <vinodkhare@vsnl.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 18 August 2012 5:41 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Fw: DON'T CALL THE POLICE
This incident needs to be reported to the Chief Minister Delhi, Commissioner of Police Delhi and the Union Home Minister. Then RTI should be invoked for Action Taken Report(ATR).
Lt Col (Veteran) VC Khare
On 17-08-2012, Mahesh Khera wrote:
Lt Col (Veteran) VC Khare
On 17-08-2012, Mahesh Khera wrote:
---
Lt Col \28Retd\29 VC Khare B-406 Ram Vihar Sector 30, Noida 201303 \28Uttar Pradesh\29 Mob 9312807120, 9810114095 Phone +91-120-2456116
Lt Col \28Retd\29 VC Khare B-406 Ram Vihar Sector 30, Noida 201303 \28Uttar Pradesh\29 Mob 9312807120, 9810114095 Phone +91-120-2456116
Dear Friends,Please peruse the trailing mail, a real incident in the heart of posh area in Delhi. We can just imagine what must be happening in other areas.How can RTI be used to nail corruption in police duties who are paid from our hard money ?With warm regards,
Col Mahesh KheraFwd as recd:
NO WONDER THEY DON'T WANT JAN LOK PAL
A true story of Army Officer Victimized by Corrupt Policemen--that too In Delhi -National Capital!! You May Be Next!!! Be prepared
If you ever get into an accident NEVER DIAL THE POLICE!!or be prepared for THIS!!Yesterday, my wife met with an accident outside Taj Palace Hotel on SP Marg at about 2 pm. She was trying to save a motorbike who suddenly took a wrong U turn where barricades have been put up on the road leading to Army Battle Honours Mess.She saved the mobike but as she suddenly halted, a Tata 407 hit her car from behind. The financial damage is another story! I was in office in Greater Noida when she called.She said the mobike chap was trying to run away and if that had happened she would have no evidence.So after two three desperate calls to me from her, much against my previous experience and wisdom, I decided to call the police and dialed 100. The cops reached around the same time as I did in about 45 mins.I had also called an old friend Col Manjit Singh Niranjan, and he fetched up from Gurgaon almost at the same time. We started explaining to the PCR what had happened and found to our surprise that the PCR had whisked away the mobike driver and his wife to RML Hospital.We learnt later that the police took the opportunity at the hospital to tutor him to say that he was driving along SP Marg in the same direction as my wife towards Dhaula Kuan (and not taken a wrong U turn as actually happened), and that she hit him from behind!At the site, the Inspector and ASI piled onto my wife and tried to tell her it was her fault. The Tata 407 chap kept saying it was the motorbike chaps fault, but they kept ignoring him. Then they said let's go to the Police Station and took my wife's documents.As we moved in our cars, we came across the police behind SP Marg flats.They had stopped the Tata 407 driver and were talking with him. This was the point when I realized something was brewing. We learnt later that they were threatening him again to say that it was my wife's fault.We were asked to proceed to Chankyapuri Police Stn and waited for around three hours.Meanwhile, my wife had the good sense to take the mobike driver's No and I called him.He turned out to be a jawan from 284 Med Regt and when I identified myself, he said " Sahab, main police ke lafde meing nahin padna chahta. Maine galti ki hai, lekin yeh PCR wale mujhe galat statement dene ke liye bahka rahe hain. Kahte hain tujhe bhi gadi wale se paise dila denge, tu bas unke khilaf statement de de, baki ham sambhal lenge"I quickly realized the racket. The Police had understood that the car owner was the right target to extract money from, seeing my wife's financial status. They were accordingly working on a plan to stage manage the witnesses!I went out of the Police Station and called the OR. I told him I do not want to press any further charges and that we would sign a razinama.He agreed and after another hour arrived at the PS.The Police took us to a room and started saying that " Yeh to mamla kachehri mein jayega. Halaat kuch clear nahin lag rahe. Madam kuch kah rahi hain aur mobike driver kuch aur"And turning to the OR said - "haan bhai bol". Before he could say anything I said we have reached an understanding and neither party wants to press any charges.Hearing this the Insp was taken aback!His entire well planned strategy had gone down the drain. He asked the mobike