Right to Information

RTI News Diary, January 24, 2011

2011-01-24T04:53:00.000-08:00

CIC not practicing what it preaches

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has in a controversial decision ruled against making public the wealth details of its former top officials as well as of former bosses of the Election Commission. The transparency watchdog has delivered many landmark verdicts, including one that led to the declaration of assets by judges of the Supreme Court and high courts last year. But in its decision on an appeal filed by Pune-based Right to information (RTI) activist Vihar Durve, who sought property details of former chief information commissioners Wajahat Habibullah and AN Tiwari and of former chief election commissioners N Gopalswami and Navin Chawla, the commission ruled in favour of secrecy.

“Property returns of the officer’s s are subs mitted to the cadre authorities every year since and disclosure of information contained would definitely be unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual,” Information Commissioner Deepak Sandhu said in the order. “If the applicant had any specific information with regard to any acts of corruption or disproportionate wealth in respect of any civil servant, he should pass it on to the designated organizations responsible for investigating such matters,“ the commission ruled.

Criticising Durve, it said: “The role of investigating agencies can't be assumed by any citizen along with the right to have access to personal information of third parties....” “This order of the CIC is completely contradictory to what it ruled in January last year, when it asked Supreme Court to provide information under RTI on whether judges declare their assets to their chief justices,“ Durve said. He approached the CIC after he was denied the information by the department of personnel and training (DoPT) last year. “The information sought by you is personal and exempt from disclosure under section 8 of the RTI Act,“ the DoPT had written to Durve. Till now, only one information commissioner, Shailesh Gandhi, has declared his assets voluntarily.

Source: Hindustan Times

CIC: Make public Prezs objection to SC selection

The Central Information Commission has directed the Rashtrapati Bhavan secretariat to make public clarifications sought by the President before she cleared the name of Justice C K Prasad as a Supreme Court judge. Justice Prasad was sworn in as a Supreme Court judge on February 8 last year.
The collegiums had in November 2009 recommended the elevation of the Allahabad HC CJ as an SC judge. However, the government returned the file seeking clarifications on allegations of corruption against Justice Prasad. The collegiums examined the allegations and found them baseless and returned the file to the law ministry for processing the appointment. RTI activist S C Agrawal had sought to know from the President secretariat the clarifications Pratibha Patil sought before clearing Justice Prasad as SC judge.

Source: The Times of India

Bengal RTI record abysmal

After a gap of five months, the West Bengal Information Commission held a meeting on Monday.But even as chief i n fo r m at i o n commissioner (C I C ) S u j i t Sarkar promised to streamline things, the panels performance since its inception in 2005 has been nothing to write home about. Among those who keenly studied implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005, in Bengal is Magsaysay awardee Arvind Kejriwal. Findings by Kejriwals Public Cause Research Foundation (PCRF) reveal that disposal of cases by the West Bengal Information Commission is very low despite huge pendency. According to the RTI Act, failure to provide information within 30 days (in special cases 40) is deemed refusal.

The commissions laxity has also been highlighted by Indian Peoples Right for Information and Democracy (IPRID) in its recent study.RTI activist and IPRID member Anindo Kishor said, Instead of doing a comparative study with states like Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Goa, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi, we have restricted our study to six states in the eastern region. Among them, Bengals performance is the worst.

Heres how Bengal takes six months between the date of filing and first hearing. Arunachal Pradesh takes only a month and Bihar two months. In 2010, Bengal had 1,357 cases pending against none in Arunachal, 42 in Assam and 75 in Manipur. The study has revealed that Bengal can dispose of nine cases every month, Assam 19, Bihar 175, Chhatisgarh 91, and Manipur 7.
The state information commission website doesn’t mention any penalty being imposed or disciplinary action taken against any public information officer for non-performance.

In the PCRF study, Bengal ranks at the bottom on overall public satisfaction in terms of implementation of the RTI Act. Karnataka tops the list of performing states, with satisfaction rated at 55%.It is followed by Left-ruled Kerala at 52%, Punjab (47%), Orissa and Assam (37%) and West Bengal 6%. Arun Bhattacharya (former CIC) directed disclosure of information in 76.5% cases, denying information in 23.5% cases. He did not remand back any case. Therefore, he stands at 63rd position amongst all commissioners on pro-disclosure. Compare this with the highest in the country. Three commissioners from different parts of India passed 100% orders in favour of disclosures and 34 commissioners passed more than 90% pro-disclosure orders. Bhattacharya’s compliance seems to be low because he closes a case after passing orders in favour of disclosure without ensuring compliance thereof, read Kejriwals report. Bhattacharya, who retired in August 2010, told TOI, Please speak to the present CIC. Sarkar admitted files haven’t moved much.

Source: The Times of India

Lenient RTI staffers caused 86cr loss to exchequer: Study

Information Commissioners across the country have caused a loss of Rs 86 crore during 2009-10 by not imposing penalties in cases where they ought to have done so as per provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, according to a study by Public Cause Research Foundation.
The total expenditure on information commissions in the country (barring Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh) was just Rs 45.4 crore. This is significantly less than the revenue loss caused by not imposing penalties. If all penalties were imposed, the running of the information commissions would not be a burden to the exchequer. In fact, it could become a revenue earner for the country, pointed out Arvind Kejriwal.

The study analyzed over 76,800 orders passed by 87 commissioners and joint benches of 27 states. The orders of the Uttar Pradesh information commission and four commissioners of Jharkhand could not be analyzed as they refused to give copies of their orders, which by law are supposed be up on their website for public consumption. As in the previous year,2008-09,the North East has shown the best performance on implementation of the RTI Act by the information commissions. The computed loss of Rs 86 crore is a very conservative one as only the loss on account of not imposing penalty in cases of delay in providing information has been calculated. There are seven more provisions to impose penalty other than just delay in providing information. The loss would have been much higher if all the grounds were taken into account, explained Kejriwal.

