Jump to content
News Ticker
Sajib Nandi

New Delhi: Kharge to become Part of CIC Selection Committee

Recommended Posts

D.T.RATHAVA

Nagpur: The Narendra Modi government's decision to appoint senior most information commissioner as the chief information commissioner (CIC) after nine months has come in for sharp criticism.

 

Sharma's name was cleared in the meeting that the prime minister held last week with leader of opposition party in Lok Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge.

 

In a letter to the prime minister on Wednesday, city-based RTI activist Avinash Prabhune said government should not adopt a short-sighted view on CIC appointment if it really wants to do justice to the RTI Act.

 

Don?t appoint CIC for short tenure, PM urged - The Times of India

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

It is not known whether any one has made SWOT analysis of such aspirants and whether tenure of proposed IC was brought to the attention of selection committee.

or

PM is himself wishes to close the mouth of opposition temporarily Stop Gap arrangement hunting for a suitable candidate acceptable in this GAP.

Atleast selection committee should formulate for officating in charge and hunting for successor well in advance, if they can not make policy of making senior as CIC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

Do you think that this government or any political party is interested in RTI Act? If they really want good governance and transparency they should have appointed an ex justice of HC/SC as a CIC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

I believe that every opposition party is interested in RTI Act, and I also believe that implementation of RTI Act is 100% more on PIOs and if they function well, a citizen need not go to CIC at all. (My opinion and others may differ)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GirijaSiva

Refer K V Chowdary appointed CVC; Vijay Sharma new CIC - The Economic Times

 

 

Former CBDT chief K V Chowdary and Information Commissioner Vijai Sharma were today appointed Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) and Chief Information Commissioner (CIC), posts which have remained vacant for over nine months on which the government drew some flak......

 

Their appointments were approved today by President Pranab Mukherjee, a Rashtrapati Bhavan spokesperson said, a week after Prime Minister Narendra Modi and leader of the Congress in Lok Sabha Mallikarjun Kharge recommended their names.......

 

In the Central Information Commission, the government has followed the convention of appointing the senior most Information Commissioner's as the CIC.

 

Sharma, a former Environment Secretary, has been working as Information Commissioner in the Central Information Commissioner since 2012. He will have a tenure of about six months as he attains the age of 65 years on December 1, this year.......

 

In the CIC, there are vacancies of four Information Commissioners. The incumbents are Basant Seth, Yashovardhan Azad, Sharat Sabharwal, Manjula Prasher, M A Khan Yusufi and Madabhushanam Sridhar Acharyulu.

 

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had attended the meeting for the selection of CIC while Home Minister Rajnath Singh attended the other meeting on CVC, held on June 1.

 

Central Information Commission, which is mandated to resolve appeals and complaints filed against government departments or public authorities by information seekers under the Right to Information Act, has been working without a Chief for over nine months, after the tenure of CIC Rajiv Mathur ended on August 22, 2014.

 

A total of 40,051 cases -- comprising 32,531 appeals and 7,520 complaints filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act -- are pending in the Commission as on today, as per an official data.

 

A total of 203 applicants were in the race for CIC...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

Government should stop such "babudon" and appoint retired justices as CIC, ICs. Govt. of Odisha has stopped to appoint retired babus as SIC and published advertisement for the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]President Mukherjee approves appointments of KV Chowdary as CVC[/h]

 

 

President Pranab Mukherjee today approved the appointment of KV Chowdary, former chairman of Central Board of Direct Taxes, as the Central Vigilance CommissionerCVC and the senior-most information commissioner Vijai Sharma as the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC). The two posts had been lying vacant for the past nine months with the Opposition accusing the government of laxity in making these crucial appointments which are key to ensuring transparency and probity in governance.

 

Read at: President Mukherjee approves appointments of KV Chowdary as CVC | Business Standard News

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iVijayC

New CVC is Mr. Choudhary and CIC is Mr. Vijay.

And I'm Vijay Choudhary ;)

 

/*fun-intended*/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MANOJ B. PATEL

Dear member, with due respect,

 

This forum is not for posting fun. Better to read RTI Act and increase your knowledge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Very bad choice for post of CIC.

 

There will be total inertia in the CIC now !

 

If IC Vijai Sharma could not even manage his own Registry and got hauled up by the Delhi HC, how can anyone expect him to manage the entire CIC ?

