Jump to content
karira

CIC asks CBI to compensate Rs 153

Recommended Posts

karira

In a recent order CIC has asked to compensate the Complainant Rs. 153 - towards expenses incurred by him in sending letters to CBI and filing the Complaint.

 

CIC also remanded the RTI application back to the CPIO to provide "information" as per the provisions of the RTI Act 2005.

CBI Compensation.pdf

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digal
In a recent order CIC has asked to compensate the Complainant Rs. 153 - towards expenses incurred by him in sending letters to CBI and filing the Complaint.

 

CIC also remanded the RTI application back to the CPIO to provide "information" as per the provisions of the RTI Act 2005.

 

Dear karira-ji,

 

The Order definitely strengthens the spirit of RTI.

 

I liked Hon'nle CIC's observation regarding IInd schedule on Two Points.

 

1. Rejecting the Information request, even without opening the cover.

2. Nullifying CBI's argument regarding provision u/s 24.

 

I was not so lucky to receive such logical orders (may be because i was not present).

Hon'ble IC wanted 'evidence' from me to establish 'allegation of corruption'. The asked information on 'entries at gate', would serve itself as a 'proof of corruption' on some matter that i had clearly described in my appeal. The order is in the following link.

http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2012_001162_M_86206.pdf

 

But in your case, Hon'ble CIC as well as respondent endorsed the fact of 'corruption issue' involved in your information request.

So, you may not need another proof for the same, if at all your appeal again goes till CIC level.

 

Regards

 

R K Mishra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

But I still doubt that I will ever get the complete and correct information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vsprajan

@ Karira

 

At the outset I thank you very much for your efforts to make the central information commission to direct the CBI to respond to RTI applications related to information on allegation of corruption.

 

Rajan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
akhilesh yadav

Disclose information related to corruption cases: CIC to CBI

As reported (PTI) in hidustantimes.com on Nov 02, 2012

Disclose information related to corruption cases: CIC to CBI - Hindustan Times

Holding that information related to allegations of corruption has to be provided even by organisations exempted under the RTI Act, the CIC has directed CBI to provide all information pertaining to corruption cases. Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra directed the agency to consider on case-to-case each request seeking information about allegations of corruption and see if they do not attract other exemption clauses.

CBI was included in the second schedule of the Section 24 of the RTI Act which allows national and security organisations of the country listed under it from making any disclosures under the transparency.

However, information pertaining allegations of corruption and human rights violations do not come under the exemption.

In a case related to RTI application filed by activist C J Karira, CBI argued before the CIC that the agency by large probed cases related to allegations of corruption and disclosing such information would make the exemption given to it "totally infructuous."

The agency, which is probing number of high profile corruption cases such as 2G scam, NRHM scam, Illegal ore mining, CWG scam, Tatra BEML scam besides other such cases pleaded that disclosure of information would defy the objective of keeping it in the exemption list.

"It (section 24 of the RTI Act) does not make any distinction between the exempted organisations on the basis of the functions they perform nor between allegations of corruption on the basis whether it is made against the employees of the exempt organisation or others," Mishra held.

He said it is true that CBI is primarily responsible for investigating into all cases of corruption cases by public servants of the Central Government.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

With due respects, even CIC decisions change depending on the face value of the appellant. One of my friend was quoting a case heard through video conferencing on 29th by Chief IC. Three cases were taken for hearing and only one point in first case was partly heard and chief IC declared that he will decide the case. PIO is from CVC. The investigation report was prepared in 2010 at Chennai, modified at Mumbai and reached CVC in Mar,11 and PIO is comfortably squatting on the report stating that as logical conclusion was not arrived by her over 8 months, she could not furnish the report. The logical reasoning has to be arrived basing on a single sentence of 10 words. After all this CVC for 8 pages report was never furnished 131 pages report after charging Rs.262/ without any index. Only when appellant sent representative to CVC, the eight page report was obtained. Chief Commissioner says now that report is received there is no use in discussing past incidents of impeding investigation on a two year back finalised report. Outright decision is now that report has been furnished the case is disposed. The other two cases were not even heard and within 8 minutes hearing ended.

