Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/15/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    If it is a recognized organization and if they submit such details to District Educational Officer, you have to file RTI Application to State Public Information Officer, District Educational Officer and seek such record submitted by the school authorities. You can get that record submitted by the school to DEO.
  2. 2 points
    Split the application into two separate applications and resubmit. Ensure to count the words in all queries (Information solicited) to avoid such rejection once again. Brevity in queries is most essential and the query has to be built/structured in a clever manner to avoid rejection. While splitting the present application, ensure to separate the applications depending on sure and certain replies and those that may likely to be denied. File applications showing two different dates but can be sent in one envelope. The two different dates are for avoiding confusion during further appeals.
  3. 1 point
    Dear Mr. Prasad GLN Thank You for your prompt and valuable reply. You have really been helpful and people like you keep the RTI movement alive. I am really grateful to you and wish you all the best. Regards
  4. 1 point
    While filing an application under RTI please adhere to RTI Act alone and do not club other things. You need no judgments of higher courts for seeking information at SPIO level. Just seek single sentence information to District Deputy Registrar. Information solicited: 1. Please provide action taken by Dy. Registrar on DDy.R orders to conduct an inquiry and follow up action taken for implementing orders for inquiry. 2. If an inquiry is conducted, please provide a copy of such report. 3. If an inquiry is not conducted, please inform proposed action to be taken against subordinate for wilful subordination of lawful orders of superior on 7, March 2019. Please have patience and wait for at least one month for implementing the orders of a superior. Also, appreciate the workload due to elections and do not pressurize authorities and allow at least two months from the date of orders. For the proposed RTI application search Shri JP Shah's Blogs. for such sample format on no response received on a complaint and modify the same to suit your requirement.
  5. 1 point
    Go for the second appeal after FAA orders. Whether CVC has taken up the investigation itself or endorsed it to concerned Vigilance dept., is not informed. I have drafted for the appeal to CVC and secured such copy only after the second appeal from CVC. A complainant is eligible to seek such information particularly when the issue is a criminal offense. Search CIC website of decisions with keywords of Public authority as CVC and find out the decisions relevant, as this issue might have decided several times by CIC.
  6. 1 point
    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.
  7. 1 point
    Private entities are beyond the ambit of RTI Act. This forum is dedicated to guiding citizens for seeking information from public authorities under RTI Act. The two options available to you are closing the account or making a complaint in their online forum and then filing complaint before District Consumer Forum after issuing a Regd. Legal notice.
  8. 1 point
    Be specific on what issue you want commission decision? You can raise your grounds and plead as per your arguments and can get a decision in your favour on the basis of stipulations in RTI Act and precedence is not required. You can plead to get such a decision and open the doors for others. Please read basic stipulations in RTI Act and at least Sec.7 and Sec.8. I have never come across denial of information under Sec.11 and that section only states that comments of third parties are required while seeking information which amounts to invasion on the privacy of an individual. The Sec.7 states that denial can only be under Sec.8 subsections with such justification for applying for that exemption. Attendance register is a public record and seeking a public record is not an invasion on the privacy of any individual. Presuming the denial under Sec. 8 (1) (j) that states in last words "unless the CPIO or SPIO or the appellate authority as the case may be, is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information", you were advised to establish larger public interest to seek exemption from exemption of personal information. If someone fakes or fabricates it is an offense and not in public interest as it is a punishable crime under Indian penal code.
  9. 1 point
    Please avoid posting queries by changing captions. Your query was replied within one minute on the same issue posted by you.
  10. 1 point
    Those societies that are receiving a substantial contribution from the Government, without which they can not survive are only under the ambit of RTI. You can seek any information from those controlling authorities if that society is under obligation to report as controlling measure or for compliance of Govt direction. Those records submitted by that organization to public authority becomes a public record of that authority. You have raised the query with a caption " Can I put up my query in Hindi? and posting now as to whether a society is within the ambit of RTI Act or not. You can still file an application for confirmation ..File the application in prescribed format applicable to that organization, and on envelope write the address of the Authority and not Public Information Officer. If the organization is not within ambit they may state such reason and return the application. Apart from this, if you are a member, you have every right to seek any information from Society. (General, not RTI) without such fees.
  11. 1 point
    REPOSTED FROM ANOTHER THREAD: The Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare offer a very good scheme to assist in acquisition of waste land for establishment of agricultural enterprise. There is NABARD funding for soldiers and widows to set up farms and cottage/village industry such as poultry farming. Find out more here: http://www.desw.gov.in/schemes/semfex-schemes This is a map of Kerala State from the wasteland atlas of India: http://dolr.gov.in/sites/default/files/karnataka.pdf - this is a great document: http://dolr.gov.in/documents/wasteland-atlas-of-india
  12. 1 point
    Go for the first appeal immediately on deemed denial of information- If your application is to Public Information Officer under RTI. If it is another issue than RTI, you can file a petition as a reminder as follows and send the same by Regd post under copy to Controlling office like Collector/RDO/DRO through ordinary post. I presume that hearing may be by another authority or at least by a group/Team/Committee. The undersigned received hearing of the objections etc.,on....in response to his letter dt.... In absence of the applicant's submissions made for regularization, grounds for objections cannot be raised and disputed without looking into facts of the claim. In view of the same, the undersigned request for providing a copy of such application received from....for regularization, as raising objections without studying facts appears as farce. Please provide the copy at least three days before hearing.
  13. 1 point
    Please provide the query related to RTI or the contents of suggestion and the remedy you wish to seek during the hearing.
  14. 1 point
    Why you are going for RTI when you have a most efficacious remedy under CP Act. The bank is bound to provide complete details of such action, loan when needed by a party that was victimized by the Bank and this is deficiency of service. File consumer complaint free of cost and seek information through the forum, which bank must provide. (Unless the exact query is posted, it is very difficult to give guidance, as Banker is under the statutory obligation of maintaining the secrecy of customer's account even before the enactment of RTI Act. Now that the borrower is a third party, strictly bank should not provide such statement of account to others. There are exemptions from this obligation if such information is within their own bank, with sister bank, with RBI, law enforcement authority and public interest)
  15. 1 point
    1) The law of evidence encompasses the rules and legal principles that govern the proof of facts in a legal proceeding. These rules determine what evidence must or must not be considered by the trier of fact in reaching its decision and, sometimes, the weight that may be given to that evidence. The law of evidence is also concerned with the quantum (amount), quality, and type of proof needed to prevail in litigation. The quantum of evidence is the amount of evidence needed; the quality of proof is how reliable such evidence should be considered. This includes such concepts as hearsay, authentication, admissibility, reasonable doubt, and clear and convincing evidence. There are several types of evidence, depending on the form or source. Evidence governs the use of testimony (e.g., oral or written statements, such as an affidavit), exhibits (e.g., physical objects), documentary material, ordemonstrative evidence, which are admissible (i.e., allowed to be considered by the trier of fact, such as jury) in a judicial or administrative proceeding (e.g., a court of law). When a dispute, whether relating to a civil or criminal matter, reaches the court there will always be a number of issues which one party will have to prove in order to persuade the court to find in his or her favour. The law must ensure certain guidelines are set out in order to ensure that evidence presented to the court can be regarded as trustworthy. The Indian Evidence Act,[1] originally passed by the Imperial Legislative Council in 1872, during the British Raj, contains a set of rules and allied issues governing admissibility of evidence in the Indian courts of law. 2) The Right to Information Act (RTI) is an Act of the Parliament of India "to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens" and replaces the erstwhile Freedom of information Act, 2002. The Act applies to all States and Union Territories of India except Jammu & Kashmir. Under the provisions of the Act, any citizen may request information from a "public authority" (a body of Government or "instrumentality of State") which is required to reply expeditiously or within thirty days. The Act also requires every public authority to computerise their records for wide dissemination and to proactively certain categories of information so that the citizens need minimum recourse to request for information formally. This law was passed by Parliament on 15 June 2005 and came fully into force on 12 October 2005. The first application was given to a Pune police station. Information disclosure in India was restricted by the Official Secrets Act 1923 and various other special laws, which the new RTI Act relaxes. It codifies a fundamental right of citizens. Central Government Act 3) Section 22 in The Right To Information Act, 2005 22. Act to have overriding effect.—The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. 