 

This seems to be a "you scratch my back, I will scratch yours" type of appointment. IC Vijai Sharma was Sonia Gandhi's candidate. He is allowed to be CIC for 6 months, in return for Congress agreeing to Basant Seth as the next CIC for about 18 months. Basant Seth is a Sushma Swaraj (ie BJP) candidate and was brought in as IC by adding a fourth panel to the selection list last time !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira
New CVC is Mr. Choudhary and CIC is Mr. Vijay.

And I'm Vijay Choudhary ;)

 

/*fun-intended*/

 

You might have the same name......but they are certainly not capable like you !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

Chief Information Commissioners with short tenure have poor records

 

In the past, between 5 September 2013 to 22 August 2014, we had three Chief Information Commissioners in the Central Information Commission (CIC), under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, who had short tenures.

 

I have since carried our study based on information available on CIC website. The study suggests that the CCIC, who headed the CIC for a shorter duration, have poor records in terms of disposing cases. During the 11 and a half months period to 22 August 2014, three people, Deepak Sandhu, Sushma Singh and Rajiv Mathur were CCICs and together disposed 893 cases or 165 cases per month on the average.

 

 

Read at: Chief Information Commissioners with short tenure have poor records - Moneylife

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

[h=1]President to administer oath of office to CVC, CIC tomorrow[/h]President Pranab Mukherjee will administer the oath of office to the new chiefs of Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and Central Information Commission (CIC) at the Rashtrapati Bhavan on Wednesday.

The Centre on Monday had appointed former CBDT chief KV Chowdary as the Chief Vigilance Commissioner and senior most Information Commissioner Vijai Sharma as Chief Information Commissioner. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had chaired a meeting over the appointments at his official 7, Race Course Road residence.

The CIC has been working without a chief for over nine months, after the tenure of CIC Rajiv Mathur ended on August 22, 2014. The CIC is mandated to resolve appeals and complaints filed against government departments or public authorities by information seekers under the RTI.

 

Read at: President to administer oath of office to CVC, CIC tomorrow : India, News - India Today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Let us hope for a better change, with closed mouths. After all, we are all optimistic, and sure that our appeals being filed now never come to him for deciding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]New CIC must dispose 2000 cases per month to clear 40,000 pending cases[/h]

Former bureaucrat Vijai Sharma today took over the reins of Central Information Commission as its seventh chief, a post which had been lying vacant for nearly nine months leading to piling up of over 40,000 cases.

Read at: New CIC must dispose 2000 cases per month to clear 40,000 pending cases | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

Chief Information Commissioners with short tenure have poor records

 

With number of pending cases going over 40,000 at the Central Information Commission-CIC and 15,704 Cases pending in the Chief CIC bench, the Commission requires drastic reforms. Plus, the CCIC and ICs must have a tenure of at least three years to justify their appointment

 

After keeping the post of Chief Central Information Commissioners (CCIC) vacant for almost 10 months, the union government finally appointed Vijai Sharma, the senior-most Information Commissioner (IC) as the CCIC. However, Mr Sharma, an officer from the 1974 batch of Indian Administrative Service (IAS) is left with less than six months before he retires on 1 December 2015, on attaining the age of 65.

 

In the past, between 5 September 2013 to 22 August 2014, we had three Chief Information Commissioners in the Central Information Commission (CIC), under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, who had short tenures.

 

I have since carried our study based on information available on CIC website. The study suggests that the CCIC, who headed the CIC for a shorter duration, have poor records in terms of disposing cases. During the 11 and a half months period to 22 August 2014, three people, Deepak Sandhu, Sushma Singh and Rajiv Mathur were CCICs and together disposed 893 cases or 165 cases per month on the average.

[TABLE=width: 700]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD][TABLE=width: 660, align: center]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Some Observations

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]1. In 3.5 Months Tenure (5.9.2013 to 18.12.2013):

Ms Deepak Sandhu disposed = 796 Cases: @ Average =227.43 Cases per month

{During this period Pendency Increased by 467 cases to go up to 1,946 cases}

 

2. In next say 5 Months Tenure: (19.12.2013 to 21.05.2014):

Ms Sushma Singh disposed = 712 Cases: @ Average = 142.4 Cases per month

{During this period Pendency Increased by 1,308 Cases to go up to 3,254 Cases}

 

3. In next 3 Months Tenure (22.5.2014 to 22.8.2014):

Rajiv Mathur disposed = 385 Cases @ Average of 128.33 Cases per month

{During this period Pendency Increased by 4,397 Cases to go up to 7,651 Cases}

Total cases disposed by three Chief CIC in 11.5 Months are 1,893 cases at an average of 164.62 cases per month[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

With huge number of Pending Cases (40,019) in CIC and 15,704 Cases pending in Chief IC bench, the Commission requires drastic reforms. This includes the CIC to work on Saturdays like High Court for consolidating the work in registries and ICs finalising orders.