Only most fortunate appellants get needed justice and not every one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

As reported in tribuneindia.com on 02 Nov 2012:

The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Main News

 

CBI can’t withhold info on graft: CIC

 

Says even exempt bodies must reveal information about corruption, rights violation

 

New Delhi, November 2

 

The Central Information Commission (CIC) today upheld the supremacy of the Right to Information Act preventing the CBI from withholding information related to corruption by public officials on grounds that it is an exempted organisation under the Second Schedule of the law.

ind1.jpg

 

CIC Satyendra Mishra made it clear in his orders today that information related to corruption and human rights violations needed to be disclosed under law even by public authorities exempted under the Second Schedule and there was no “escape from disclosure”.

The Second Schedule of the Act exempts 25 intelligence and security organisations of the country from making sensitive disclosures under the law. The CBI, National Investigation Agency and the National Intelligence Grid are the latest entrants to the ever-growing list.

However, Section 24 of the Act makes it clear to the public authorities that they have to disclose information related to corruption and human rights violations.

It says, “Information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this subsection.”

The case at hand involves the CBI’s refusal to disclose to petitioner CJ Karira of Secunderabad information on sanctions the CBI sought for prosecution involving allegations of corruption against certain public officials.

The CBI, on its part, first returned the RTI application which the petitioner sent by post and later argued before the CIC that the information the petitioner was seeking could not be divulged as the CBI was a Second Schedule Organisation.

“Since the CBI, by and large, handles cases of corruption involving public officials, it would have to entertain every RTI application, making its exemption pointless. That is not the purpose behind exemption,” the CBI argued for non disclosure. The agency further said it was obliged only to disclose information related to corruption by its own employees and not by employees of other Central organisations.

The point to be decided by the CIC was - whether the CBI needed to disclose the information under Section 24 of the Act. Ruling in the case, the CIC said, “The wording of Section 24 is clear. It casts an obligation on the CPIO of the exempted organisation to entertain all requests for information pertaining to allegations of corruption or human rights violations. It doesn’t make any distinction between the exempted organisations on the basis of the functions they perform nor between allegations of corruption on the basis of whether it is made against the employees of the exempt organisation or against others.”

Ordering the CBI to part with information within 15 days, CIC Satyendra Mishra said the agency should compensate the petitioner an amount of Rs 153 for at first returning his envelope unopened.

The order added, “It is true that the CBI primarily investigates cases of corruption by public servants of the Central Government and therefore most of the information it holds would have a nexus with allegations of corruption. It is also true that the proviso to Section 24 of the RTI Act would make it necessary for the CPIO to entertain all such RTI applications, rendering the exclusion of the organisation from the operation of the Right to Information (RTI) Act almost pointless. This cannot be helped as the law is quite clear.”

The orders come a day after the Cabinet decided to withdraw amendments which would have diluted the RTI Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dr.s.malhotra
But I still doubt that I will ever get the complete and correct information.

Read more: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/105766-cic-asks-cbi-compensate-rs-153-a.html#ixzz2BEBvMOWo

The Complete Right to Information Community Portal of India

Follow us: @rtiindia on Twitter | rtiindia.org on Facebook

I can partially agree with you since the Courts are not too happy with common man trying to open every closet.

good work done .

you have given ideas to the citizens of the country , it is a long-term investment .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

CBI has gone to Delhi High Court to get a stay on this CIC order.

I was served a copy of the petition today.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digal
CBI has gone to Delhi High Court to get a stay on this CIC order.

I was served a copy of the petition today.

 

....As you expected:(. No more comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Prasad GLN

Sir, Excellent work done/efforts initiated irrespective of outcome/result. Please also know as to whether you have represented the case personally before Hon. Chief IC or some other else represented or whether you have filed written arguments.