Out of nearly 60,000 cases of delay in providing information, penalties were imposed in only 3.2% of cases, a marginal improvement from 2.4% the previous year. Out of 87 commissioners whose orders were analyzed, 26 did not impose a single penalty in the whole year.Just six commissioners imposed penalty in more than 10% of the cases. R K Angousana Singh from Manipur is at the top having imposed penalties in almost 33% of cases.

The poor rate of disposal of cases shows why the RTI system is getting clogged with huge pendency. Twenty information commissioners had a pendency of over a year. At the current rate of case disposal, Jagdananda of Orissa, with the worst record just 304 cases disposed in a year would take 10.7 years to clear just the pending cases, not including fresh ones which would come up in the 10 years. Similarly, Sujit Kumar Sarkar of West Bengal who disposed just 42 cases in a year would take 10.2 years to clear the pending cases. When you delay disposing cases and do not impose penalties, the message to the bureaucracy is that there is no consequence to not giving information. This leads to even more appeals being filed and greater pendency of cases, said Kejriwal.

Source: The Times of India

No info on black cash abroad: MEA

The ministry of external affairs (MEA) said it has no information related to black money in foreign banks. The ministry will have to submit an affidavit by January 20 to the Central Information Commission (CIC). The ministry’s response comes in the light of a Right to Information (RTI) application filed by Promod Chawla who sought to know from the cabinet secretariat if Swiss and German governments passed any information about accounts held by Indian nationals in their banks, the details of such accounts and steps taken by the government to investigate such accounts. The CICs order comes barely days after the Supreme Court questioned the government for keeping under wraps the names of individuals who have stashed away black money in foreign banks.

The MEA will be expected to submit the affidavit within three days. It had denied any records related to accounts held by Indians in Swiss banks and said no information has ever been provided by Switzerland. The application was forwarded, under the provisions of the transparency law, to the MEA. The ministry said no such information is available with it and that finance ministry is re-negotiating the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement with Switzerland.

Chawla then filed an appeal with CIC, saying he was not satisfied with the reply provided by the MEA. Information commissioner Annapurna Dixit directed MEA officials to again search the records and provide information to the applicant. During the hearing, MEA reiterated that no records pertaining to information about black money deposited in foreign banks could be traced by it.

Dixit pointed out that according to the MEA there is no record of any list of Indians holding secret accounts in Swiss banks or elsewhere, provided by Swiss government or by any other country to the ministry. Besides, no record of any such information has been submitted by the Indian ambassadors.

Source: The Times of India

DoPT challenges CIC on disclosure of records

New Delhi: The personnel department has challenged the transparency panels demand for proactive disclosure and appointment of transparency officers by the government. The department of personnel and training (DoPT) has refused to follow Central Information Commissions (CIC) order for systematic disclosure of records and appointment of transparency officers. This could mean a severe setback to the proactive disclosure of information as other ministries follow suit. The CIC has sought legal advice on the objections and is likely to discuss the issue in its meeting on January 25.

The CIC order had in November 2010 asked all central government ministries to make public all its records except those exempted under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. It had also for the first time set a deadline of 30 days for appointing transparency officers and six months for cataloguing records and creating a negative list of records that can’t be made public.Speaking to TOI on Tuesday, chief information commissioner Satyananda Mishra said,We have taken the issue seriously and will examine if there is merit in the objections. But I do feel that the ministry should rise above the technicality and look at the objective of the CIC order which was to ensure that government implements the provisions of the Act. The department has objected to the changes offering technical reasons.

Source: The Times of India

No exemption for DVAC under RTI Act, says info panel

The Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC),which has been claiming exemption from the Right To Information Act for over two years, has now been ordered to furnish details of a case in which a sub-inspector of police in Thirumangalam was caught red-handed while accepting a bribe of Rs 5,000 from a private bus driver in 2008. The Tamil Nadu Information Commission passed the order on an appeal from the driver G Balaji of Padikuppam Road in Thirumangalam to whom the DVAC had earlier refused to furnish the information, claiming that the investigation agency was exempted under the RTI Act under a state government order dated August 26, 2009.

Though exemption is given under a government order, section 24(4) of the RTI Act says information pertaining to allegations of corruption and human right violations shall not be excluded (from being disclosed). Since the petitioner is a party in the case, he has full right to know the fate of the corruption case, information commissioner T Srinivasan said in his order.
Also section 8(1)( h) of the Act, under which information that would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders, would not be attracted as the investigation of the corruption case is already over and the final orders were issued as stated by the public information officer of the DVAC, the commissioner held.

According to Balaji, there was a quarrel between him and a car driver on January 24,2008,when he was driving the bus on Inner Ring Road as the car driver tried to overtake him from the wrong side. At one stage,the wordy duel turned into a physical clash and the car driver assaulted him. But the car driver later lodged a false complaint with the police that Balaji had snatched his gold chain, following which Balaji moved the court and obtained anticipatory bail. The court, as a bail condition, had directed him to appear at Thirumangalam police station daily in the morning.
Balaji further said when he had gone to the police station, the sub-inspector had asked him to give him a bribe of Rs 10,000 so that he could arrange for a compromise, and otherwise, he would book him in some other case where he could not get bail from the court. Determined to expose the corrupt practice of the police official, Balaji later complained it to the DVAC, following which the agency laid a trap and arrested the SI while he was accepting a bribe of Rs 5,000 from him. In October 2008, Balaji filed an RTI application with the DVAC, seeking to know the fate of the case. As he was not given the details even after he had filed his first appeal with the appellate authority, he moved the information commission with a second appeal.