 

1433856909_PerformanceofCCIC0906.jpg

 

In addition, the CCIC, who also have administrative role at the CIC, must have at least three years of service left before retirement, to justify the appointment.

Read More: Chief Information Commissioners with short tenure have poor records - Moneylife

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Possible solutions ? Suggestions ? recommendations for huge clearance within ambit of RTI Act ?

( a team may be appointed in each Registry to observe cases and prepare a brief in each case and placed before IC, so that he can focus on those specific issues alone, instead of writing names of appellants, Public Authority. Another suggestion is for negotiation between appellant and CPIO at FAA's Office locally making available all matters and write only synopsis not exceeding 10 lines so that IC focus and make a summary trial only on those cases. This is particularly useful in complaints where CPIO has not provided information. First wherever information was not provided bunch them, outsource with an expert for preparing show case notices to settle the issues within time bound programme and fixing a hearing on appointed day, and if appellant is satisfied, these cases can be disposed. CIC can not alone do all this and contribbution by PIOs and appellants should also co-ordinate and co-opertate, first this must be focused on appeals of more than 1 year chronlogically and one IC must coordinate compromise situations in simple matters.

Complicated cases, where IC hearing is necessary must be taken up at CIC, and simple cases through VC in a time bound programe. Now VCs are taking up bunches of cases in VC and there is hardly enough time to read them. IC can only go through office notes prepared, and he can decide them, however both appellants and CPIOs can add more if they seek.

This simple process involves.

Whether CPIO has provided information within time ?

Is he accepting delay,

Is CPIO prepared to provide the information within 15 days.

If preliminary scrutiny reveals that CPIOs denied information without any grounds pointing out this to them, and asking them whether he accepts ICs contentions or contest it, if CIC decides then they must be prepared for penalty and consequences.

FAAs must first go through such pending appeals at CIC as per and as per CPIO records, call appellants for a compromise and send those reports to IC.

If they are not willing to compromise, then IC takes his own decision but gives personal hearing, and then PIO must face consequences.

 

Hon Karira may suggest some more steps and suggest them to CIC and all formats must be formated in system and decisions must be delivered immediately to parties on the same day saving costs.

When there can be compromise/arbitration in more civil cases, why should not CIC do it in an experimental manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digal

The million dollar Qn still remains..

 

Who will accept the suggestions?

 

Why should this situation come, if Govts would hv taken the repeated Suggestions/Demands/Prayers/Pleas to appoint ICs (sympathetic bkgrnd towards transparency/anti-corruption), in transparent manner?

 

Negligible/Zero Penalty for obdurate PIOs & insincere PAs, results in rain of Appeals & complaints at CIC.

 

The key still remains at the corrupt & turbid Neta+Babus.

 

It is very difficult for a common man to knock the door of Courts every time for justice.

 

Strong movement through civil society Groups may jiggle the torpid authorities to take action in right direction.

 

 

R K Mishra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

The common proverb for sending suggestions to CIC

"Friends, I have some more pearls to be thrown "

Efforts should continue.

But rightly observed, that violations must be strictly curbed only by penalties alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

[h=1]Key choices, some questions[/h]The appointments of Vijai Sharma as Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and K.V. Chowdary as Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC), which have been a long time coming, also raise some concerns about the Narendra Modi government’s level of engagement with institutions that form the life breath of Indian democracy. The CIC presides over the Right to Information, crucial to a participatory democracy in making institutions accountable, while the CVC is tasked with overseeing the vigilance administration. As watchdogs, both are premised on the principles of transparency and autonomy. For this reason, utmost transparency is called for in these appointments, and it is imperative that the processes by which the names are arrived at are in the public domain. Yet, in the last one year, amid all the achievements of the Modi government, the delay in appointing suitable candidates to these posts had been a matter of some concern, flagged by political parties, informed citizen groups and others. At last count, the Central Information Commission, which has been functioning without a chief for the last 10 months, has nearly 37,788 cases to clear. Three posts of information commissioners in the CIC are vacant. The CIC bench is authorised to hear appeals with respect to the PMO, the Department of Personnel, the CVC, the CAG, and crucial government Ministries.