Fortunately, it is Delhi High Court and most of the decisions are RTI Act/citizen friendly.

I am sure that decision will be in your favour (RTI Cause) and a good Speaking order.

Further please enlighten me as to whether committing fraud also comes under corruption. (Suppressing fraud by investigating agency and giving a clean chit, even when documentary evidences are clear, without stating any reasons as speaking orders, and with just recommendation "agreed" on CVO report.

Please also inform 'Human rights" briefly as accepted in Constitution, and Right to property, Right to information, Right to justice, Fair treatement were also covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

1. I had represented personally through Video Conferencing, after filing written arguments.

 

2. The entire second appeal copy is available here: Complaint to CIC against CBIs refusal to accept RTI application - Directory

 

3. The case that you mention about suppressing of facts or ignoring documents produced, can be described as "malfeasance" - ie:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-malfeasance.htm

Example of "malfeasance" being also treated as a allegation of corruption is argued out very well in this order by the CIC:

http://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=malfeasance+site:www.rtiindia.org&source=web&cd=11&cad=rja&ved=0CC0QFjAAOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.rtiindia.org%2Fforum%2Fattachments%2Fask-rti-query%2F4939d1316592040-national-research-technical-organisation-inquiries-into-illegal-use-secret-service-funds-film-women-colleagues-bathroom-sec-24-organization-under-rti-act-directed-provide-information.pdf&ei=Sai5UJOZOMLPrQfYroHgAw&usg=AFQjCNF8BXGdPySe6j7QB_O3tiXVdwh_yg

 

4. Regarding Human Rights, India is a signatory to the Universal declaration of Human Rights and that decalration carries many definitions and categories of Human Rights. Please see:

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

 

Also read some of the threads in the followings search results: http://www.google.co.in/search?q=human+rights+site%3Awww.rtiindia.org&oq=human+rights+site%3Awww.rtiindia.org&sugexp=chrome,mod=3&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 - Google Search

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
taurus

I feel that the fight has still a long way to go. The matter may drag up to the Supreme Court as it is a matter of interpretation - a crucial one at that - of the provisions of the Act. It is better that the matter is settled once for all at the earliest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sunil Ahya

CIC directs CBI to disclose info on corruption

 

Holding that information related to allegations of corruption has to be provided even by organisations exempted under the RTI Act, the CIC has directed CBI to provide all information pertaining to corruption cases.

Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra directed the agency to consider on case-to-case each request seeking information about allegations of corruption and see if they do not attract other exemption clauses. CBI was included in the second schedule of the Section 24 of the RTI Act which allows national and security organisations of the country listed under it from making any disclosures under the transparency. However, information pertaining allegations of corruption and human rights violations do not come under the exemption. In a case related to RTI application filed by activist C J Karira, CBI argued before the CIC that the agency by large probed cases related to allegations of corruption and disclosing such information would make the exemption given to it "totally infructuous." The agency, which is probing number of high profile corruption cases such as 2G scam, NRHM scam, Illegal ore mining, CWG scam, Tatra BEML scam besides other such cases pleaded that disclosure of information would defy the objective of keeping it in the exemption list. "It (section 24 of the RTI Act) does not make any distinction between the exempted organisations on the basis of the functions they perform nor between allegations of corruption on the basis whether it is made against the employees of the exempt organisation or others," Mishra held. He said it is true that CBI is primarily responsible for investigating into all cases of corruption cases by public servants of the Central Government.

 

Link to the Story: http://rtitoday.com/cic-directs-cbi-to-disclose-info-on-corruption_278.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
karira

The CBI has now got a Stay order from the Delhi HC.

 

Next date 03 April 2013.

 

Order of Delhi HC is attached.

Stay Order Delhi HC CBI matter.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
taurus

For all we know, this stay will stay put for quite some time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digal
The CBI has now got a Stay order from the Delhi HC.