Source: The Times of India

Communication by President office beyond RTI

CAN communication from the President or its office be disclosed under the Right to Information Act Maintaining that such a communication is protected from disclosure, the Presidents Secretariat has raised the issue before the Delhi High Court in a writ petition challenging the CIC directive on the disclosure of the communication between the then President A P J Abdul Kalam and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee on the Padma Awards. The issue of law which arises pertains to the communication entered into or which emanates from the Presidents Secretariat and the President of India; whether such communication, material and information is protected by the operation of Article 74 of the Constitution of India or whether... open to disclosure in terms of the Right to Information Act, 2005, the secretariat has pleaded in its petition.

The communication between the Council of Ministers and the President is protected under Article 74 of the Constitution of India and hence cannot be subject matter of disclosure, the President’s office said. The CIC had ordered the part disclosure of communication between the two leaders in which President Kalam reportedly has raised question marks over some of the people considered for the Padma awards. The communication was sought by activist S C Agrawal in his RTI application. The CIC has pronounced an order on a constitutional issue, being the scope and operation of Article 74(1) which in the respectful submission ..., it lacks jurisdiction to pronounced upon. The CIC is an authority whose powers and jurisdiction are conscribed by the provisions of the RTI Act,and in the present matter, the CIC has traversed far beyond the same, the President’s office said in the plea. It said orders passed by the CIC have grave and far reaching ramifications on the manner in which information, communication and material emanating from or available in the Presidents Secretariat.

Source: The Economic Times

RTI News Diary-II, December 16, 2010

2010-12-16T05:12:00.000-08:00

Shri Satyanand Misra will be new Chief Information Commissioner (CIC)

Information Commissioner Shri Satyanand Misra will take over as the new Chief Information Commissioner (CIC). He will replace A N Tiwari, who retires on December 19, 2010.
The decision was taken by a panel comprising Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, law minister Veerappa Moily and leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj. Unlike the selection of former telecom secretary P J Thomas as Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) despite opposition from Swaraj, the government has played it safe this time. Thomas was named by a three-member panel, which included the Prime Minister, home minister P Chidambaram and the leader of Opposition. Swaraj had also complained to President Pratibha Patil seeking her intervention in removing the CVC. However, there is consensus this time in the case of Misra. His predecessor AN Tiwari, who had taken over as CIC in October succeeding Wajahat Habibullah, had also been chosen after consultations with BJP. A 1973 batch IAS officer, Misra had worked for ten years in the Madhya Pradesh government in various posts. In 2007, he became a secretary in the department of personnel and training in the Ministry Of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions.

CIC tells schools to display admission info

New Delhi: Pulling up Delhi government’s education department for its lack of transparency, the Central Information Commission has asked it to ensure that all city schools put up display boards carrying information about available seats for economically weaker sections (EWS) before December 31, 2010. CIC has also asked for annual returns of private unaided schools and a list of schools that have not filed returns, to be uploaded on the education department website along with information related to available seats, applications for admission and other details by December 31, 2010.

The board to be displayed on the school premises will be in English and Hindi and will include important details like total number of seats in all classes in a school, total vacancies in all classes, total number of seats under EWS quota,seats available under the quota, total applications received under the quota, information about when EWS quota applications will be received and date by which admissions will be given. Information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi also said the information should be updated weekly.

The order was in response to an appeal filed by Delhi resident Ritu Mehra who complained that information related to EWS admissions was not available on the education department website despite previous CIC orders. The directorate of education has been asked to ensure that from 2011 onwards, information related to annual returns filed by private, unaided schools before July 30 be uploaded on its website before August 31 every year along with the list of schools, which have defaulted in filing the annual returns.

Source: The Times of India

National Advisory Council to examine new RTI draft rules

National Advisory Council (NAC) will examine threadbare the new draft rules framed for Right to Information Act, which make it mandatory for applicants to file questions in 250 words and pay for hiring photocopy machine used to provide information.

NACs sub-group on transparency and accountability, headed by social activist Aruna Roy, would discuss the draft rules in its meeting on Monday. The draft rules for RTI Act have been framed by the department of personnel and training (DoPT) and have been put up on the website to seek public opinion. The rules lay down provisions for application process, fee for providing information, filing first appeals and appointments in Information Commission. One of the provisions is that an applicant will file an application in not more than 250 words, excluding the address of the public information officer and the applicant.

The Government also seeks to bring changes in fee for providing information. So far,the applicant could just pay Rs 10 in cash or through a postal order for receiving information. However, the draft rules lay down that applicants would have to pay the actual amount spent by a government department in hiring a machine or equipment to supply information. It also says that postal charges, in excess of Rs 10, spent in supplying information would also be recovered from the applicant.

RTI activists have pointed out several flaws in the draft rules. Magsaysay award winner and RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal said that all the rules framed by the department of personnel and training seem to take the bureaucracy in account. There is nothing that addresses the concerns of the common citizens. When the rules lay down that an application should be filed in 250 words, does the Government intend to check the common mans writing skills what happens to illiterate and the poor can they frame such an application?

Mr Kejriwal termed provision on recovering cost of hiring a machine from the applicant as absurd.He said,These rules are meant to further restrict the boundaries of transparency. There are no provisions in the Act or the new rules on appointment of information commissioners or issue of arrest warrants by commissioners. Why are the rules shying away from addressing the real concerns and problems with our transparency law?

RTI activist Commodore Lokesh Batra also said that the rules are trying to dilute the RTI Act. The rules are not people friendly. We need to analyze not only changes but also omissions in the rules. The new rules lay down that documents need to be included when an applicant goes for first appeal. Why is a format prescribed? It is a national waste.

Angry with such inclusions in the rules, non-governmental organizations and RTI activists have decided to give representations to NACs sub-group headed by Ms Roy. Nikhil Dey of National Campaign for People’s Right to Information said the organization would hold a meeting on Sunday and frame their objections to be presented to NAC sub-group on Monday and also for submission to Department of Personnel. The Government has sought public opinion till December 27 on the draft rules.

Source: The Economic Times

RTI News Update, December 03, 2010

2010-12-02T21:12:00.000-08:00

Don't reject RTI applications submitted without prescribed fees: Government

The government has asked all the ministries and departments not to reject the RTI applications which are without the prescribed application fee of Rs10. The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) has asked all Central government ministries to treat such applications "sympathetically", sources said.

Sources said that officials have been asked to take a sympathetic view and see if the applicant is needy by enquiring about the person, and then waive the Rs 10 application fee. However, a final decision by the concerned public information officer (PIO) will be binding. The government has also asked all the departments to use the RTI logo make the concept popular and earmark and identify PIOs and CPIOs appointed to answer the RTI applicants, sources said.

Source: The India Express

Disclose details of NSE inquiry: CIC

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has asked the capital markets regulator- Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to disclose inquiry reports of the National Stock Exchange (NSE) in the alleged defaults by a brokerage firm in the larger public interest. The commission overruled the Securities and Exchange Board of Indias (SEBI) arguments that making these records public would hamper investigation and that the information was related to a third party and hence exempted from disclosure under the RTI Act. The ruling came on the basis of an application-filed by Swati Mayekarasking for the inspection of clearing operations of SMC Global Securities (F&O segment) conducted by NSE during December 2008.

SEBI, in its reply said that the observations made during the inspection of SMC and its reply was placed before the disciplinary action committee (DAC) of (the) exchange. DAC decided that a broad based audit be conducted by an independent external auditor of SMC. But the market regulator refused to furnish details about the NSE inspection report and also on the audit by external agencies, saying it was related to a third party’s business transaction and such a disclosure would impede the ongoing investigations.

Mayekar, however, said the disclosure was in the larger public interest and hence the information should be made public. If the averment of the respondents (SEBI) that all such enquiry reports should be withheld from disclosure as these might contain commercial and business related information of the broker or brokerage firm investigated by the stock exchange or SEBI is accepted, no wrongdoing of the brokers would ever be known to investors the very victims of brokers wrongdoings, said chief information commissioner A N Tiwari.

Source: The Times of India

RTI News Update

2010-10-15T05:24:00.000-07:00

Preparatory info of Cabinet papers can be disclosed under RTI

Pushing the envelope regarding disclosure of confidential information,Central Information Commission has ruled that documents are open to public before being submitted to the cabinet secretariat for the Union Cabinets consideration. This is a departure from the usual practice in the government where most public authorities took a wide view and denied all information related to Cabinet notes on the plea that the issue was under consideration and had not been finalised.
A CIC bench decided that proposals formulated by ministries get cover under exemption clause of RTI Act only when they are actually submitted to cabinet secretariat to be placed for discussion.

The RTI Act under section 8(1)( i) exempts from disclosure Cabinet papers including records of deliberations of council of ministers, secretaries and other officers till decision has been taken. Exemption under section 8(1)( i) will apply only when a note is submitted by the ministry that has formulated it to cabinet secretariat for placing this before the Cabinet. All concomitant information preceding that, which does not constitute a part of that Cabinet, will then be open to disclosure, the CIC said. The records which went into preparation of a Cabinet note but is not a part of it have to be provided to an RTI applicant as per provisions of the law,the commission felt. A note that is withdrawn would therefore not constitute a Cabinet note and would qualify for disclosure, the order said.

Source: The Times of India

Rajasthan CM Gehlot says no to 17-yr-olds RTI query

The chief minister’s office recently rejected an RTI query sought by a 17-year-old boy, belonging to CM Ashok Gehlots home district Jodhpur, on the ground that the applicant was a minor. The government, however, later claimed that it had sent a revised reply, which the applicant was yet to receive. The youth, Lakhan Agmalliya, a BPL card holder, had enquired about issues taken up by the state government with the PMO for boosting development work since Ashok Gehlot-led Congress assumed power in the state.

Lakhan is the son of 51-year-old Lakshmi, a leprosy patient staying at Gandhi Leprosy Ashram in Jodhpur. He had sought information on June 30.The youth has now filed an appeal with first appellate authority, RTI, challenging the refusal for granting information. When contacted, Vikram Singh Chauhan, deputy secretary for RTI in CMO said, we have sent him a revised reply and given him the information. However, when told that the applicant has filed an appeal, he said: Maybe he hasn’t yet got it. We don’t send such letters directly, its first sent to CMs secretariat. The youth wanted to know how Central grants to the state have been spent, steps taken by CMO for expediting various departmental matters pending with various ministries and the status of some cases handed over to the CBI.

Source: The Times of India

RTI activists urge Information Commissioners to disclose assets

In a move to bear down pressure on information commissioners, RTI activists have kick started an online petition urging the transparency watchdogs to disclose their income assets। Incidentally, chief information commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said he would raise the issue in a meeting with other information commissioners. So far, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has resisted disclosure of assets and liabilities arguing that the information was disclosable under RTI if an individual asked for it but since it related to third party information, the consent of the IC would be required. It has also referred this case to the Election Commission for advice. The petition, meanwhile, is gathering steam. Begun by Jharkhand RTI Forum secretary Vishnu Rajgadia, the petition expresses disappointment at the conduct of information commissioners."We all hope that there are some Information Commissioners at states and central level, who do not consider this designation merely as an authority for money, power and honour but they are aware that their designation holds a duty towards democracy and citizens," the petition said.