driver that he was sure and not under any duress, still hoping that he could make his buck, but the OR was determined.So he made a long face and got us to sign the razinama.Now he turned onto the Tata 407 chap and said "iska chalan karo, yehi baar baar bol raha tha motorcycle wale ki galti hai." On this I said we are not withdrawing our statement, we still say it is the mobike person's fault, but we don't want to press any charges. The Tata 407 driver is speaking the truth and you can't penalize him for that."The Insp said you people leave, we will let him also go. but I stood my ground and waited till they handed over his papers to him.I had to see that justice is done for a man who speaks the truth! So we all walked out of the PS out of the clutches of the Delhi Police at 6,30 pm - after 4 hours of harassment.My wife is suffering from shock - not so much from the accident as the Delhi Police's deviousness !She says she had only heard stories but having experienced it first hand, she has lost complete faith in the Delhi Police!Thank God the other party was a fauji, otherwise we were done for. He offered to pay me for the damage but I told him I'm not going to take money from a fauji bhai.Moral of the Story - Never Dial 100. If an accident happens, resolve it amongst yourselves amicably. The Police does not intervene (unless there has been a loss of life) till you call them (even if they're at the scene).I hope none of you ever face this situation. Be prepared for this game plan of our corrupt devious cops & stump them in advance!!!
Friday, August 17, 2012
Re: [HumJanenge] Fw: DON'T CALL THE POLICE
| Dear All Calling Policeman is like calling Decoits to yuor house. Previously these cops had a bit of respect for uniform but that is absolutely gone now. Commander P K Jain --- On Sat, 18/8/12, VINOD KHARE <vinodkhare@vsnl.com> wrote:
|
[HumJanenge] Pendency in the Central Information Commission
To:
Shri Satyananda Mishra-ji
Chief Information Commissioner of India
Central Information Commission
August Kranti Bhawan
New Delhi
By EMAIL
18-Aug-2012
Respected Sir
On behalf of the members of the "Humjanenge" RTI mailing lists, having
13,971 subscribers, of which I am a Moderator, I am constrained to
report / suggest as follows, in the larger public interest.
Our members are AGGRIEVED that since April 2012 the Hon'ble Commission
has stopped the practice of reporting its monthly disposals and also
the pending backlog on "cic.gov.in" . It is pertinent that the last
disclosed statistics reveal that upwards of 3,000 fresh cases are
being received each month, the monthly disposal is allegedly about
2,000 cases, and the backlog of 25,000 cases would take at least 1
year to clear.
We are now caused to say that the monthly figures published so far are
spurious, fictitious and are not borne out by the number of decisions
independently published on the Commission's other website
"rti.india.gov.in".
To illustrate, the Commission's other website reveals that from
1-July-2012 till today decisions / orders for 2,783 matters have been
published. Our members at cost of great time and personal effort have
determined that about 1310 matters (47%) are either merely a)
transfers to a First Appellate Authority or b) determination that case
has been previously decided.
The net effective disposal rate works out to 1473 matters in 29
effective working days, ie a SHOCKING disposal of ONLY 50 decisions
per day for the Commission as a whole. On the average it appears that
each information Commissioner is only deciding 7 matters per day. At
this rate the pending backlog will take over 3 years to get cleared.
As it seems that none of the Information Commissioners at the present
time are qualified or knowledgeable in Statistical methods, we submit
that the Commission must dispose of at least 300 pending cases every
day if the present backlog has to be cleared within the next 12
months. This translates into about 35 cases each day per Information
Commissioner, including yourself.
Our members are also AGGRIEVED that whereas Information Commissioners
such as Ms. Sushma Singh are promptly disposing of Complaints within
10 days of receipt, other Commissioners, including yourself, take up
to a year to address them. The citizens ought not to be subject to
such arbitrary actions on part of the Commission especially since the
Commission's pro-active disclosure u/s 4(1)(b)(iv) of RTI Act is so
incomplete and evasive on this aspect.
Our members are further AGGRIEVED that whereas enlightened
Commissioners like Smt. Sushma Singh have readily grasped the concept
that Complaints u/s 18 are an EXTRA-ORDINARY remedy needing prompt and
PRIORITY action, the rest of the Commission still persists in equating
Appeals and Complaints as equivalent and according the same priority
to both.
Finally, our members are AGGRIEVED that Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar, despite
being from the Indian Statistical Service has deliberately suppressed
and manipulated the statistics of disposals by the Hon'ble Commission
to bring about this sorry state of affairs.
We therefore suggest that this email be placed before the Commission
at its next meeting and you exercise your powers under Section 12(4)
of the Act to direct that each Commissioner must endeavour to dispose
of at least 25 cases each day from here on so that some semblance of
sanity is maintained. We also suggest that Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar be
transferred out and another Statistical Services officer be deputed in
his place.
with best wishes
Sarbajit Roy
New Delhi
Shri Satyananda Mishra-ji
Chief Information Commissioner of India
Central Information Commission
August Kranti Bhawan
New Delhi
By EMAIL
18-Aug-2012
Respected Sir
On behalf of the members of the "Humjanenge" RTI mailing lists, having
13,971 subscribers, of which I am a Moderator, I am constrained to
report / suggest as follows, in the larger public interest.
Our members are AGGRIEVED that since April 2012 the Hon'ble Commission
has stopped the practice of reporting its monthly disposals and also
the pending backlog on "cic.gov.in" . It is pertinent that the last
disclosed statistics reveal that upwards of 3,000 fresh cases are
being received each month, the monthly disposal is allegedly about
2,000 cases, and the backlog of 25,000 cases would take at least 1
year to clear.
We are now caused to say that the monthly figures published so far are
spurious, fictitious and are not borne out by the number of decisions
independently published on the Commission's other website
"rti.india.gov.in".
To illustrate, the Commission's other website reveals that from
1-July-2012 till today decisions / orders for 2,783 matters have been
published. Our members at cost of great time and personal effort have
determined that about 1310 matters (47%) are either merely a)
transfers to a First Appellate Authority or b) determination that case
has been previously decided.
The net effective disposal rate works out to 1473 matters in 29
effective working days, ie a SHOCKING disposal of ONLY 50 decisions
per day for the Commission as a whole. On the average it appears that
each information Commissioner is only deciding 7 matters per day. At
this rate the pending backlog will take over 3 years to get cleared.
As it seems that none of the Information Commissioners at the present
time are qualified or knowledgeable in Statistical methods, we submit
that the Commission must dispose of at least 300 pending cases every
day if the present backlog has to be cleared within the next 12
months. This translates into about 35 cases each day per Information
Commissioner, including yourself.
Our members are also AGGRIEVED that whereas Information Commissioners
such as Ms. Sushma Singh are promptly disposing of Complaints within
10 days of receipt, other Commissioners, including yourself, take up
to a year to address them. The citizens ought not to be subject to
such arbitrary actions on part of the Commission especially since the
Commission's pro-active disclosure u/s 4(1)(b)(iv) of RTI Act is so
incomplete and evasive on this aspect.
Our members are further AGGRIEVED that whereas enlightened
Commissioners like Smt. Sushma Singh have readily grasped the concept
that Complaints u/s 18 are an EXTRA-ORDINARY remedy needing prompt and
PRIORITY action, the rest of the Commission still persists in equating
Appeals and Complaints as equivalent and according the same priority
to both.
Finally, our members are AGGRIEVED that Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar, despite
being from the Indian Statistical Service has deliberately suppressed
and manipulated the statistics of disposals by the Hon'ble Commission
to bring about this sorry state of affairs.
We therefore suggest that this email be placed before the Commission
at its next meeting and you exercise your powers under Section 12(4)
of the Act to direct that each Commissioner must endeavour to dispose
of at least 25 cases each day from here on so that some semblance of
sanity is maintained. We also suggest that Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar be
transferred out and another Statistical Services officer be deputed in
his place.
with best wishes
Sarbajit Roy
New Delhi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)