 

Next date 03 April 2013.

 

Order of Delhi HC is attached.

 

As appeared in edit page of Times of India, written by Shri Sailesh Gandhi: ...........my colleagues and i have the same conditions of service and salaries as Supreme Court judges. And yet, on several occasions, public authorities do not obey the orders we pass. When they are faced with action for non-compliance, they rush to the high court and obtain a stay on our order.

 

My question is simple. Long after the deadline for complying with our order has passed, should a person or organisation that has flouted our order get a stay from any court? Shouldn't there be some penalty for violating the orders we pass? If not, what value are our orders? Those who violate our orders get legal protection. If the orders of the Central Information Commission (CIC) can be flouted so blatantly, should not the service conditions and salaries of the central information commissioners be equal to that of a sessions judge?

When granting such stays, the high court usually does not give any reasons for doing so. This means that there is no evidence of any justification for protecting those who defy the law and act in a lawless manner. The lawyers who help obtain a stay in the high courts are known to charge a whopping Rs 1-5 lakh for a single appearance. I strongly feel that any action by an instrument of the state which diminishes respect for the rule of law must be stopped. .........

 

 

The above quote is as appeared in media and is still in this link naming "The law made toothless"

 

 

The undersigned is in no mood to comment on that.

 

R K Mishra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vsprajan

The argument by the CBI that "if information pertains to allegations of corruption has to be disclosed under RTI will make the notification infructuous" is baseless for the following reasons -

 

1. Any notification so issued under the power conferred by a parent satute, cannot be interpreted so as to nullify the express provisions of the parent statute.

 

2. Moreover, with regard to the validity of the notification itself, the settled position of law is that any any notification so issued under the power conferred by a parent satute, cannot be issued so as to nullify the express provisions of the statute.

 

3. Enough Supreme court decisions support this view mentioned in 1,2.

 

4. Hence both the validity of the notification itself and the interpretation by the CBI are questionable and are indicative of ulterior motive of the govt to hide information from the public!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sajib Nandi

Reported by Ibnlive.in.com on Feb 18, 2013

CBI claims exemption from disclosing corruption data under RTI - India - IBNLive

 

New Delhi: Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached the Delhi High Court claiming protection from disclosure of information held by it on allegations of corruption under the Right to Information Act. The CBI's move to approach the Delhi High Court came on a Central Information Commission decision allowing RTI plea of activist CJ Karira who had sought information related to status of sanction for prosecution against public servants facing allegations of corruption during 2007-11.

 

Ironically, the information which CBI wanted to withhold on this RTI plea has been disclosed by Ministry of Personnel in a number of responses to Parliament members. The court of Justice Rajiv Shakdher has stayed the CIC order and fixed the matter on April 3.

 

In 2011, the central government brought CBI which was probing several high profile corruption cases including 2G scam case, CWG case, illegal mining case, Adarsh Housing Society scam, under the schedule of organisations exempted from making disclosure under the RTI Act. According to Section 24 (1) of the RTI Act, under which exempted organisations have been listed, "the information" (defined as any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority) pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights do not enjoy the cover.

 

In one of the cases cited by CBI itself in its plea before the High Court, the CIC had directed the DRI (an exempted organisation) to disclose information related to allegations of corruption. A full bench of the CIC had also directed Enforcement Directorate to disclose information related to blackmoney as it was considered to be a case of alleged corruption.

 

In its plea before the High Court, CBI has claimed that provision of allegations of corruption is only applicable when it is against its employees and not all the information held by or under its control. The contention of the agency, facing criticism from political parties and social activists for poor record in high profile corruption cases, has been rejected by CIC, activists and Information Commissioners.

 

Former Chief Information Commissioner A N Tiwari said the Section 24 must be read in accordance with definition of 'information' and the Right to Information given under the transparency law. According to RTI Act, 'information' is any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority.

 

He said the section says "the information (any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority) pertaining to allegations of corruption does not come under exemptions given to security and intelligence agencies". Tiwari said when an information seeker applies for the information pertaining to alleged corruption, it can be disclosed.

 

CBI has pleaded before the High Court that its primary job is to probe corruption cases and disclosing information about them would make the exemption given to agency infructuous. In his order, Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra had clarified the point saying RTI Act neither makes distinction between the exempted organisations on the basis of the functions they perform nor between allegations of corruption on the basis whether it is made against the employees of the exempt organisation or others.

 

RTI activist Subhash Agrawal cited a Madras High Court order in a case of Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (an exempted organisation of Tamil Nadu Government similar to CBI) Vs R Karthikeyan and V Madhav where it ordered disclosure of information related to corruption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digal

As reported by DNA India CBI claims exemption from disclosing corruption info under RTI - India - DNA

[h=1]CBI claims exemption from disclosing corruption info under RTI[/h]

[TABLE=width: 600]

[TR]

[TD=colspan: 2] Published: Monday, Feb 18, 2013, 15:24 IST

Place: New Delhi | Agency: PTI

[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=colspan: 2][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=width: 450] [TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]

 

 

CBI has approached the Delhi High Court claiming protection from disclosure of information held by it on allegations of corruption under the Right to Information Act.

 

The CBI's move to approach the Delhi High Court came on a Central Information Commission decision allowing RTI plea of activist CJ Karira who had sought information related to status of sanction for prosecution against public servants facing allegations of corruption during 2007-11.

 

 

Ironically, the information which CBI wanted to withhold on this RTI plea has been disclosed by Ministry of Personnel in a number of responses to Parliament members.

 

The court of Justice Rajiv Shakdher has stayed the CIC order and fixed the matter on April 3.

 

In 2011, the central government brought CBI which was probing several high profile corruption cases including 2G scam case, CWG case, illegal mining case, Adarsh Housing Society scam, under the schedule of organisations exempted from making disclosure under the RTI Act.

 

 

According to Section 24 (1) of the RTI Act, under which exempted organisations have been listed, "the information" (defined as any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority) pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights do not enjoy the cover.

 

 

In one of the cases cited by CBI itself in its plea before the High Court, the CIC had directed the DRI (an exempted organisation) to disclose information related to allegations of corruption.

 

 

A full bench of the CIC had also directed Enforcement Directorate to disclose information related to blackmoney as it was considered to be a case of alleged corruption.

 

In its plea before the High Court, CBI has claimed that provision of allegations of corruption is only applicable when it is against its employees and not all the information held by or under its control.

 

The contention of the agency, facing criticism from political parties and social activists for poor record in high profile corruption cases, has been rejected by CIC, activists and Information Commissioners.

 

 

Former Chief Information Commissioner A N Tiwari said the Section 24 must be read in accordance with definition of 'information' and the Right to Information given under the transparency law.

 

According to RTI Act, 'information' is any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority.

 

He said the section says "the information (any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority) pertaining to allegations of corruption does not come under exemptions given to security and intelligence agencies".

 

Tiwari said when an information seeker applies for the information pertaining to alleged corruption, it can be disclosed.

 

CBI has pleaded before the High Court that its primary job is to probe corruption cases and disclosing information about them would make the exemption given to agency infructuous.

 

In his order, Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra had clarified the point saying RTI Act neither makes distinction between the exempted organisations on the basis of the functions they perform nor between allegations of corruption on the basis whether it is made against the employees of the exempt organisation or others.

 

RTI activist Subhash Agrawal cited a Madras High Court order in a case of Directorate of Vigilance and Anti- Corruption (an exempted organisation of Tamil Nadu Government similar to CBI) Vs R Karthikeyan and V Madhav where it ordered disclosure of information related to corruption.

 

 

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sajib Nandi

Reported by Timesofindia.indiatimes.com on Feb 19, 2013

CBI moves Delhi HC seeking exemption under RTI Act - The Times of India

 

NEW DELHI: The CBI has approached the Delhi High Court claiming exemption under RTI Act from disclosing information held by it on allegations of corruption.

 

The CBI's move to approach the HC came on a Central Information Commission (CIC) decision asking it to furnish information related to status of sanction for prosecution against government officials facing allegations of corruption between 2007 and 2011.

 

The CIC had allowed the RTI plea of one C J Karira who had sought this information. He had pointed out that the information which CBI declined to reveal on his RTI plea has been disclosed by the ministry of personnel in a number of responses to Parliament members.

 

On Monday, Justice Rajiv Shakdher stayed the CIC order and fixed the matter on April 3 for further hearing.

 

In 2011, the Centre brought CBI — probing several high-profile corruption cases like 2G scam, CWG, illegal mining, Adarsh Housing Society scam — under the schedule of organizations exempted from making disclosure under the RTI Act.

 

According to Section 24 (1) of the RTI Act, the exemption, however, doesn't apply to allegations of corruption and human rights violations.

 

In one of the cases cited by CBI itself in its plea before the HC, the CIC had directed the DRI (an exempted organization) to disclose information related to allegations of corruption.

 

A full bench of the CIC had also directed the Enforcement Directorate to disclose information related to black money as it was considered to be a case of alleged corruption.

 

In its plea before the HC, CBI has claimed that provision of allegations of corruption is only applicable when it is against its employees and not all the information held by or under its control.

 

CBI has argued in its plea before HC that its primary job is to probe corruption cases and disclosing information about them would make the exemption given to agency in fructuous.

 

In its order the CIC had clarified the point saying RTI Act neither makes distinction between the exempted organizations on the basis of the functions they perform nor between allegations of corruption on the basis whether it is made against the employees of the exempted organization or others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
digal

As reported by DNA India,

CBI claims exemption from disclosing corruption info under RTI - India - DNA

 

[h=1]CBI claims exemption from disclosing corruption info under RTI[/h] Published: Monday, Feb 18, 2013, 15:24 IST

Place: New Delhi | Agency: PTI

 

CBI has approached the Delhi High Court claiming protection from disclosure of information held by it on allegations of corruption under the Right to Information Act.

The CBI's move to approach the Delhi High Court came on a Central Information Commission decision allowing RTI plea of activist CJ Karira who had sought information related to status of sanction for prosecution against public servants facing allegations of corruption during 2007-11.

Ironically, the information which CBI wanted to withhold on this RTI plea has been disclosed by Ministry of Personnel in a number of responses to Parliament members.

The court of Justice Rajiv Shakdher has stayed the CIC order and fixed the matter on April 3.

In 2011, the central government brought CBI which was probing several high profile corruption cases including 2G scam case, CWG case, illegal mining case, Adarsh Housing Society scam, under the schedule of organisations exempted from making disclosure under the RTI Act.

According to Section 24 (1) of the RTI Act, under which exempted organisations have been listed, "the information" (defined as any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority) pertaining to allegations of corruption and human rights do not enjoy the cover.

In one of the cases cited by CBI itself in its plea before the High Court, the CIC had directed the DRI (an exempted organisation) to disclose information related to allegations of corruption.

A full bench of the CIC had also directed Enforcement Directorate to disclose information related to blackmoney as it was considered to be a case of alleged corruption.

In its plea before the High Court, CBI has claimed that provision of allegations of corruption is only applicable when it is against its employees and not all the information held by or under its control.

The contention of the agency, facing criticism from political parties and social activists for poor record in high profile corruption cases, has been rejected by CIC, activists and Information Commissioners.

Former Chief Information Commissioner A N Tiwari said the Section 24 must be read in accordance with definition of 'information' and the Right to Information given under the transparency law.

According to RTI Act, 'information' is any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority.