Signed by activists across the country including those in Delhi, Puducherry and Orissa, the petition asked all central and state information commissioners to "disclose own assets so that the accountability parameters may be strengthened", desist from using beacon lights on cars as a status symbol and stop maintaining personnel security. The activists have demanded "more public oriented and accountable" Information Commissioners. When contacted, Habibullah said he planned to raise the issue in Tuesday's meeting."There is no problem in disclosure of assets. The commission only feels that third party should be consulted before the information is given under RTI," he said. He added that beacon light cars had been given to Information Commissioners keeping in view their stature."We wanted to establish the stature of the Information Commissioners and this was felt necessary. But I disagree with the need for security," he said, adding that Information Commissioners at the CIC did not have any security cover but those in states might have.

Source: The Times of India

Private schools too under RTI Act

Private recognized schools cannot claim exemption from disclosing information to Education Directorate under Right to Information Act, a full bench of the Central Information Commission (CIC) has held, thus virtually bringing them under the ambit of the transparency law. The issues relating to management and regulation of schools responsible for promotion of education are so important for development that it cannot be left at whims and caprices of private bodies, whether funded or not by the Government, the bench said in its order deciding on disclosure of service records of a teacher employed at a private school.

Bindu Khanna, a teacher at Pinnacle School at Panchsheel Enclave, had filed an RTI application with Education Directorate seeking to know her service records. But despite orders of the Directorate to provide the details, the school maintained that it was a private body and hence outside RTI purview. It cited sections of the law which exempt the disclosure of personal information. The Commission said various clauses of Delhi School Education Rules,1973 say that all records of a private recognized school are open to inspection by any officer authorized by the Director or the appropriate authority at any time.
The records provided to education department by the schools can be accessed by an RTI applicant, it said. Information which a public authority is entitled to access, under any law, from private body, is information as defined under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act and has to be furnished, the Commission said in its order rejecting the claims of the school. Quoting a high court order in this regard, the bench said the term third party includes not only the public authority but also any private body

Source: The Times of India

RTI Related Queries

2010-04-09T04:23:00.000-07:00

Ask to InDG Expert

If you have any RTI related queries i.e.
1. How to apply for information under RTI Act 2005?
2. Where to find RTI Application form?

you can send that query to InDG Expert and they answer your query in your language. Please Click Here to Post your Queries.

Citizens can inspect quality of work under RTI

2010-02-11T04:54:00.000-08:00

Inspection of works provision largely not being used; anyone can inspect, take samples, get quality levels tested

Citizens are empowered to inspect the quality of ongoing public projects under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, Chief Information Commissioner, Punjab State Information Commission, Ramesh Inder Singh said on Wednesday.

Presiding over a district-level public interaction session here, Ramesh Inder Singh said at times citizens complained about newly-laid roads getting damaged after two or three months of work completion. "They can now use their right to information for ensuring better quality of work in their areas," he pointed out.

"The inspection of works provision is largely not being used by citizens. Anyone can inspect such works, take samples of material from the project site, and get its quality levels tested from his or her choice of laboratory. It will ensure whether work is being carried out as per the laid-down specifications and will definitely improve the quality of works in public domain," he added.

The CIC, accompanied by Deputy Commissioner Gurkirat Kirpal Singh, said the government departments must upload the complied-with information sought by an applicant in a particular case on its official website. "Once posted on the web, citizens can access the information easily, in turn reducing the work of departments as well as applicants," he said.

It is mandatory that all records that are appropriate to be computerised are done so within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerised and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so access to such records is facilitated.

"A majority of government departments are yet to release information on websites," he commented.

He said the applicants must observe self-restraint while demanding information. "The tendency amongst a section of applicants to seek unwarranted or meaningless voluminous information and using the RTI Act to virtually blackmail officials has not gone done well with the spirit of law. That's why opposition to its certain provisions has been reported from different parts of the country," he said.

Source: Hindustan Times (February 11, 2010)

RTI won't change for judges

2010-02-11T04:03:00.000-08:00

Moily's Volte-Face follows the NDA and left's threat to Veto the move to make changes in the transparency law

Faced with an aggressive opposition, the UPA government on Monday decided to drop its proposal to amend the Right to Information (RTI) Act to keep the office of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) out of its ambit.

"We are not contemplating any such amendment," said Law Minister M. Veerappa Moily, contradicting his earlier statement that the government was mulling changes in the transparency law. On January 31, the minister had said: "A proposal is being contemplated. It is in comparison to other judiciaries in the world. But it has nothing to do with the Delhi High Court judgment. It is independent of it."

The High Court had ruled on January 12, 2010 that the office of the CJI was indeed covered by the RTI Act.

Moily's volte-face followed the BJP-led NDA and the Left parties' threat to veto the government's move to make changes in the RTI Act.

The government needs some support from the opposition to make an amendment since it does not enjoy a majority in the Rajya Sabha.

"Only when such matters are placed in the public domain will the collegium is forced to record cogent reasons for appointment," said Arun Jaitley, leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha.

RTI Top Stories

2009-07-23T02:56:00.000-07:00

40% Rural RTI Applicants threatened by Officials: Surveys

Over 40% of rural respondents of a major RTI survey said they had faced harassment and threats from officials while filing an application to obtain information. Nearly 30% of respondents from villages said Public Information Officers had discouraged them from filing the application. About 50% of the rural PIOs did not have a copy of the RTI Act readily available with them.

The survey brings out the great rural-urban divide in the implementation of the RTI Act. Only 15% of the urban respondents cited harassment and lack of co-operation from officials. And just 5% of urban PIOs who were interviewed did not have a copy of the RTI Act available with them.

These findings emerged in a survey conducted across 10 states, and NCR Delhi, in 2008. The states were Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Meghalaya, Orissa, Rajasthan, UP and West Bengal. Over 35,000 people were interviewed; 1,027 public authorities' offices were inspected in rural as well as urban areas. The survey was conducted by RTI Assessment and Analysis Group (RaaG) and National Campaign For People's Right to Information (NCPRI).

Few would dispute that the RTI Act is one of the most people-friendly legislations ever. But More than four years after Parliament passed the RTI Act in June 2005, the road to accessing information remains difficult. From huge delays in getting replies and receiving incomplete answers to difficulties in filing appeals — the information seeker is discouraged at every step.

But the other side of the story is equally revealing. The report says that "almost all the information commissions responding complained about the inadequate financial and infrastructural support provided by the government." About 85% felt the staff sanctioned to them was inadequate.Nearly 60% of the commissions did not have what they considered adequate infrastructure. Over 30% of the rural PIOs admitted they did not know the act's provisions. On the other hand, all urban PIOs claimed they knew the RTI Act well.

Interestingly, respondents from both rural as well as urban areas had a common suggestion to improve the functioning of the act. About 30% respondents from rural areas and 35% from urban areas wanted people's awareness of the act to be enhanced.

More Channels to File RTI pleas likely

Filing a RTI application may no longer mean multiple trips to government offices and suffering the indifferent attitude of babus. A government report has outlined multiple channels for acceptance of RTI applications like post offices, common service centres, RTI portal and call centre to streamline the process of providing information to people. If the recommendations are accepted, RTI pleas could be filed at a service centre or in the comfort of your home even as you finish up your household chores. The report "Understanding the key issues and constraints in implementing RTI Act" prepared by Pricewaterhouse Coopers in association with IMRB has urged the Centre to initiate a national level helpline.

Source: The Times of India

RTI Top Stories

2009-07-23T02:37:00.001-07:00

Gandhi warns against dilution of RTI Act

Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi has written to PM Manmohan Singh in protest against the government’s intention to amend the Right to Information (RTI) Act, saying any changes may amount to ‘avoidable confusion” and cause more harm than good.

He added that if government felt it was absolutely necessary to introduce amendments in the law, and then there should be no tinkering with existing definitions of what constituted “information” or a public authority.

The letter comes at a time when the department of personnel and training (DoPT)has mooted amendments to the RTI Act that include exclusion of file nothings (other than those related to social and development subjects) from disclosure, increase of fees, anonymity for officials amongst other far reaching changes.

Gandhi, an RTI activist-turned information commissioner, has sought a clarification from the PM on what these amendments are and the government’s reasons for proposing them. He pointed out that government had declared its intention to amend the legislation through the president speech in Parliament earlier this month. “It would be in the fitness of things if the government declared the amendments they are proposing to the Act, and gave the reasons for the amendments publicity. I request you to clarify these matters soon so that the citizens feel reassured,” he said.

Gandhi added, “It would be useful to remember that the RTI Act was the result of an extensive consultative process in which citizens and the government engaged in intensive discussions for long time. It would be therefore be appropriate if the government transparency accepts certain boundaries in the exercise of improving transparency.

Gandhi said the minimum requirement for this was that there should be no reduction in the scope of sections that deal with what constitutes information, public authority and the right to access information. He said the law was designed to be used by citizens and changes in the law may cause a “certain amount of avoidable confusion”.

CIC hot on the heels of ex-envoy to Turkey

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the Ministry of External Affairs to disclose all details pertaining to the inquiry into alleged misuse of government fund between 2005-06 by the then Ambassador to Turkey.

The details of the case, closed by the Central Vigilance Officer of the department saying it may have been procedural error but without any financial loss to the government, were sought by one Balendra Kumar under RTI Act. The information was denied by the ministry citing the clause of the Act which exempts personal information, which has no relationship to any public activity or interest, or which could cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual, from disclosure.

"There is no merit in denial of information as 'personal information' while invoking section 8 (1)(j) of the RTI Act, since public interest far outweighs any harm done to protected interests," held Information Commissioner Annapurna Dixit. The case relates to a complaint made to Central Vigilance Commission under Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informers (PIDPI), disclosing incidents of alleged misuse of government funds and corruption at the Embassy. During the period-- 2005-06-- mentioned in the complaint Chitra Narayanan was posted as the Ambassador in Turkey.

The complaint was forwarded by CVC to the Central Vigilance Officer of MEA who did not find merit in the complaint and closed it. Balendra Kumar contended before the CIC that he has "ample evidence" to prove that no proper investigations were made and an attempt was made to protect alleged higher officer(s) by the the department.

"In the complaint filed before CVC it was alleged that the then Ambassador took home leave...But did not disclose the fact to the office that her only entitled family member was not left behind during her home leave period...By this misrepresentation higher rate of allowance was paid to the officer," Kumar said in his plea. He added that practice was repeated previous year also when the officer availed the emergency leave. Kumar said a total misappropriation of Rs 1.40 lakh was done.

"The CVO concluded this was inadvertent and unintentional and overpaid amount had been deposited into government account...The recovery to the tune of more than 1.5 lakhs was affected by the lodging of the complaint and not because audit pointing it out as informed by the CVO to CVC," Kumar said in his plea.

Kumar further said the information was in public interest as the money involved belongs to citizens of India and they have every right to know how their money is spent. "While transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what the public authority is doing, including efficient spending of public money and making all decisions in the open and on record," Dixit held directing the ministry to provide information by June 15.