 

 

Read at: Editorial: Key choices, some questions on the Chief Information Commissioner and Chief Vigilance Commissioner - The Hindu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • armyguy
      By armyguy
      This RTI is a powerful tool to expose major policy decisions. Recently a major breakthrough happened with effort in Delhi to privatize water supply in the city.
       
      Apparently, this was a proposed World Bank funded effort. The proposal was on since the mid nineties in complete secrecy. However, some news leaked out in to the press, and an RTI petition was filed asking for the files on this process.
       
      At first there was a lot of resistance, but finally the files were made public, and the story was shocking. Apparently, the World Bank was arm twisting and almost dictating policy to the government. The process of privatization (or any government work) takes place with bids by bidding companies. There is a two layered process, where first in this case the top six companies would be selected, and then in the second round, the best among them would be selected. Here, in the first round, Pricewaterhouse-Coopers, the well known consulting firm, had a bid that came in tenth. By law, they should have been eliminated. But the world bank insisted that PWC be considered. At first the government protested, but with continuous pressure relented, and declared PWC to be selected in the top six by declaring it to be an Indian company! In the next round, again PWC fared badly, with only a 67% score, and a terrible proposal. Again the world bank pressurized the government (by asking it to remove the people who evaluated the proposal), and forced the government to declare the PWC bid as the winner. Again, the government capitulated to pressure.
       
      It wasn’t just this, but the entire process of water privatization in this proposal was rather absurd, and would have affected millions of people adversely.
       
      Bowing to public pressure (after the dealings were revealed due to the RTI petition), the government scrapped the project completely.
    • ganpat1956
      By ganpat1956
      The rules framed by the court deter those who seek information about its workings, reports Avinash Dutt

      When the Right to Information (RTI) Act came into force in October 2005, lawyers who had been fighting for transparency in India’s higher judiciary were apprehensive that the courts might not be very forthcoming with information about their working. Many RTI activists also had their doubts about the courts’ willingness to part with information. The RTI rules framed by the Delhi High Court have confirmed their worst fears. They say that the rules completely dilute the provisions of the RTI.
       
      Under the RTI Act, heads of different government institutions are allowed to frame their own rules to implement its provisions. “The High Court rules defeat the entire purpose of the Act,” says the senior Supreme Court lawyer, Prashant Bhushan. RTI campaigner Shekhar Singh agrees. “Rules framed by the court violate the law,” he says.
       
      The Central Information Commissioner, Wajahat Habibullah, who is in-charge of overseeing the Act’s successful implementation, also has reservations about the rules. “I largely agree with Singh’s observation on the RTI rules formulated by the Delhi HC,” he said. Habibullah differs with Singh on some points, but he also feels that the HC rules need to be amended.
       
      Shekhar Singh elaborates why: one of the rules framed by the HC states that if an applicant seeks any information from a Public Information Officer (PIO) that is not under the officer’s jurisdiction, the information will not be provided. Nor will the fees paid by the applicant be refunded. “This is in violation of the act, which stipulates that such applications must be transferred to the correct PIO within five working days,” Singh points out.
       
      The violations, says Singh, don’t stop here. The Delhi HC rules state: “Decisions, which are taken administratively or quasi judicially, information therefore, shall be available only to the affected persons.” The Delhi HC Press Information Officer cited this rule as the reason for the HC’s refusal to divulge information about class III and Class IV recruitments done in the court in the last 16 years (see box). In fact, says Singh, “The act obligates the public authority to suo motu provide all administrative and quasi judicial decisions to the affected party but does not prohibit it from being given to anyone else.”
       
      The RTI campaigners also object to the HC’s stipulation of mandatory forms and the fees that go with it. The Central Information Commission has ruled that RTI forms should be made available to applicants who need them but should not be made mandatory. The HC has pegged the fee at Rs 500 per application. “Though the court is authorised to fix the fee, but the act also says that it should be reasonable. The rate is unreasonably high,” Singh says.
       
      However, Singh does not see the HC rules as all bad. He points out that one rule is actually an improvement over the RTI Act. The Delhi HC rules give the applicant an opportunity to appear in person and present his case before the PIO, something which the Central Information Commission does not mandate.
       
      Tehelka - The People's Paper

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy