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

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/11/2019 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    Write to him directly and seek all those success stories and stepping stones in his biography. He can definitely respond. Search in google and create a library with all those material.
  2. 3 points
    Hearing in First Appeal is not mandatory. In Case No. CIC/AD/A/2013/000875-SA, orderes delivered on 14.6.2014 it is observed that there is not a whisper about hearing by FAA in RTI Act, 2005. There is also no provision under the Act to prescribe procedures with regard to the manner in which FAA has to conduct & decide the First Appeal. It is also mentioned in that Order that it is duty of the FAA to consider written appeal of the Appellant even if he is not present on the date of hearing and decide on the basis of the material available. Even appearance before the Second Appellate Authority i.e. SIC is not mandatory, as per State Information Commissioner(Appeal Rules), 2005 (Section 7 of the R.T.I. Rules) (Central Act 22 of 2005) ..
  3. 3 points
    Sir, Am sharing some relevant files with you as requested. All of them can be quoted. Also sharing with you the draft of the RTI- you can refer to the life and liberty clause as stated below. This is for ready use. Best Regards, Andy Public Information Officers, Please note: If you wish to deny any of the above items or part thereof, please give reasons for such rejection citing the proper subsections of Section 8, 9 or 11. This is required as per Section 7 (8) of RTI Act. Your Kind attention is invited to the following: - 1) Clause 7(1) of the RTI Act wherein it has been clarified that the information concerning life and liberty is to be provided within 48 Hours. 2) Recent decisions of the Central Information Commissioner in following cases wherein the CIC has decided that information on Pension Matters is to be treated as concerning Life & Liberty: a. CIC/BS/A/2016/001238, in case titled Amrika Bai v/o PIO, EPFO, Raipur decided on 30.03.2017 wherein it has been held as under: - Para 9- The moment RTI Application on Pension Issue is received, there should be a mechanism at the entry stage to discover and identify it reflects a pension related grievance/issue and then should act immediately. Para 10 – Not only the CPIO, even the other authorities under RTI Act like the first appeal /second appellate authorities also should dispose such appeals involving pension issues within 48 Hours. Para 16 – The commission also requires as per section 19(8)(a) (I, III, IV) of RTI Act, the public authority to consider pension related information as life and liberty concerned information b. CIC/BS/A/2016/000307, in case titled V. Balaraman v/s PIO, EPFO, Thiruvananthapuram decided on 4.07.2017, wherein the above orders of CIC as at 2 (a) above have been reiterated that the information related to the pension matters must be provided within 48 hours as the same is concerning life and liberty. c. CIC/BS/C/2015/000157, in case titled V. Vaidyanathan v/s PIO, EPFO, Mumbai decided on 17.07.2017, wherein the above orders of CIC as at 2(a) above have again been reiterated that the information relating to Pension matters must be provided within 48 hours as the same is concerning life and liberty. You are therefore, requested to provide duly attested /certified photocopies (see Chapter 1, clause (2) (j) (ii) of the RTI act 2005) of the aforesaid documents on A-4 paper sheets under RTI Act 2005 within 48 Hours as decided by the CIC (see Sr. no. 2 above). 48 Hours Clause can be invoked.pdf 2017-06-28-193000321_Vaidyanathan_V.pdf news letter 4 UPDATED AS ON 3 JULY 2017 BY SECRETARY.pdf Pension_RTI_GBT_3634.pdf Pension_RTI_PK_2962.pdf Show_Cause-307_Balaraman_V.pdf
  4. 3 points
    Please find attached herewith the CIC decision wherein it had ruled as follows: prefixing of why & what doesnt debar applicant from receiving info..pdf
  5. 3 points
    Unfortunately every citizen is having his own personal matters to be taken care of and hardly have personal time to spend with families at a place like Mumbai. In addition this goondaism and group fights , extortions and threatening are usual. BMC corporators are more powerful than MLAs of other districts. If any citizen is having such time, he should file RTI Application and seek information on full details of unauthorised construction, locational address, present status, action taken, pending in Court and the officials responsible for such negligence in duties. In this forum, I have seen such extra ordinary follow up through RTI and then bringing into logical conclusion through PIL by our esteemed member Mr.Bali and he has contributed more insights into tackling this problem. Because of his vast knowledge, perseverance, he could do that at his personal expenses in Punjab state, but in Mumbai we can never dream of that. Why only Mumbai, it is there in Thane, Kalyan and even in Dombvilli also.
  6. 2 points
    An applicant is having right to information alone, and the penalty is in between the PIO and IC and appellant has no role to play. That penalty can never come to appellant as wrongly perceived. Insisting for imposition of penalty may spoil the relations, when one expects smooth relations without hurting. It is very difficult to establish deliberate denial with fraudulent motives by PIO.
  7. 2 points
    As to how many Deputy Chief Ministers should be appointed, it is the prerogative of the C.M.. In Andhra Pradesh, the C.M. has appointed 5 Deputy Chief Ministers & in Telangana 2 Dy. C.Ms. When State was integrated, there was no Dy. C.M. for most of the period... Court has fixed the limits for Ministers in the Cabinet i.e. 10% of the Legislatures including C.M., but there is no restriction of Dy. C.M.. There is no change of salary and perks of Ministers and Deputy Chief Ministers. Hence the question of waste of public exchequer also may not arise..This is nothing but an attempt to please the disgruntle MLAs to keep the folk together. Politicians in power should have the sense of economics of the State so that public taxes may not be wasted. Hope good sense will prevail upon them one day or the other.