Source: The Times of India

RTI Top Stories

2009-07-22T04:22:00.000-07:00

RTI ACT COMPLETED FOUR YEARS

Is it possible for an ordinary man to take on the judiciary or the administration? People like Subhash Chandra Agarwal, Commodore (retired) Lokesh Batra and journalist Anuj Dhar have proved that it can be done.

As the Right to Information Act completes four years, it is these unlikely heroes who have brought meaning to the legislation by constantly pushing the envelope. While the Congress-led UPA can take credit for bringing a forward looking legislation in the form of RTI Act, the true measure of its success lies in the change in the quality of life for ordinary people.

Despite constant jibes that the law is only being used by disgruntled bureaucrats to get information on transfers and postings, no one can deny that there is finally an alternative if your ration card or passport is stuck somewhere in red-tape.

Textile businessman Subhash Chandra Agarwal's RTI applications have forced the government to cough up details on ministers' assets while his applications on declaration of wealth by judges' and Padma awards have often grabbed headlines.

Agarwal said the Act should be applicable to the private sector as well.

"Increasingly, services like telecom, power and water are being given to private firms but the public is not privy to this information. Private companies should also be brought under the ambit of the Act," he added.

If people were shocked at the morbidity of the Nithari killings, Batra's RTI replies revealed that the government was not one of them. Even as hapless parents ran from pillar to post to get the administration, including the National Commission for Women (NCW), to react, Batra's RTI plea yielded shocking replies. The NCW member deputed to investigate the gruesome crime took her own sweet time, visiting the spot only after two weeks. Her report after that meeting was an eye-opener on the callous attitude of the powers-that-be. Batra has also been lobbying for uniformity of rules so that NRIs and people of Indian origin can seek information under RTI. "There should be a uniform mode of payment across the country. I have also been stressing that section 4 of the Act -- that talks of voluntary disclosure -- should be implemented by all agencies," Batra said.

Journalist Anuj Dhar has rallied to get disclosures on the mysterious death of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, a plea that left many red faced in the government as one ham-handed reply followed another.

While there are several lacunas in the implementation of the Act, activists say that the law must not be tinkered with.

Rising fears of file notings being exempted from disclosure have left many to distrust the government that has, in many ways, created impediments rather than remove them.

Activists have so far been able to ward off the government's attempts to dilute the Act. It remains to be seen how long they will have the upper hand.

Source: Times of

India

RTI Top Stories

2009-07-21T01:50:00.000-07:00

Complaints & appeals received by CIC/SIC

The Central Information Commission (CIC) and State Information Commission (SIC) hear complaints/appeals relating to information sought under the Right to Information Act. The number of appeals and complaints received and disposed by CIC is as under:

Period	Received	Disposed
2006-07	6,839	4,074
2007-08	11,261	7,722
2008-09 (upto Sept 08)	5,401	3,519

The information in respect of the state Information Commission is not maintained centrally.

The Central Information Commission imposed penalty in 211 cases and recommended disciplinary action in 21 cases during this period।

The recommendation of the CIC for disciplinary action against the guilty Central Public Information Officers is to be acted upon by the respective cadre controlling authorities. Information regarding the disciplinary action taken by the cadre controlling authorities is not centrally maintained.

This was stated by the Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions Sh. Prithviraj Chavan in a written reply to a question in Lok Sabha.

Source: Press Information Bureau

Now, Students can seek exam marks details under RTI

In a landmark judgment that will change how examinations are conducted in the country, the Central Information Commission has ruled that authorities must usher in transparency and reveal question wise marks awarded to candidates, under the Right To Information Act.

The ruling will bring cheer to India's large student population, which has been fighting for access to copies of answer sheets ever since the RTI Act was passed.

In March 2006, Treesa Irish from Kerala became the first student to fight tooth and nail to be allowed to see her exam answer scripts. She lost the battle when a full bench of the Central Information Commission ruled that the data she had requested was of a personal nature, and that its disclosure had no relation to any public interest and would therefore be prohibited under section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

The CIC also held that the relationship between the exam-conducting authority and the examiner was fiduciary in nature, and therefore information must be kept confidential under section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act.

However, Irish was hardly alone. Students under several education boards across the country have sought copies of their answer booklets under the RTI Act. All failed in their quest, with public information officers conveniently referring to Irish's case as the precedent. That is, until Ajeet Kumar Pathak, a class XII student from Bihar, demanded that the CBSE board provide him details of question wise marks awarded to him in the chemistry paper.

Here too, the CBSE board stated, ``The larger public interest does not warrant disclosure of such information.'' Pathak then filed his first appeal, which was again defeated, with the authority ruling that ``no candidates shall have the right to obtain question wise marks''.

But in a dramatic twist, the CIC overturned those rulings. Information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi, who ruled on December 22 that question wise marks awarded must be shared with the candidate, said, ``none of the exemption clauses in the RTI Act were applicable in this case.'' Gandhi said that this ruling was now ``in principle'' applicable to all authorities conducting examinations across the country.

In Maharashtra too, several students have taken the RTI route to get their hands on copies of their answer sheets. Basanti Roy, divisional secretary of SSC board, said that to date, there has been no provision in the law to part with answer sheets, and that several students had to be turned down. ``But we will wait for orders to flow in from the state government on providing question wise marks,'' Roy added.

Currently, the Maharashtra State Board for Secondary and Higher Secondary Examination lets students demand verification, which allows for marks to be re-calculated by opening the answer booklets. Verification also helps ensure that all answers have been marked. However, there is no provision for reassessment, which requires the moderator to read through and reassess the content of the paper.

NCERT joint director G Ravindra said that this ruling was in line with the National Curriculum Framework of 2005, which emphasized transparency in conducting examinations. ``NCF 2005 had suggested several exam reforms, including transparency and stress-free exams. However, NCERT is an advisory body, and it was upto boards to implement NCERT recommendations,'' added Ravindra. Karnataka was the only state in the country that decided to go ahead and hand over answer sheets to students.

Educationist and former chairman of the Mumbai board J M Abhayankar said that while the CIC ruling was something to cheer about, boards must be proactive and provide copies of answer booklets. Abhyankar himself had presented a report to the state government on exam reforms in 2002, but it remains on paper.

``I had recommended that the Maharashtra board also give copies of answer booklets to students. But the state did not accept the recommendations under some pressure,'' he said. He added that providing copies of the answer scripts would ensure better evaluation.

RED TAPE CURTAIN

Central Information Commission asks others to declare assets, but won’t do itself

When Information Commissioner Mr Shailesh Gandhi voluntarily declared his assets (Rs 5।38 crore) in November 2008, it was to set an example for his colleagues in the Central Information Commission (CIC). “I have requested the Central Information Commissioner (Mr Wajahat Habibullah) to post the list of assets of all the commissioners on the website of the CIC,” Gandhi, an alumnus of Indian Institute of Technology , Bombay who sold a thriving plastics business to pursue his, goal of ensuring transparency in public life.

But the people mandated to ensure transparency in public life took refuge behind the oldest bureaucratic trick in the book to perpetuate the opacity surrounding them.

“We will have to take into account the procedures for sub mission of such declarations in other commissions before taking a final decision,” Wajahat Habibullah, Chief Information Commissioner, told to journalist।

Presumably the CIC, which, routinely orders politicians and government departments to part with information to the public, is still pondering over the procedures- no other member of the 8 member CIC has declared their assets।

But, pressure is mounting, not only on the Information Commissioners but also on others holding high constitutional office- like judges and election commissioners- to declare their assets। There are reports that some Supreme Court and high court judges want to end the controversy over the judiciary’s reluctance to declare assets by doing so.

But the official position is that judges do not come under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act and the CIC’s order directing judges to declare their assets has been stayed on appeal by the Delhi High Court।

The Election Commission, too, was quick to deny details of the assets of its three commissioners। The reason: the information, apparently, is not available with it.

Ironically, politicians, much vilified for alleged corruption, have to, and do, declare their assets – once at the time of filing nomination papers when they contest elections, and then again, annually to the presiding officers of their respective legislatures।

Here, Lok Sabha Speaker Mr। Somnath Chatterjee set an example by making public the declarations that were filed by members to him.

In a telling comment, in the context of the judiciary’s unwillingness to declare assets, he recently said: “There is no law that says you have to be honest. Honesty is not imposed by law. Dishonesty is treated as a crime.” But the two commissions and the judiciary continue to evade public scrutiny. Magsasay award winner and RTI activist Mr Arvind Kejriwal feels “the time has come to scrap the rules that allow retired bureaucrats to evade scrutiny”.

RTI Top Stories

2009-02-09T03:16:00.000-08:00

Rs 1 crore for Information

A farmer, with an average annual income of Rs 60,000, was ordered to pay a whopping sum of Rs 1 crore to know how Public Distribution System dealers distributed kerosene oil and food articles over the past few years।

Gupteshwar Singh of Bankat village had initially sought these details from Bihar’s supply department in Patna in May 2008। The request was forwarded to the Ara district supply officer, who in turn sent a letter to the petitioner asking him to pay a sum of Rs 78 lakh towards the cost of collection of the information and it’s photo-copying.

The stunned villager then moved the State Information Commission (SIC), saying he was denied information even after expiry of the stipulated 30-day deadline under the RTI in June 2008. The SIC directed the District Supply Officer (DSO), Jawahar Prasad, to provide the details to the petitioner free of costs.

The DSO then sought Rs 1 crore from the government towards the costs involved in complying with the SIC directive। The SIC, in the meantime, summoned the DSO, who explained the costing of the information collection.

The proceedings at the SIC lasted some six months and in December 2008, it accepted the DSO’s plea and issued an order directing the farmer to pay the costs and collect the information।

DSO told, “I will forward the latest order of the SIC to the petitioner and if he comes up with the necessary stipulated costs of Rs 1 crore, he will be provided the information he has sought.” He has not yet heard anything from the farmer.

Entire file to RTI applicant

2009-02-09T00:32:00.000-08:00

A Noida resident got a rude shock recently when, instead of information he sought under the Right To Information (RTI) Act, a huge file containing information about original vehicle theft and recovery lay on his table.

Ashok Naagar had sought information on vehicle thefts in Meerut Zone (Gautam Budh Nagar, Ghaziabad, Meerut, Baghpat and Bulandshahr districts), names and addresses of owners, recoveries of such vehicles, among others.

On Sunday he produced the original register handed over to him by the Ghadiabad police. “They asked him to gather information on my own and told to return the register after a week. They also took a receipt from them for the same.

But applicant is unable to gather the desired information as the record maintenance is cumbersome. To escape complications in providing data to an RTI applicant, the Ghaziabad police handed over their original vehicle theft and recovery record register to an applicant.

The complainant also said the register does not have updated information and contained misleading data. When they repeatedly asked them for information, the department asked me to pay Rs 2,200 as the data tabulation according to him ran into 1,100 pages. Following repeated complaints, the in charge of Anti Auto Theft Department, through a messenger, handed over the original register to his Noida office.

Since the matter has come to light, the authorities are finding it tough to answer how the record register was sent to the RTI complainant. “This is violation of duty rules. There would be an official inquiry into the matter,” said SP (Traffic) Anil Kumar.