He said the section says "the information (any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority) pertaining to allegations of corruption does not come under exemptions given to security and intelligence agencies".

Tiwari said when an information seeker applies for the information pertaining to alleged corruption, it can be disclosed.

CBI has pleaded before the High Court that its primary job is to probe corruption cases and disclosing information about them would make the exemption given to agency infructuous.

In his order, Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra had clarified the point saying RTI Act neither makes distinction between the exempted organisations on the basis of the functions they perform nor between allegations of corruption on the basis whether it is made against the employees of the exempt organisation or others.

RTI activist Subhash Agrawal cited a Madras High Court order in a case of Directorate of Vigilance and Anti- Corruption (an exempted organisation of Tamil Nadu Government similar to CBI) Vs R Karthikeyan and V Madhav where it ordered disclosure of information related to corruption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ambrish.p

As reported in Dainik Jagran on 19/02/13

 

Source: http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/epaper/article/index.php?page=article&choice=print_article&location=2&category=&articleid=111762260672516784

 

आरटीआइ से बाहर रहें भ्रष्टाचार की सूचनाएं

 

नई दिल्ली, प्रेट्र: भ्रष्टाचार से जुड़े मामलों को सूचना के अधिकार कानून (आरटीआइ) से दूर रखने के लिए सीबीआइ ने दिल्ली हाई कोर्ट में गुहार लगाई है। दिलचस्प ये है कि जांच एजेंसी जिस जानकारी को सार्वजनिक नहीं करने के लिए अदालत पहुंची है, उसे कार्मिक मंत्रालय सांसदों के सवालों के जवाब में जाहिर कर चुका है। आरटीआइ कार्यकर्ता सीजे करीरा ने सीबीआइ से वर्ष 2007 से 2011 के बीच भ्रष्टाचार के आरोपों से घिरे सरकारी कर्मचारियों के खिलाफ चल रही जांच की स्थिति के बारे में जानकारी मांगी थी। इन्कार करने पर केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग ने भी इस संबंध में जानकारी देने के लिए सीबीआइ को आदेश दिया था। सोमवार को जस्टिस राजीव शकधर ने सूचना आयोग के आदेश पर स्टे लगाते हुए मामले की सुनवाई तीन अप्रैल को तय की है। अपनी याचिका में जांच एजेंसी का कहना है कि जब सीबीआइ कर्मियों पर भ्रष्टाचार के आरोप लगे हों तब इसकी जानकारी देने का प्रावधान है न कि अन्य लोगों के बारे में। हाई प्रोफाइल भ्रष्टाचार के मामलों की जांच को लेकर राजनीतिक पार्टियों और सामाजिक कार्यकर्ताओं के बीच खराब छवि बना चुकी सीबीआइ के इस तर्क को केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग खारिज कर चुका है।

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sajib Nandi

In an apparent misinterpretation of the RTI Act, CBI has claimed before the Delhi High Court that it can only share information pertaining to allegations of corruption against its own officials and not the graft cases probed by it.

 

"A citizen can demand the information (any material in any form held by or under the control of a public authority) from CBI if it pertains to allegations of corruption. The claim that it will give information only where allegations are against its employees is a complete abuse of the law," said noted activist Venkatesh Nayak.

 

Read more at: CBI misconstrues RTI Act on exemption clause - The Economic Times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • UK K
      By UK K
      I wish to know,
      How to file RTI to information about OBC Non Creamy Layer.
      As per OM, for children of class iii/class c state government officer income test is not applicable.
      But OBC issuing authority/SDM of our state is not aware of this and rejects our application.
      So i filled an RTI to get information about same, but got reply as queries/clarification does not come under RTI act.
      So how do i file an RTI to know applicability of INCOME TEST for CLASS C officer.
      Please reply..........
    • gene0004
      By gene0004
      Dear sir
      Please 1 year old rti file no information my department

      Sent from my A37fw using RTI INDIA mobile app


Announcements



×

Important Information

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