  8. 2 points
    An information pertaining to co-operative societies can be broadly classified into two categories: (1) Information which a co-operative society is supposed to mandatorily and periodically file with the Registrar of Co-operative Societies e.g. annual returns etc. (2) Information which a co-operative society is not supposed to file with the Registrar of Co-operative Societies and is available only at the Society's Office e.g. Minutes of Managing Committee meetings etc. Presently the status is that: The information which falls under category (1) above can be accessed under the provisions of RTI Act by filing a RTI application with the PIO of the concerned ward of Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. Whereas, the information which falls under category (2) above is being wrongfully denied by the PIO of Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies. A writ petition on the above subject is pending before the Bombay High Court.
  9. 2 points
    dear friends. with the help and support of many of you,I could ensure a due pension to around 3200 ex Indian Naval sailors. Around 100 RTI applications,40 first appeals and 5 second appeals,during the period since 2012. I could dig out copies of orders of the GOI as old as 1976. Finally all these materials were used for our legal fight before the honorable supreme court. Even though,the SC had given a favorable judgment in 2016,the actual payment of pension has started only in 2019. The concerned authorities had diluted the SC orders in this regards, and not paid the due entitlements fully and the case is still going on. But all this we could achieve,only because of the RTI Act,and the numerous rti applications from time to time. This forum has helped me in clearing my doubts from time to time. I was lucky enough to get associated with this forum almost from the beginning. Thanks to all for providing a wonderful platform for a great cause.
  10. 2 points
    Kindly go through RERA act by downloading the Act from google, and you can find from stipulations as to whether your query is proper or not.
  11. 2 points
    First Appeal hearing is not mandatory, and not stated in RTI Act even if demanded many FAAs never permit appellant for hearing in several public authorities. As a courtesy just thank him for giving the opportunity, express regrets stating your inability to appear for hearing and either ask him to decide on merits or give another date for attending hearing. Definitely, first appeal hearing gives better opportunities of getting information.
  12. 2 points
    1.A PIO is expected to provide that information available in material form that is in his custody. Once it is uploaded, it is not in custody of the PIO and in public domain. In view of this, experts in the forum advised members to seek such information in the form of certified copies. 2.For you there are two options. a)File fresh application and seek such information in the form of certified copies, so that PIO can himself check whether it is in public domain or not. b)after receiving such information file first appeal on first RTI, that PIO has provided misleading information that the information is uploaded in website though it is not available. 3.Or go for first appeal, seek first hearing in person, and let PIO present that information downloaded from website of the FAA's office himself. (If you have smart phone, do carry that with another hard copy of that information which is uploaded in website without information solicited by you.
  13. 2 points
    You have been recognised as regular member with more than 156 posts, and filing applications with more than 10 different authorities, and by this time you have acquired more than an average RTI applicant and well versed with the facts. Reduce number of queries and seek guidance only in case of douts and no need to report developments on day to day basis. Only in case of genuine doubts and want sincere guidance, please use the forum for such posts.
  14. 2 points
    Namaskaram Prasad Ji. Thank you for answering the original question pertaining to RTI. Also thank you for your valuable inputs. What you say makes complete sense and it esp. when you say that “After all the errant officials are your own colleagues and might committed mistake without expecting any unlawful gain. Live and let live and focus on your issue”. The first step when a mistake is committed is to own it up. “To maintain a fault known is a double fault.” A genuine and inadvertent error can be condoned on compassionate grounds provided when such an error is brought to light, genuine intent is displayed to rectify the issue and contain the damage. Not otherwise. The perspective that you have given is a valid one and finds resonance within me. It also gives me strength to file a detailed response so that the details of the case are known esp. to those who are in a similar situation. Please allow such a response. This is a Pension Recovery Case, the rules governing the Pension Disbursal and Recovery are very well codified. “If a payment is made over and above eligibility, any one is having such rights to recover the amount paid by mistake”. It is not illegal. My comment: Pension cannot be equated as Payment. Earlier the right to Pension was a fundamental right and also a property right. When property right was repealed as a fundamental right by the 44th Amendment, It became a Constitutional Right protected under Article 300 A enforceable by law. “Recovering the amount paid by mistake is not illegal”- true; However, Recovering Pension Overpayment amount after continually making overpayment beyond 5 years is in direct contravention to several supreme court judgements and is not legally tenable. More so, in every case, due process of law must be followed. Recovery cannot be made arbitrarily. Pension overpayment and an overpayment by cashier may appear similar in terms of human behaviour- but it isn’t. These two scenarios are completely different. Cash overpayment on counter can purely be an inadvertent human error – but pension disbursal is a highly controlled well-defined process with multiple checks and balances. The probability of making such overpayment is highly minimized if correct inputs (such as: Date of retirement, Date of birth, PPO Number, DA, years of service, commuted amount etc) are fed in the process; Bank has every right to induce pressure in case of un-intended benefits accrued by such a mistake to any beneficiary. However, if you find a Pension overpayment that has happened for over 5 years, you will almost always find that either the Bank or the Pension Sanctioning Authority has overlooked and has been non-compliant to the well-defined sacrosanct procedures that are mandatorily to be followed. In such cases, it is no longer a case of innocuous human error but of wilful negligence. In our case the bank has completely overlooked the procedures mentioned as per Circular No. 57, Dt. 17, September, 2008, issued by PCDA (P); Specifically, Para 10 of the Circular directs the bank to share every case of pension consolidation done by the bank to the PCDA (P). This was never done. This observation comes from the stakeholders themselves: the CAG & PCDA (P). I have gone through the case reference mentioned: Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd vs Attar-Ul-Nissa & Others on 7 October, 1966; this is not applicable in our case. I hope this is the one that you were referring to. Without going into too much technical details here the overall process is: The Banks consolidate the Pension as per circulars issued by PCDA (P) and disburse the amount to the Pensioner. Later the Bank sends the advice of the payment made to the RBI and receives the reimbursement made only by the Central Accounts Section (CAS) of the RBI located at Nagpur. So, let’s say the pension consolidation done by the bank indicates that the pensioner should receive 60,000 as pension amount. If there is a Pension Recovery happening- the bank would deduct 20,000 and disburse 40,000 to the Pensioner. This recovery is as per the RBI authorization. (Refer to the RBI Circular: RBI/2017-18/1 DGBA.GBD.No.-1/31.05.001/2017-18). So, the bank is not recovering from my account once the credit is available. They are deducting the recovery amount at source- pretty much the way the TDS (Tax deduction at source) works. “No one can benefit on mistakes and use it for unlawful gains”- Again in complete agreement with this. What you say is correct. This is the exact question and perspective that has been looked into through several SC Judgements. The Rafiq Masih’s Case words this more cogently: Quote “ Merely on account of the fact, that the release of these monetary benefits was based on a mistaken belief at the hands of the employer, and further, because the employees had no role in the determination of the employer, could it be legally feasible, for the private respondents to assert, that they should be exempted from refunding the excess amount received by them”? Unquote However, as said earlier, this notion and perspective of unlawful gains has been covered many times in several SC judgements. These necessarily have to be mentioned here to dispel the highly over-simplified view of things and would need a detailed response. The SC provisions for such a recovery if it is found within the first 5 years of overpayment. Beyond that, it does not permit such recovery. The Pensioner has never been told about his correct entitlement of Pension; Neither by the PCDA (P) nor by the Bank. There is a complete blatant disregard again by the Bank in issuing of Pension Slips – please refer to RBI letter No. DGBA.GAD. No. H-10975/45.05.031/2006-07 dated January 9, 2007, in this regard. As per this the Pensioner must be issued a Pension Slip so that the Pensioner knows about his correct entitlement. The bank is in possession of these documents but the Pensioner has never been given / made known his correct entitlement. A case can be made stating that the Pensioner ought to make efforts to know the correctness of his Pension. In this case the Bank was asked for the Pension Slips- and it didn’t provide any. So- in such cases, whatever the amount accrued as Pension was taken as the correct entitlement. It can be argued whether such an excess was used for “Unlawful Gains”. However, the lapses and errors of omission and commission done by the bank cannot be ignored or condoned. However, the process of making such recovery cannot be arbitrary. Due process of law must be followed in case of any recovery. All this and more perspectives have been completely though over in several judgments of the Supreme Court in cases of Pension Recovery due to Overpayment. These are:- a) State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih reported in 2015 (4) SCC 334 – wherein recoveries by the employers would be impermissible in law where the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued. The OM issued by DOPT : F.No. 1 8/03/20 1 5-Estt. (Pay-I) has been issued citing this judgement and it clearly states that no recovery from pension can be made in violation of the Judgment of Rafiq Masih b) ShyamBabu Verma Vs. Union of India reported in 1994 SC (2) 521, wherein a three Judge Bench of SC held that no steps should be taken to recover or adjust any excess amount paid to the employees due to the fault of the respondents c) Syed Abdul Qadir and others Vs. State. Of Bihar and others reported in (2009) 3 SCC 475, where in a three Judge Bench of the SC held that the relief against recovery is granted by courts not because of any right in the employees, but in equity, exercising judicial discretion to relieve the employees from the hardship that will be caused if recovery is ordered. d) The DPPI -2013 Instructions (Defence Pension Payment Instructions), section 103.2 issued by PCDA (P), Allahabad clearly prohibits the banks from initiating recovery of overpayment of pensions not detected within 12 months of the date of first erroneous charge without the orders of PCDA(P). Every case of overpayment detected should be reported to the PCDA(Pensions), which in turn shall decide himself or shall obtain orders of the competent authority, Govt. of India as the case may be. It further states that to avoid hardship to the pensioner, payment for the current period, however should be continued to the pensioner at the correct rate admissible. Please note that the Pension Disbursing Bank is just an agent and is under direct instructions by the Pension Sanctioning Authority. It cannot act independently on its own. Some parts of the Rafiq Masih’s Judgement need to be Quoted to give a complete perspective: - “The Pensioner was not guilty of furnishing any incorrect information, which had led the concerned competent authority, to commit the mistake of making the higher payment to the employees. The payment of higher dues to the private respondents, in all these cases, was not on account of any misrepresentation made by them, nor was it on account of any fraud committed by them” – this is true in our case. It further states: “It will be our endeavour, to lay down the parameters of fact situations, wherein employees, who are beneficiaries of wrongful monetary gains at the hands of the employer, may not be compelled to refund the same. In our considered view, the instant benefit cannot extend to an employee merely on account of the fact, that he was not an accessory to the mistake committed by the employer; or merely because the employee did not furnish any factually incorrect information, on the basis whereof the employer committed the mistake of paying the employee more than what was rightfully due to him; or for that matter, merely because the excessive payment was made to the employee, in absence of any fraud or misrepresentation at the behest of the employee”. “ Having examined a number of judgments rendered by this Court, we are of the view, that orders passed by the employer seeking recovery of monetary benefits wrongly extended to employees, can only be interfered with, in cases where such recovery would result in a hardship of a nature, which would far outweigh, the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover. In other words, interference would be called for, only in such cases where, it would be iniquitous to recover the payment made. In order to ascertain the parameters of the above consideration, and the test to be applied, reference needs to be made to situations when this Court exempted employees from such recovery, even in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Repeated exercise of such power, "for doing complete justice in any cause" would establish that the recovery being effected was iniquitous, and therefore, arbitrary. And accordingly, the interference at the hands of this Court.” “The right to recover being pursued by the employer, will have to be compared, with the effect of the recovery on the concerned employee. If the effect of the recovery from the concerned employee would be, more unfair, more wrongful, more improper, and more unwarranted, than the corresponding right of the employer to recover the amount, then it would be iniquitous and arbitrary, to effect the recovery. In such a situation, the employee's right would outbalance, and therefore eclipse, the right of the employer to recover.” It is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship, which would govern employees on the issue of recovery, where payments have mistakenly been made by the employer, in excess of their entitlement. Be that as it may, based on the decisions referred to herein above, we may, as a ready reference, summarise the following few situations, wherein recoveries by the employers, would be impermissible in law: (i) Recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service (or Group 'C' and Group 'D' service). (ii) Recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery. (iii) Recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued. (iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post. (v) In any other case, where the Court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover. That completes the reference to the Rafiq Masih’s Judgement by Apex Court. Regarding Arbitrariness, as stated earlier- 1. No show cause notice was issued to the pensioner prior to commencing the recovery 2. No order of recovery has been issued by any competent authority. In the end the long detailed response may seem disproportionate keeping in mind the brevity of inputs received from you; However, this case is not an isolated one. This is just a tip of the iceberg. If you think the above response is exaggerated, you can check the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Disbursement of Defence Pension for the year ended March 2016 (Performance Audit No. 26 of 2017). This Audit Report is submitted to the Presidents Office. It states “Deficiencies in the pension disbursement system: We observed that the transmission errors as well as other mistakes in the banks, which account for nearly 75 per cent of the pension disbursements, had resulted in numerous cases of underpayments and overpayments”. “As per records of the PCDA (P) Allahabad, there were 24, 61,651 defence pensioners as on 01/04/2015, which increased to 25,00,631 on 01/04/2016”. The mathematics can be done! All the documents and references cited above are available in public domain. Apologies, shall restrict further posts on matter pertaining to RTI only. Lest any specific questions are asked pertaining to the background of the case while filing the RTI. Regards, Andy
  15. 2 points
    Wait for say approximately 35 days from the date of filing of the RTI application and if you do not receive any response from the PIO, then file a first appeal with the concerned First Appellate Authority under section 19(1) of the RTI Act.
  16. 2 points
    The PIO is quoting very old Judgment. It was held in CIC decisions that if the information is available on record in material form it has to be provided, as RTI Act never stipulated any form of seeking information. For example: Who is Prime Minister of india is interrogative form Please provide the name of the Prime Minister of India is a simple sentence. If PIO has in his records material form naming such PM, he can not reject the information on grounds that it is interrogative. PIO can only deny information as per exemptions stated in Sec.8 or Sec.9 of RTI Act. Either you can file simple RTI to same PIO or go for first appeal so that you can educate Public Authority PF who is not still knowing fundamentals even after 14 years after RTI came into force . Simple form: 1.Please inform the reasons for delay in transfer of PF from.................to................. 2.Please inform time frame fixed under citizen charter for making such transfers. 3.Inform the name of the employee, and his supervisor, designations, mobile numbers and full address that are purposefully delaying transfer and neglecting their duties.
  17. 2 points
    FAA's obligation is to direct his subordinate Public Information Officer suitably to follow such stipulations in RTI Act, if he finds from first appellant has stated any grounds of violation. Information should always be from Public Information officer. You can ask a friend or relative from different station to file RTI Application seeking information as follows: Information solicited: 1.Please provide the copy of office notes/directions that state the reasons for putting on hold the recruitment of Deputy Managers, Assistant Managers (desk top). 2.Please inform whether there is an obligation on public authority to inform developments to the aspiring candidates, without giving scope for each candidate filing individual RTI Applications. 3.Please provide the link if the matter is put on website about suspending such recruitment. 4.Inform further plan of action for recruitment in future if available on record if any.
  18. 2 points
    If a candidate seeks information under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, then payment has to be sought under the RTI Rules. The question before the Supreme Court was which Guidelines/Rules will govern the prescription of fee for copies of answer sheets and their inspection. The Court held that while the ICSI is governed by the Companies Secretaries Act, 1980 and the Examination Committee formed under the statute prescribes a certain fee, the RTI Rules also lay down a fee structure for procurement of answer sheets. The Court held, “In our opinion, the existence of these two avenues is not mutually exclusive and it is up to the candidate to choose either of the routes. Thus, if a candidate seeks information under the provisions of the Right to Information, then payment has to be sought under the Rules therein, however, if the information is sought under the Guidelines of the appellant, then the appellant is at liberty to charge the candidates as per its guidelines.” The decision was rendered by a Bench of Justices NV Ramana and S Abdul Nazeer, which made it clear that if there are other avenues to procure answer sheets, the applicant can choose which one to route her request through. The RTI Rules entitle a student to seek inspection and certified copies of their answer scripts. When this right is exercised, Rule 4 will govern the levy of the required charges. This Rule stipulates a fee of Rs. 2 for each page of the answer script. For inspection, no fee is prescribed for the first hour. For every subsequent hour of inspection, the fee is Rs. 5 per hour. The order came in an appeal filed by the Institute of Companies Secretaries of India (ICSI) against a decision of a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court. The respondent, Advocate Paras Jain, had sought from ICSI certified copies of answer sheets and their inspection under RTI. He was charged a fee for the same as per Guideline No. 3 notified by the Statutory Council of the ICSI. As per the ICSI Guidelines, the fee for the supply of certified copies was Rs. 500 per answer sheet, and the charge for inspection was Rs. 450 per answer book. Download the decision here.15222_2014_Order_11-Apr-2019.pdf
  19. 2 points
    State Public Information Officer, Sub Registrar (Society Registration) Information solicited: 1.Please provide the copy of registration certificate for Locality Resident Association of.......................at...............................with Shri..........................as President and as.................................Secretary. (As a member you have the right to seek same information from your society without spending single paisa)
  20. 2 points
    We expect that positive success stories from our members and we take pride in those members achievements. CONGRATULATIONS.
  21. 2 points
    Never enter into useless correspondence with lethargic authorities without a cause. The more they drag, the more advantageous position you are placed. Write a polite letter stating in the personal name of FAA (DO) such FAA hearings given, canceled in a table form and also seek inspection of the file PRIOR TO HEARING as the file notings can be noted to note a day to day status and action taken on the application. (I always wonder why it is necessary and what we can do with that information under RTI when the issue is pending on record, I find several PIOs getting irritated and felt as though they are being questioned by applicants like their auditors)
  22. 2 points
    What can you do by knowing that information? Such displaced families are more, the affected people are many, there was no problem as everyone was accommodated. They have a powerful union/association and they have links to know status and developments themselves as they are concerned. Jump into the fray, only when you can bring a change through logical conclusion and do not expose yourself on petty things that cannot make any difference. Do not think that your repeated representations are of no use, get them solved through the interference of welfare association and meeting concerned officials in a group. In police, discipline is the priority, and I have not come across any broad-minded superior who considers their subordinates are also citizens. Our actions should bring results and should not drag us to further problems. Still, if you wanted to go on hunting for the information, seek such information as follows: Information solicited: 1. Please provide the reasons on the record for the abnormal delay in commencing housing project for police quarters at................................................ 2.The present status and plan of action to complete the quarters within a time frame.
  23. 2 points
    File another first appeal writing on top as ADDENDUM TO FIRST APPEAL. Addendum to First Appeal dt.1st Jun, 2019. (First Appeal dt.....received by FAA on 28-05-2019, pending with FAA, FAA orders not received till to-day) Against: State Public Information officer,............................. Appellant:......................................................... Brief facts: Applicant has solicited information on ...........and it was received by SPIO on 22-04-2019 2. As SPIO has not provided information the first appeal was filed on .....................and received by FAA on 28-05-2019 3. After receipt of the first appeal, SPIO has on 21-05-2089 posted on................stated that he can not reply to question in RTI Application raised in impetus as per Sec.2f. 4.As FAA has not decided the first appeal and delivered order this addendum to be treated as the First Appeal. GROUNDS for Appeal: This appellant is only aware of the following section relevant to PIO. Sec (7) (1) Subject to the provision of Sec. (2) of Section (5) to the proviso the subsection (d) of Section 6, the Central Public Information officer or state public information officer, as the case may be, on receipt of a request under sec.6 shall as expeditiously as possible and in any case within 30 days of receipt of the request. EITHER provide the information on payment of such fee as may be prescribed or REJECT the request for any of the reasons specified in Sec.8 and Sec.9" The denial should be only under Sec.8 or Sec.9 supported with such justification as per umpteen CIC/SIC decisions. PIO has neither provided information nor denied information and invented a new clause that was not stated in RTI for denial of information, which is highly improper and shows sheer negligence of a statutory obligation. Hence this first appeal, in the larger public interest as the information is not exempted under RTI and is available in material form. PRAYER: Appellant prays for directions to SPIO for providing the information free of cost as expeditiously as possible. Applicant.
  24. 2 points
    Let the answer come from KIC. Apply for such information in prescribed format with such adhesive court fee stamp of Rs.10/- Brief facts. The website of Karnataka Information Commission for proactive disclosure under section 4(1)(b)(x) the site showed the message"The origin server did not find a current representation for the target resource or is not willing to disclose that one exists." Information solicited.1. Is it not mandatory to disclose monthly remuneration of officer/employees of the Commission under RTI as per 4(1)(b)(x). (Voluntary disclosure) 2. Please provide specific exemptions if any to KSIC alone.
  25. 2 points
    No uniform format has been prescribed. Her attendance is also not needed. That is just a formality. Please mail a copy in advance and retain one copy with you for showing it to Commission.. Before .................Information commission,..................... File No: Against: SPIO,........................ Appellant:..................................... Authorisation letter for representing the appellant for hearing on..................... Appellant humbly submits that she could not attend hearing on.........................and hereby authorizes her husband Sri................................for representing her and submitting the grounds of appeal and praying for such remedies under RTI Act. He may be permitted to attend the hearing on the basis of this authorization letter Shri ............................Signs as.................................................................... Appellant
  26. 2 points
    Certainly, you have done a crime. But your motive is not for any unlawful gain to you or unlawful loss to anyone. Though your friend's letter can not erase/wipe your crime, he is the affected person, and if he has no objection, nothing can happen to you. Do not fear and always use your own name. If you are worried about your safety, request your friend to sign his name as an applicant. Keep silent and nothing can happen. Never do that again.
  27. 2 points
    Make all attempts, do not assume things, let them state their objections if any. Continue your efforts and do not get doubts as you are not investing any huge amounts. It costs only Rs.22/- for a Registered post.
  28. 2 points
    The citizen has the right to seek information only, and the rest is left between PIO and SIC. The duty of a citizen is using first appeal and second appeal only and making representation to CIC. Represent material facts to IC and seek information. These are not loopholes and in fact, no PIO is caring for RTI sincere implementation. The penalty is left to the discretion of IC killing the spirit of RTI Act and the act is just a paper tiger. which PIO can just blow with his breadth.
  29. 2 points
    Just go ahead and file the first appeal on the following grounds (keep it short and simple): Grounds of the First Appeal: 1. That, the information sought against each of the points of request for information is unique and not a repetition. 2. That, the information sought against each of the points of request for information are all public documents and hence the exemption of section 8(1)(d) (commercial confidence) does not apply. Prayers: 1. Kindly direct the PIO to provide the requested information forthwith. 2. Kindly direct the PIO to provide the requested information free of cost in accordance with the letter and spirit of section 7(6) of the RTI Act.
  30. 2 points
  31. 2 points
    One cannot argue with idiots. Go for second appeal as there is no justification for Public Authority's reason for such denial.
  32. 2 points
    You have never stated about the incomplete inspection and their orders for completing the inspection on some other day. Unless you get a confirmation in writing about the day, time and contact officer, never visit public authority's office. The security is performing its duty. They have to contact the concerned officer over the phone, prepare a pass with the signature of such officer, mentioning the purpose of the work, duration, etc., and after inspection, the concerned officer has to sign the pass and it should be returned back. You can also register your visit in the Visit book kept at the security gate. When you are in RTI, do not think of saving on postage as personal visits frequently to a public authority is not advisable. You are fortunate. Once I went for inspection to a Ministry at New Delhi after receiving such written permission, the concerned Addl. Secretary left to Dehradun for training. After traveling 32 hours I returned back empty handed and reduced the ordeals in writing, but there is no response from Addl. Secretary. These harassments are usual with Public Sector Oil companies and those officers are located far from the city in outskirts where you do not find transportation and even drinking water. The security personnel permits a citizen only if he is having a valid pass. Focus on information, these are most common.
  33. 2 points
    You can file RTI Application to State public Information officer TSCB and can solicit the information as follows: Information solicited: 1. Please provide the status of various projects undertaken by the board for construction of houses in the .......District. 2. Please provide the Brochure/Booklet/Circular that states the norms for allocating such houses. 3. Please provide No of applications received, accepted, rejected and finally selected, a vacant position as on 31-3-2019. 4. Please provide a copy of the beneficiaries list. NB: Please provide that information available in electronic data through CD and if the information is in hard copies provide that hard copy. Note to search website of TNSCB for format of RTI Application, CPIO particulars and RTI Fee mode of remittance.
  34. 2 points
    Sorry the file is not available for opening in my system.
  35. 2 points
    Your drafting is good and even an expert can not suggest better points. Just mention the subject matter with more clarity in one sentence. Complaint dt........................from......................against dy. Registrar, orders Ref....................No....................Implementation status. The queries are more than enough. Congratulations for perseverance in focussing on many issues as required in RTI.
  36. 2 points
    An applicant is not concerned with their internal correspondence, he is concerned only of getting information within the time frame fixed under RTI and he has to focus on further step undeterred by their internal jurisdictional issues.
  37. 2 points

    Version 1.0.0

    205 downloads

    The Service book of Government employee can be disclosed under Right to Information Act 2005 With the recent decision of Central Information Commission Service book of Government Employee can be disclosed under Right to Information Act 2005. This means a third party can have access to most of the information about the employee career including disciplinary action, his leave, place of posting etc. A Service book of Government Employee is maintained for every employee from the date of his first appointment. Every step in official life is recorded in it. All the pensionary benefits are sanctioned mainly on the basis of entries in the Service Book. Hence, it plays a prominent role in the timely settlement of pension cases and proper maintenance of Service Book eliminate delay in sanctioning and payment of pensionary benefits. The Service book of Government Employee consists of 2 volumes. VOLUME-I: Volume I of the Service Book is meant for recording the bio-data of the employees and various events of his service. VOLUME-II: The purpose of Volume-II of the Service Book is to place different types of nominees, declarations, pay fixation memos etc. The Service book of Government Employee contains following information of an employee Appointment and joining.Grant of increment or withholding of increment.Grant of Selection Grade.The crossing of efficiency bar.Fixation of pay.Grant of leave.Deputation/ transfer suspension or interruption in service along with details of the period thereof.Reinstatement.ResignationTermination of service along with its reasons.Promotion.Compulsory / Premature/ Voluntary Retirement.Removal or dismissal from service.Reversion.Reduction in rank or pay along with the precise reasons thereof viz. Whether reduction is on account of inefficiency or reduction in establishment or abolition of the post held by the employee.Retirement on superannuation. The Central Information Commission has decided an appeal on Service book of Government Employee with following directions: The Commission holds that service details of Public servants available in the service book cannot be treated as personal information. (File No: CIC/AD/A/2011/000014)
  38. 2 points
    There is a mistake on your part. Time and again, experts advised to record the entire proceedings as Minutes and give it to FAA and PIO duly signed. If PIO has really provided that letter, he might have marked and written to FAA immediately after receiving the first appeal. He should have at least communicated to the appellant. There are flaws in every step. The designation of PIO is different and FAA must be superior in authority over PIO and designated as such. There was never a practice of signature of PIO for FAA. Again FAA can only deliver his orders and can not force any appellant to sign any document when the appellant reported non-receipt. At least the copy was not given. Coming to FAA orders, the orders are defective. Information can be denied only on stating such exemption in RTI Act Sec.8 and subsection and with proper justification for applying that section. The reason for rejection is stated as follows: "That daily status and action taken of an application cannot be supplied through RTI . " There was never any such exemption in RTI Act as stated by PIO and FAA. Ask through separate RTI application to SPIO and seek information as follows: 1. Please provide me a copy of the letter that stated that information was denied tat daily status and action taken of an application cannot be supplied through RTI . " with a copy of such entry in outward despatch letter that mentions details. As the SPIO response is essential for submitting the second appeal and such letter was never received by the Appellant. 2. Please provide me the copy of that section or subsection in RTI Act that exempts and states that "That daily status and action taken of an application cannot be supplied through RTI . " The second Appeal can be filed within 90 days from receipt of FAA. To prepare grounds for the second appeal, get this information also so that you can simply state only simple ground for the second appeal to SIC as follows: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Grounds for Appeal: SPIO has said to have rejected to provide information stating as follows: 'That daily status and action taken of an application cannot be supplied through RTI ." FAA has agreed with PIO. Appellant has neither received such letter nor there is no such stipulation exempting such information under RTI in Sec.8 or Sec.9 of RTI Act. SPIO can only deny information stating such Section and subsection with proper justification. In this case, PIO has neither quoted such exemption section/subsection nor offered any justification. Hence the information denial is treated as deliberate and malafide. PIO was asked to provide such Section and subsection in which there is such exemption and PIO has responded as follows ( or Not responded) PRAYER: Appellant prays for directions to SPIO and to FAA also (as SPIO has signed for FAA) to provide the information as expeditiously as possible free of cost as denial is deliberate and malafide.
  39. 1 point
    Definitely you can first bring this to attention of FAA first and then in second appeal as deliberate and malafide. If the PIO is ordinary officer it is different, but here in this case he is law officer and supposed to know fundamentals in RTI.
  40. 1 point
    This reply from PIO is classic example of defiant attitude of PIO and levels of knowledge both in running his department and on RTI.Any how it is not our concern for the present. You have to go for appeal within maximum 30 days within in receipt of FAA orders or maximum 45 days in case FAA orders are not delivered. Now ask a friend or relative to seek information as follows: 1.Please provide number of vacant houses for allocation as on date in 2.If allotment closed, such date of final closure of allotment. and certified copy of that memo/notice/report on finalizing the list. 3.Please provide copy of such list of selected beneficiaries..................................................... Then go for second appeal. Certainly you can get a befitting order, if IC applies his mind. Sorry I am not finding a link in between what you have sought guidance and on which you have sought guidance. To refresh this is your first query. "I would like to know the various schemes under which housing or tenements are granted to beneficiaries,list of applicants for free housing scheme ,number of sanctioned applications , field verification details,list of applications rejected etc This is the actual you have solicited from PIO. . Please provide name ,designation and official mobile number of all the officers & employees working at SCB, Tiruvallur Division in accordance and in compliance of the provision of section 4(1)(b)(ix) of the RTI Act. in accordance and in compliance of the provision of section 4(1)(b)(ix) of the RTI Act. Time and again we advise members not to seek that information which is not useful but still some state unnecessary quotes of sections and ask those questions which are in fact not relevant not necessary, not helpful. Honestly, what do you want to do with that employees of SCB address book list. You can also file grievance before the TOP authority of SCB requesting him to upload the beneficiaries list in their website as the selection is not proper.
