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
Guest pcbali

RTI to PIL, a right path

Recommended Posts

Guest pcbali

The latest interim order on 17/7/2013 of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in my PIL. The CJ has fined the Municipal Corporations, shows the wrath of Judiciary for non compliance of the orders.

 

CWP-8801-2012 (O&M)

..

 

 

Parbodh Chander Bali vs. The Chief Secretary to Government of Punjab & Others

 

 

 

Present: Petitioner in person

 

 

Mr.P.S. Bajwa, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab

 

 

Mr.Harsimran Singh Sethi, Advocate for respondent No.4

 

Mr.Chetan Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr.Kunal Mulwani, Advocate for respondent No.5

..

 

 

The petition, styled as a PIL, has been filed alleging non- compliance by the Municipal Corporations with the provisions of Sections 257 to 275 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976. It was the case of the petitioner that there have been rampant unauthorised constructions and the detection is only a fraction of such cases where also the action is not taken to its logical end. We find from the order sheets that on 30.7.2012, the respondents were directed to file their affidavits specifically qua four aspects. This has been reiterated in the order dated 21.1.2013. These aspects are:

 

(i) Cases detected of illegal/unauthorised construction;

(ii) Notices issued and not complied with;

(iii) Why such buildings were permitted to be completed;

(iv) How much compounding fee yet remains to be recovered.

 

 

The Municipal Corporation of Amritsar has filed affidavits and it is the submission of the petitioner that though action has been taken, but there is great paucity of staff/Inspectors to detect the deviations/violations. It is submitted that there are only 4 Inspectors deployed with the Corporations. This is against sanctioned posts of 20 i.e. there are 16 vacancies. It is stated that there are no Junior Engineers in this department as the said posts are in the Engineering Department. The additional affidavit filed on 24.9.2012 itself paints a dismal picture as even challans have remained unattended of the year 2008-2009 (page-145). The affidavit does not contain any plan setting out the time schedule within which the proceedings qua the challans would be concluded. 104 more cases are stated to have been concluded as set out in the affidavit dated 4.3.2013.

 

As far as the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana is concerned, no affidavit has been filed, but a status-report is sought to be placed on record in Court while Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar has filed a short reply both of which are taken on record, but learned senior counsel cannot dispute that the contents of the same do not answer the queries posed by this Court as far back as 30.7.2012. We, thus, impose costs on the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana and Municipal Corporation, Jalandhar for non-compliance of the directions of this Court quantified at Rs.7,500/- each, to be deposited with the Mediation Centre.

 

The Special Secretary, Local Government, Punjab has filed an affidavit dated 21.1.2013 (page-156). The affidavit is effectively in response to the order dated 30.7.2012 noticing the paucity of the Building Inspectors. There are stated to be 46 sanctioned posts of Building Inspector (Technical) for 8 Corporations and 20 new posts are stated to have been created. Against 66 total posts, it is admitted that there are only two Building Inspectors working and 64 posts are vacant. (these two are in Amritsar i.e. there is no such Inspector in other Corporations). The affidavit goes on to state that action for direct recruitment is under consideration, as intimated vide letter dated 14.1.2013 and, in principle, approval has been given. The instructions are

stated to have been issued vide letter dated 7.12.2011 to the Commissioners of all the Municipal Corporations that additional charge of Building Inspector (Technical) be given to the Junior Engineers, if needed.

 

In our view, other than admitting absence of adequate number of Inspectors and posts not being filled in, the affidavit is as vague as it can be. The first aspect we must notice is that the negligence is of the State Government resulting in rampant unauthorised constructions remaining undetected. The second aspect is that even the existing 66 posts, which are inadequate, have remained almost completely unfilled, since only two Inspectors are working. The affidavit only talks in generalisation about steps being taken without laying any time schedule within which these posts would be filled in, a study done as to how many posts are required with suitable increase of strength as per requirement. Even though we are informed that Junior Engineers in the department do not exist, a direction appears to have been issued to engage their services in the meantime. This is complete non-application of mind.

 

We have called upon the Municipal Corporations to file ffidavits setting out the time schedule within which the work of compounding will be completed giving the area-wise position. This may, however, only assist in scheduling of the challans made, but the larger problem of non-detection would remain till such time there are adequate number of Building Inspectors in position in the different Corporations.

 

We, thus, call upon the Principal Secretary, Local Self Government to inform us by filing an affidavit as to ideally how many Inspectors are required for each of the Municipal Corporations and as to within how much period of time will the process of recruitment be completed. This is necessary to carry out a legislative mandate under the Act, referred to above.

 

The affidavits be filed within a maximum period of four weeks from today, failing which the Commissioners of the Corporations will remain personally present in Court. The Corporations should depute their senior officers to assist their counsel. As far as the State Government is concerned, given the ground realities, we would like to have the assistance of the Principal Secretary, Local Self Government, who should remain personally present in court.

List on 21.8.2013.

 

Order dasti to learned counsel for the respondents.

 

 

 

( SANJAY KISHAN KAUL ) CHIEF JUSTICE

 

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) JUDGE

 

17.07.2013

pc

4 interim_order 17_07_2013_.doc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
skmishra1970

Dear Bali Sahab, many many Congratulations for your right steps and success to get such type of DHAMAKEDAR ORDER for all the MC's in the State of Punjab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digal

.

.

Congratulations Bali saab. You have really shown us the right path: "RTI to PIL, a right path" which consummates your fight to galvanize us to irradiate irregularities in our system.

 

 

Regards

 

R K Mishra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali

Laton Ke Bhoot Bato Se Nahin Mante

 

Dear Friends,

 

It is a common phrase. And it is proved as under.

 

In a writ (PIL) filed against the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar and Govt of Punjab, it was ordered by Hon'ble High Court that ALL Local Bodies (Municipal Corporations, Committees, Nagar Panchayats etc.) will strictly comply with the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act 1976, especially in regard to law as incorporated about “Meeting of House of Councillors”.

The MC Amritsar and none other ever complied with the mandate of High Court. This resulted in compelling me to file a fresh COCP (Contempt of Court) in High Court. It was admitted. As soon as Notice of Motion was issued, now the “Rules for Admission of Public in Meeting of House” were immediately framed and got approved in the meeting of House of MC Amritsar held on 16/07/2013. (Uploaded with this mail)

Alas, this would have been done before; some one goes to High Court with a COCP.

But still no such exercise had been made by other Corporations and Local Bodies, let the Secretary, Local Bodies, Punjab Government reply in High Court on next date i.e. 02/09/2013 and face wrath of Court.

MCA Rules.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
G.R.Vidyaranya

Good job Sri Bali ji.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali

A leading Hindi Newspaper Punjab Kesari publish the report on the order of Hon'ble High Court in my PIL against unauthorised constructions against Local Bodies of Punjab

11 News of Order dated 17-7-13.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

JP Shah saab,

Any ready to use formats with procedure in your mind for helping citizens ?

 

What about Financial help and assistance from Legal Services Authorities if it is filed in the name of women or below poverty applicants ?

 

These PILs are possible only if you are near to HC and at HCs who sincerely help RTI Applicants in larger interest. Unfortunately opposing RTI Act is becoming opposing litigants ab initio with some judicial authorities.

 

It is hoped that atleast newly qualified advocates come forward to take RTI cases through PIL so that they can earn name and fame.

 

This forum may ignore if any rules and regulations and may consider their names in panel of RTI consultants as this is in larger public interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shree Vathsan

Learned members of this forum,

 

Could you let me know if violation of building norms be questioned under which act in TN. Any assistance on TN town planning laws will be highly appreciated.

 

I would like to file RTI on encroachments and illegal construction in MCs of TN, as Mr Bali jis experience is truly inspirational.

 

Sent from my GT-I5500 using Tapatalk 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sharadphadke

 

I further appeal to you, that after getting information through RTI, actual result will come if we expose the matters in Courts. So be forward and prepare yourselves to file PIL, writs or though any other means, your matter to courts to teach the guilty, lessons.

Yours in RTI activism,

 

Parbodh Chander Bali

 

With kind guidance of P C bali, I have issued a notice to Bombay High Court, Registrar General for contempt of Supreme Court. The notice has moved high court and will be filing "Contempt of Court" letter petition in Supreme Court soon.

 

My thanks to P. C. Bali in helping in RTI matter to reach the door of court and that to Apex Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Please identify illegal constructions one or two in the beginning and file RTI Application the stipulation as per Town Planning, action taken for deviations if any, name of building inspector entrusted with regular inspection, dates of inspection. Kindly google for Town Planning rules and regulations or just seek PIO and file RTI Application for a copy of such Rules and regulations applicable in Tamilnadu (differ from place to place of construction and area of plot, areas of usage etc.,)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

I am not pessimistic, but there are several HCs that are against RTI Act and Punjab, Delhi . Jarkhand, Gujarat etc., are exceptional when compared with Madras and AP.

Why Madras HC should grant stay order for BCC under RTI Act, before complete hearing before CIC or it's own RTI Act ? One of an RTI Activist who filed a petition for first time before HC has narrated his bad experience and lamented that he was treated like a criminal by hearing authority, and Public Authorities have large number of advocates/legal advisors large in number having very good influence that make a difference in decisions.

They should have waited for the outcome and then responded suitably. Such things can not be done suddenly with out a pre planning and mutual consultation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali

Recently in 2008 and then again reaffirming in 2012, Hon’ble PB & HR HC gave a very effective Judgment against Municipal Corporations (all Local Bodies) in regard to removal of Encroachments over Public Land. The Hon’ble Judges have also covered unauthorised constructions mushrooming on Government/Public Lands. The beauty of Judgment is, it gives a time bound schedule for needful and it is just a policy. This is maximum a court can do. The court is inviting public to come to HC with COCP and speedy trials. For those who like Hindi Version, I am enclosing Hindi Translation of operative part of the Judgment. If you feel it good, please file more CWPs in other states and COCPs in PB & HR better as a Petitioner-in-Person. The English copies of Judgment are also attached to check full version.

1a CWP 4886 Hindi Translation.doc

1 Judgment CWP 4886 4.10.2008 HC Website.pdf

2a COCP 1299 Hindi Translation.doc

2 Judgment COCP 1299.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

I am not well versed with law matters and seek clarification on experts on possibility of the following:

a.Corporations are Public Utility organisations, and Permanent Lok Adalat in DIstrict level has authority to accept petitions for which petitioner need not pay any costs/expenses.

b.As per Supreme Court judgment in Ghaziabad Development Authority, tax payers are consumers for Municipalities and corporations as per CP Act.

Is it possible to take up these encroachments and unauthorised constructions locally through above forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali

The Next issue taken up in direction “From RTI to PIL- A Right Path”. My one more PIL has been registered today i.e. on 31/7/2013 and is fixed for first hearing for admission Tomorrow with the Double Bench of Chief Justice and Justice AG Masih of Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. Efforts are totally as Petitioner-in-Person. Self drafted, self printed, self filed and self pleaded. (it took my four “to and fro” journeys from Amritsar to Chandigarh to file in registry and collect back after one or other objections and finally it is through and registered.

(Screen Shot of Cause List attached as file)

(Full PIL attached for your reference, record and as format for your use)

 

The Subject of PIL is removal of unauthorised encroachment of about more than 250 grabbers on a dried water channel stretched through the heart of city as long as about 14 Kms 20 meters wide. (I am not very sure of length, but it seems from records. The RTI helped a lot and a bunch of documents self admitting that the land is of Forest and is occupied by illegal encroacher had been collected from Forest, Irrigation, Pb Urban Development and DC Amritsar in about one and half years strong efforts with almost five second appeals and complaints in State Information Commission, Punjab. It asked about a dozen times to appear at Chandigarh to plead in SIC. The Forest has served Legal Notice in 2005 to the encroachers but after that they are mum. Reason, nexus of Officers to let the land be grabbed by the grabbers and officers get the share.

 

Please pray to Almighty, it may be admitted.

 

Two more Writs have hearing in High Court on same day 1/8/2013, in RTI matters, one if for abolition of illegal formation of Collegium in SIC Punjab with request for removal of an erring SIC of Punjab.

 

Second is against an order of SIC, Punjab in favour of SSP Cyber Crimes, Punjab and I am praying to High Court for a penalty and information.

(Screen Shot of Cause List attached as file)

 

So enjoy and be encouraged to file PILs as a Right Path.

PIL.doc

PIL Jethuwal Distributory.pdf

CWPs.doc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Kudos to your dedication sir, All the best. Fortunately, your Courts are most client friendly and do not insult party in person, and dismiss the writs with costs, stating that these are Publicity stunts.

Can you just inform the link for a format of PIL so that atleast one member tries to emulate your example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali
Kudos to your dedication sir, All the best. Fortunately, your Courts are most client friendly and do not insult party in person, and dismiss the writs with costs, stating that these are Publicity stunts.

Can you just inform the link for a format of PIL so that atleast one member tries to emulate your example.

 

Mr. Prasad,

 

Please be computer friendly, see that three files are attached with post No.90. Just click to retrieve. I have already uploaded full PIL with annexures. If still you do not find, message me, I will send you the file on your personal id.

 

On thing more, humbly, there are no" your courts and my courts". It all depend that how you plead and really you are pleading a matter where there is none of your personal attachment. Even if it indirect or your prejudice or your personal disliking, the courts judge it from far (This is my experience) Mostly people file PILs on the subject where they are sufferers, better just see to scene of this world and pick up a issue at random. No prejudice, no malice and no disliking. Pure common cause. You will be praised. Respect Judiciary, respect law, bear dismissal of matters, we have to walk along them to bring some fruits out. Please make an introspection that if you speak less but to the point. Are you not irritating others. If you impress others with you clear logic, you can win the Judiciary. I have made thrice, judiciary to just lament on the plight of poor.

 

Punjab & Haryana High Court is also going very very strict and choosy to accept the PILs and that is why I had to face four times the objections from Registry, I had to file new Affidavits to clear my motive, my living, my credentials to get it admitted. Further No body knows what happen in court.

 

But be positive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali
I am not well versed with law matters and seek clarification on experts on possibility of the following:

a.Corporations are Public Utility organisations, and Permanent Lok Adalat in DIstrict level has authority to accept petitions for which petitioner need not pay any costs/expenses.

b.As per Supreme Court judgment in Ghaziabad Development Authority, tax payers are consumers for Municipalities and corporations as per CP Act.

Is it possible to take up these encroachments and unauthorised constructions locally through above forums.

 

Please send me Case No. or upload the full judgment here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

This is the best Judgment that I have come across in CP Act by Supreme Court: Jurisdiction

Ghaziabad Development Authority Vs. Balbir SIngh reported in (2004) 5 Scc 65.

I have shared the experiences of others and materials read in news papers and mentioned their feelings on PILs and I have never attempted PILs, and inspired by your example, I wish to take up and sought your help with all positive approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali

High Court impose cost of Rs.10000/- on SSP, Cyber Cell, Punjab to pay me for delaying filing reply

 

Sr. No.220

CWP No. 12804 of 2012

Parbodh Chander Bali

v.

State of Punjab and others

Present:

Mr. Parbodh Chander Bali petitioner in person.

Mr.Inder Pal Goyat, Addl.AG., Punjab.

****

Learned Addl.AG prays for some time to file reply on behalf of

respondent No.2. It may be noticed that notice of motion was issued more

than one year ago and till date reply has not been filed on behalf of

respondent No.2. In the circumstances there is no justification for granting

any further time to respondent No.2. However, at the persistent request of

learned Addl. AG, four weeks' more time is granted to respondent No.2 to

file reply along with costs of ` 10,000/- to be paid personally by the

respondent No.2 in the form of draft in favour of the petitioner.

Adjourned to 03.09.2013.

( AJAY TEWARI )

JUDGE

August 01, 2013

CWP_12804_2012_01_08_2013_INTERIM_ORDER.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali
Please find attached judgement as above.

 

I am obliged sir.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali
Please find attached judgement as above.

 

Mr. Barboza and Mr. G.L.N. Prasad,

 

Sirs, which para contains this line that

 

"judgment in Ghaziabad Development Authority, tax payers are consumers for Municipalities and corporations as per CP Act."?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

The SC Judgment is on misfeasance of Public Authority and the relevant para is as under

"Thus the law is that the COnsumer Protection Act has a wide reach and the Commission had therefore jurisdiction even in cases of services rendered by Statutory and Public Authorities. Such Authorities become liable to compensate for misfeasance in Public office i.e am act which is oppressive,, or capricious or arbitrary of negligent provided loss or injury is suffered by a a citizen:

The interpretation is given by experts is that every public authority is accountable to citizens if an injury or suffering is attributed to negligence. This is oft quoted judgment on misfeasance and for jurisdiction of filing complaints before Consumer Forums. The relevancy can be explained only by professionals. However this is one of the best judgments making the doors wide open to citizens for misfeasance by PA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pcbali

O my God, Mr. Prasad,

 

This is really funny to interpret this judgment that "the Tax payers are consumers"

 

This is the reasons that courts slap cost on Petitioner who makes not only a false interpretation but rather make wrong quotes of those "words which do not exist or even can not be interpreted from any angel or stretch of imagination"

 

Do you mean non-tax payers are not having the equal benefit, which the tax payers are going to gain from this judgment, if we take views of experts as correct?

 

Anyhow this is really one of the best judgments but it is for all and not for only taxpayers and even not only for Municipalities and Corporations specifically. It is in general and for the services which may be interpreted for "Negligence to any desired lawful duties and responsibilities of PAs"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • Atul Patankar
      By Atul Patankar
      As reported at timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 9 Jul 2009
       
      RANCHI: A PIL was filed by one Surendra Sao of Bokaro in Jharkhand High Court demanding a CBI inquiry against SAIL chairman, BSL MD and former Union steel minister Ram Vilas Paswan in connection with the expenses incurred during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to the state last year. The PM had come to lay the foundation stone of BSL's modernization and expansion programme.
       
      Sao has challenged the Rs 1.92 crore expenditure incurred by BSL during the visit of the Prime Minister on April 22, 2008. The estimated expense to be incurred by BSL in this programme was around Rs 11,000 crore.
       
      The petition was filed on basis of information collected through RTI from SAIL. The report of alleged misuse of money during the Prime Minister's visit to the state was first published in TOI.
       
      Source: PIL against SAIL chairman, BSL MD - Ranchi - Cities - The Times of India
    • Atul Patankar
      By Atul Patankar
      As reported at thehindu.com on Jul 19, 2009
       
      MADURAI: The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005 has exposed the appalling conditions of a middle school in Tiruchi where 195 students were suffering from lack of basic facilities such as electricity, ventilation, toilets and structurally stable buildings.
       
      Disposing of a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed on the strength of information obtained under the RTI Act, the Madras High Court Bench here on Friday directed the education officials to shift the students to other schools.
       
      The Tiruchi District Elementary Educational Officer (DEEO) was ordered to transfer immediately all 195 students studying in Standard Six to Eight in Sacred Heart Middle school at Pushpa Nagar, Sangiliandapuram, to two other nearby schools.
       
      A Division Bench comprising Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Justice D. Hariparanthaman held that the temporary recognition granted to the middle school, until October 31, 2009, was illegal.
       
      Mr. Justice Ramasubramanian directed the Collector and the Director of Elementary Education in Chennai to inspect the buildings where the school was accommodating students studying in Standards I to V and ascertain whether they had all necessary facilities.
       
      Source: The Hindu : Tamil Nadu / Madurai News : RTI exposes lack of facilities in school

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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