4) The honble IC has clearly indicated i) Section 4(1) (d) does not apply to a judicial proceedings conducted by a Court or a Tribunal as it refers only to administrative and quasi-judicial decisions of public authorities. ii) The non-obstante clause in Section 22 of the Right to Information Act does not,repeal or substitute any pre-existing law including the provisions of the Income Tax Act concerning dissemination of information iii) The appellant cannot take recourse to the RTI Act to challenge a judicial decision regarding disclosure of a given set of information, which properly belonged to the jurisdiction of that judicial authority. If the appellant is aggrieved with the decision of the ITAT, the remedy lies elsewhere. iv) It is reiterated and made clear that the RTI Act is not intended to come into conflict with a judicial decision regarding disclosure of information. Section 8(1)(b) of the Right to Information Act, 2005 makes it very clear that the information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal cannot be disclosed as any such disclosure is also within the exemption clause. v) In a recent decision High Court of Madras in The Suprintendent, High Court Vs. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Information Commission and M. Sivaraj has held that “ 18. Therefore, Section 22 of the RTI Act cannot undoubtedly override Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act.” The reading of the non obstante clause in Section 22 of the RTI Act has to be so interpreted that preamble and enabling provisions of the RTI Act will be given plentiful and bountiful meaning only when there is no statutory bar of any kind in providing the information. The rule of Construction demands that so long as the provisions exist in the Statutes, they have to be given effect to by harmonious construction. Both the statutes will be allowed to have the space without contradicting each other. In the given facts, Para 14 and Para 15 of the 2007 procedure cannot be overwritten by the RTI Act 2005 as it occupies the field in the way other subordinate legislations occupy the field. The Commission is also in agreement with the averments made by the CPIO that irrespective of the fact that the application is accepted or rejected by the Settlement Commission, it does not alter the character of the information. 5) In CIC decision CIC/AT/A/2009/000755, it has been held as follows:¬ Section 79 of the Indian Evidence Act states that certified copies of public documents including public records of private documents shall be accepted as original evidence in courts of law and shall be presumed to be true From this, it is quite obvious that certified copy has a definitive meaning as a legal expression defined in the Indian Evidence Act. The use of this expression in the RTI Act cannot be disconnected from its original meaning as contained in the Indian Evidence Act. It follows from it that the eligibility of an RTI-applicant to take certified copies of any information will have to conform to the definition of certified copy in Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act and can relate only to such documents as mentioned in Section 74, i.e. public documents. Section 2(j)(ii) of RTI Act speaks of an applicant’s right to “taking notes, extracts or certified copies...”. These workings make it clear that each mode of disclosure of information, viz. “notes”, “extracts” or “certified copies” is separate and independent. IT follows from it that, given the type of documents demanded by an applicant, he shall be provided “extracts”, “notes” or “certified copies” depending upon the nature of the documents, his right to take “certified copies” has to be decided in terms of documents which are liable to be given out as “certified copies” consistent with the definition of this expression as found in the Indian Evidence Act (Sections 74, 76 and 79). “Certified Copies” is an exact legal expression and cannot be used loosely as ‘attestation of documents’ or ‘true copy’ of any document. It is noteworthy that Section 2(j) of RTI Act does not authorize an applicant to receive “attested true copies” of a document but only its “extracts”, besides allowing him to “take notes”. Since certified copies can be given out only for certain category of documents as listed in the Evidence Act, it follows, that for all other categories of documents, a citizen can only claim “extracts” or “notes” and not their “certification” as “true copy”. 6) It has to be kept in mind that each act has to be given harmonious interpretation keeping in mind the "mimansa" principles of interpretation . we may read the following blog for more details SATYAM BRUYAT - Justice Katju : The Mimansa Principles of Interpretation — II 7) The beauty of both acts is that they complement each other in a way that it is only possible to give a "harmonious" interpretation to each act as "none" of them have "non-obstanate" clauses. Hence although the evidence act is 1872 and the rti act is much later, "evidence" helps to lay the foundation of "justice" and the RTI act sets to codify "justice" in the form of "evidence". They cannot be substituted, but cannot live without each other in an "ideal world". CJ
This leaderboard is set to Kolkata/GMT+05:30


  • Create New...

Important Information

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