  41. 1 point
    Sir, on 4th July 2019,SIC has directed PIO for GOA electricity dept to supply me the copy of govt letter of intent to me which states the decision of LED replacement and posted the hearing ahead on 23rd july for further proceedings, thanks and due respects with high regards to this forum and you for all the guidance [emoji120] [emoji257] Sent from my vivo 1606 using RTI INDIA mobile app
  42. 1 point
    Make a complaint to IC in a tabulated form. To .... IC.... Respected Sir, Reg: Non compliance of IC orders reference....................dt.. ..by SPIO...........................Appellant:............................(full address) After the decision, PIO has provided incomplete information deliberately to harass me. ___________________________________________________________________________ Information solicited......................Provided by PIO after IC orders. Information not provided. _______)1______________________________2___________________________3_____________________ Please admit this letter as complaint and direct SPIO to provide complete information as per application, and as per Column No.3. Complainant. Copy to SPIO, Copy to FAA File another RTI and seeking information on dates of deducting the penalty, and disciplinary action taken against SPIO.
  43. 1 point
    I can see that SC judgement of 2009 (CIVIL APPEAL No.22 OF 2009) held that service record book between employer and employee is a private matter but CIC decisions CIC/AD/A/2012/00287 dated 13.05.2013 and CIC/AD/A/2012/00287 dated 03.02.2011 have ordered for service record book of a government employee sbe given. What is the present scenario in this case? I have sought the service record book of a police officer and I am filing second appeal Is there any other judgements or anything else that I need to know ?
  44. 1 point
    File RTI Application to State Public Information Officer, District Educational Officer, Baroda as per the format prescribed by Gujarat state and seek information as follows: Information solicited: 1. Please provide any directives/guidelines that states of possible action against teachers in regular employment conducting coaching centers/tutorials neglecting their duties
  45. 1 point
    Regd post. The principal, ---------College Respected Sir, Reg: Returning of original mark lists, qualification certificates to.......................................of..........(.*year)........Roll No..... I hereby request you for returning of all my original certificates deposited with the college for verification within 15 days from receipt of this request, as per UGC/HRD/AICTE notifications,. As my several oral requests were neglected by Administrative staff, this request in writing. Please treat this as notice. My mobile No is:....................................and a message can be sent for collecting them at a date convenient to your staff. Yours faithfully, ..................... Copy to UGC, New Delhi, Copy to Ministry of HRD, New Delhi.
  46. 1 point
    Please provide clarification as to whether you have sought same information earlier and whether PIO has provided such information and reasons for such denial. After giving such clarification you can explore the possibility of going for the first appeal as CPIO has not justified reasons for the denial and just quoted a section and I do not personally think that CPIO has the information in a fiduciary capacity at any stretch of wild imagination. I am also shocked to know that APIO has denied the information when he is not having such powers under RTI Act. Only designated CPIO can provide or deny information and API's denial is most unjustified and illegal, his action is ultra vires. We all missing the most valuable services of Super Moderator Raveena as she is the authority in Railway matters. Kindly search in her profile and send the query as a personal message, as she is the most competent person that can provide authentic guidance in matters relating to Railways.
  47. 1 point
    You have to go for appeal and in another post, such guidance was already given. PIO may invent and say a hundred things. But, whether those exemptions were as stipulated in RTI Act and whether CPIO has justified for denial must be decided by CIC. If that information is available in the office, file another RTI application and seek information through the form of inspection. or act over smart, If that information through the document is available in a certain file. Let that friend from another place seek certain other information in the form of inspection, let him mark that letter for providing certified copy and produce them before FAA and IC.
  48. 1 point
    Every citizen is entitled to information as a right. Every state has a prescribed application or General format for seeking information. Search your state website of any of your state dept., and learn whether there is any prescribed format, if so apply in prescribed format and RTI fee of Rs.10/- (Postal order or Adhesive court fee stamp for Rs.10/-. The following is a general application format that can be used. Application dt.23rd Apr 2019 seeking information under RTI Act. Before: State Public Information officer, PHE,................... RTI fee: Adhesive court fee stamp for Rs.10/- Applicant: (Provide full address) Information solicited: 1. Please provide whether the destruction of pipeline and not providing adequate water to ..............village was recorded in your registers. 2..Please provide date of registering such complaint and day to day action for providing uninterrupted drinking water, the essential service to the village. 3. Please inform the name of the official that is controlling/supervising the water supply activity to the village......with his address, mobile no... 4. If the matter is already under consideration, please inform the present status and future action for ensuring regular supply of drinking water. 5. Please inform action taken on the applicant's letter dt......and the name of the official, designation and mobile no....with whom the application was lodged without taking any action for providing an essential supply of drinking water. 6. Please inform the name of the TOP official, full address to whom a grievance can be filed by villagers en masse for such dire negligence in providing essential water supply. Applicant. Also, prepare a petition to MLA and MP informing the problems being faced and present it to him as a group. This is more effective.
  49. 1 point
    This is the proper way of correct usage of RTI Act.
  50. 1 point
This leaderboard is set to Kolkata/GMT+05:30

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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