Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
karira

Petition challenges right to seek information from court

Recommended Posts

karira

Petition challenges right to seek information from court

 

 

Chandigarh, October 5 The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued notices to Union Law Ministry on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the powers of various Information Commissioners in seeking information (under RTI Act) from High Courts and the Supreme Court. Filed by an advocate, the PIL has challenged the powers of even the Chief Information Commissioners at state and central level, as such power interferes with the independence of the Judiciary, which is part of the basic structure of the Indian Constituion.

 

The petitioner argued that no such power can be conferred on information commissioners under the RTI Act, without bringing an amendment to the Constitution of India.

 

He also challenged the criteria and procedure used in appointing information commissioners at the state and central level by relying on a judgment of Constitution Bench in N Sampath Kumar’s case (1987), wherein it was held that no appointment to the post of chairman and administrative member of the Central Administrative Tribunal can be made by the central or state governments alone, as those members have to decide cases filed by employees against the government.

 

The petitioner further argued that the SC had given two options to the Union Government, viz. (i) Consult the Chief Justice of India (CJI) before making such appointments or constitute a committee headed by the CJI or some other Judge for recommending the names. The central or state governments therefore cannot make appointments to the post of Information Commissioners without consultation in this manner, argued the advocate.

 

He also argued the fact that since no specific qualifications have been prescribed for appointment to these posts, arbitrary powers conferred on the governments to make such appointments lowers the constitutional status of Judges of the High Courts, including Chief Justices of the High Courts and Supreme Courts Judges, argued the advocate.

 

He called for a procedure that was somewhat comparable to that of the appointment of High Court and Supreme Court Judges.

 

 

Petition challenges right to seek information from court

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ksg123

Sir,

The day RTI Act came into effectin 2005/ in April 2006, I tried to test the waters.

I've sought info from DDA of which none satisfactory reply was given that too exceeding the time limitation. The issue was pertaining an encroachment on approved layout plan designated as parking space arround my area of living. The fortunate part was before any reply was to be given to me evation was very obvious. What the DDA did was change my address from No. 1 to no. 4. The department was caught off guard upon my visit to the particular dept. by showing them the photocopy of what I have submitted. Anyway, I ended making the first appeal and then forwarded after the limitation to CIC. The order can be read if interested. The dept. was penalized Rs. 50,000 for both the queries made to their section.

 

In the mean time learning the process made another application to DDA now, with specific querries rangeing from Damage section of the estate court officer to Land management area which gave me the exact info of where the file of the encroacher was that had been kept in safe custody for the benefit of the encroacher for 25 years by greasing the department and making a fool of all the authorities. I would say the LG's listening post was also helpull in expediting the process by the estate court officer to make a decision to evict the encroacher. I would like to add I made sure I phoned each and every department that was involved constantly to make sure the process & my inquery is alive and progressive. It took good nine months of pursuing the issue, eventually the large metal shed did got demolished last 18th Sept. 2007.

 

Now the next task is to make sure the area that got domolished remain or develop as a parking space which is very much needed in our area. The area was in Jhandewalan Extension behind the metro station.

 

Had the RTI not come into effect. I don't think I could have done anything., because the encroacher greese the palm of any one who came to inspect the encroachment. and had tried his might & money power during the process of my trying to have the encroacher evicted according to the court officer of DDA.

 

As a lesson to our citizen do not lost heart "lage raho Muna Bhai" ask your self which side of the law are you with, if your answer is on the right side of the law nothing should deter anyone to fight it. Wrong negative suggestion or advice by your love ones will never get you any where. I feel it is an insult to our being as humans to succumb to fear when you are in the right side of the law. The fear would be to the person who is on the wrong side of the law.

 

In closing the topic I urge each and evry citizen of this country to say I had enough and I shall overcome to fight the evils of society. Maybe the dream each and every one of us have of India will be attain.

 

K.S.Gahunia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ksg123

Sir,

The day RTI Act came into effectin 2005/ in April 2006, I tried to test the waters.

I've sought info from DDA of which none satisfactory reply was given that too exceeding the time limitation. The issue was pertaining an encroachment on approved layout plan designated as parking space arround my area of living. The fortunate part was before any reply was to be given to me evation was very obvious. What the DDA did was change my address from No. 1 to no. 4. The department was caught off guard upon my visit to the particular dept. by showing them the photocopy of what I have submitted. Anyway, I ended making the first appeal and then forwarded after the limitation to CIC. The order can be read if interested. The dept. was penalized Rs. 50,000 for both the queries made to their section.

 

In the mean time learning the process made another application to DDA now, with specific querries rangeing from Damage section of the estate court officer to Land management area which gave me the exact info of where the file of the encroacher was that had been kept in safe custody for the benefit of the encroacher for 25 years by greasing the department and making a fool of all the authorities. I would say the LG's listening post was also helpull in expediting the process by the estate court officer to make a decision to evict the encroacher. I would like to add I made sure I phoned each and every department that was involved constantly to make sure the process & my inquery is alive and progressive. It took good nine months of pursuing the issue, eventually the large metal shed did got demolished last 18th Sept. 2007.

 

Now the next task is to make sure the area that got domolished remain or develop as a parking space which is very much needed in our area. The area was in Jhandewalan Extension behind the metro station.

 

Had the RTI not come into effect. I don't think I could have done anything., because the encroacher greese the palm of any one who came to inspect the encroachment. and had tried his might & money power during the process of my trying to have the encroacher evicted according to the court officer of DDA.

 

As a lesson to our citizen do not lost heart "lage raho Muna Bhai" ask your self which side of the law are you with, if your answer is on the right side of the law nothing should deter anyone to fight it. Wrong negative suggestion or advice by your love ones will never get you any where. I feel it is an insult to our being as humans to succumb to fear when you are in the right side of the law. The fear would be to the person who is on the wrong side of the law.

 

In closing the topic I urge each and evry citizen of this country to say I had enough and I shall overcome to fight the evils of society. Maybe the dream each and every one of us have of India will be attain.

 

K.S.Gahunia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • garg0505
      By garg0505
      Recently PIO of public authority, in a RTI application submitted u/s 6 of the RTI Act, responded to applicant after the stipulated time, you please visit the office of his junior and inspect the file/files, and after inspection of the files obtain the documents by depositing the money itself. Therefore, please provide expert opinions about the issue, as in my opinion no such provision do available to PIO to direct the information seekers under RTI Act. However if applicant desires himself to inspect the files, then option available to applicant to file the RTI application under section 2(j)(I) of the RTI act.
    • ashakantasharma
      By ashakantasharma
      Seeking information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act can be costly at times. Especially when you are asked to cough up as much as Rs 56,000 for some information, you would probably think again before using the Act.
      Advocate Vinod Sampat, too, was shocked when he was asked by the Andheri Land Records office to pay an amount of Rs 56, 268 to get information on the structures located on collector’s land across the city.
      Sampat had made an application on September 21 to inquire about it. He needed the accurate information to be part of the reference books he is writing on property matters. “I wanted information on such properties because buying properties situated on collector’s land costs an extra amount,” said Sampat.
      “However, I was shocked to see the amount asked by the Andheri office,” he said. And the amount was asked only for information on the properties situated under the jurisdiction of Andheri office.
      A shocked Sampat wrote to the Chief Information Commissioner Suresh Joshi, on Wednesday, asking him to ascertain the amount demanded from him. He also wrote to the Land Records Officer, Andheri, MT Ingle seeking a clarification on how the amount was arrived.
      As per RTI rules, Rs 2 per page is demanded to provide information. “That means they were giving me 28,000 pages as information,” said an amused Sampat.
      He said that if his queries were not answered, he would file an appeal with the appellate authority.
      When contacted, Ingle said he had charged Sampat according to the rates specified by the state government and the revenue department.
      Joshi said that in such cases, it is better for the applicants to ask for the inspection of the files so that they can pin-point the actual documents needed. They can also come in appeal to the commission, he said.
      “The information officers can charge rates only as prescribed by the state government and in this case, it is found that the concerned officer is trying to willfully mislead the people, strict action will be taken,” he added.
      However, Sampat said that the inspection point should have been mentioned in the letter, “instead of just frightening the applicant by demanding such an astronomical amount.”
      “Do you believe that the Land Records office must have counted all the 28,000 pages?”
       
      http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1833687,0008.htm
      https://right2information.wordpress.com/category/rti-cases/
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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