Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/23/2020 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Communication is highly sensitive and this is the only reason BSNL was lagging behind as other private telcom companies compromise for cheap Chinese./Korean/Taiwan where hacking is not difficult. BSNL never use such hardware of enemy country. Entire world suspects Chinese telcom products. The importance is on technology adopted in a state like West Bengal. There are several disruptive activities in the state and the blame goes on enemy countries and migrants from border countries. ,It is my only apprehension and it can only be decided by BSNL/CIC as the entire state of West Bengal BSNL telcom network information and operations in one year is being solicited by a citizen and when some contractors in India can resort to compromise due to pressures/money and several other things. Those who seek information seek it openly and always keep transparency and accountability in operations and once if citizens himself hide their identity and seek that vast information without any idea of putting into logical conclusion of such vast data., the very purpose of RTI is defeated. Information is not for information sake and it should be put to logical conclusion. CIC must consider this though objective and reasons are unknown in RTI Act.
  2. 1 point
    CPIO has not applied his mind while denying information. 8 1 (e) Information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship unless the competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure of such information.: Tender documents/work contracts by any stretch of wild imagination is not information held by BSNL on behalf of any contractor, and their activity and work contracts are in larger public interest that is never exempted under RTI Act. But to me it appears that seeking such One year work contracts BSNL West Bengal is not fair. They can reject the information stating Sec,8 (1) (a) (d) as the communication net work should be confidential in a sensitive state like West Bengal. The tenders state the steps or machinery to be used etc., and while all other telcom companies made an exit from the country, due to strong fundamentals with great difficulty BSNL is surviving somehow. I am afraid that seeking such sensitive information will certainly weaken their status and they can not expose sensitive information. However, as you have started a process go for First Appeal but I am sure that it is not possible to get such sensitive information of entire state by a citizen without demonstrating larger public interest.
  3. 1 point
    The procedure was well explained in those state on line websites /Central on line that offer that facility. Not all states are offering and only some states are offering . We are hearing teething problems and always advise hard copy registered post tracking process so that every thing is at the finger tips of applicant.
  4. 1 point


    Find here the original Supreme court judgement on Aadhaar. (1) The requirement under Aadhaar Act to give one's demographic and biometric information does not violate fundamental right of privacy. (2) The provisions of Aadhaar Act requiring demographic and biometric information from a resident for Aadhaar Number pass three­fold test as laid down in Puttaswamy (supra) case, hence cannot be said to be unconstitutional. (3) Collection of data, its storage and use does not violate fundamental Right of Privacy. (4) Aadhaar Act does not create an architecture for pervasive surveillance. (5) Aadhaar Act and Regulations provides protection and safety of the data received from individuals. (6) Section 7 of the Aadhaar is constitutional. The provision does not deserve to be struck down on account of denial in some cases of right to claim on account of failure of authentication. (7) The State while enlivening right to food, right to shelter etc. envisaged under Article 21 cannot encroach upon the right of privacy of beneficiaries nor former can be given precedence over the latter. (8) Provisions of Section 29 is constitutional and does not deserves to be struck down. (9) Section 33 cannot be said to be unconstitutional as it provides for the use of Aadhaar data base for police investigation nor it can be said to violate protection granted under Article 20(3). (10) Section 47 of the Aadhaar Act cannot be held to be unconstitutional on the ground that it does not allow an individual who finds that there is a violation of Aadhaar Act to initiate any criminal process. (11) Section 57, to the extent, which permits use of Aadhaar by the State or any body corporate or person, in pursuant to any contract to this effect is unconstitutional and void. Thus, the last phrase in main provision of Section 57, i.e. “or any contract to this effect” is struck down. (12) Section 59 has validated all actions taken by the Central Government under the notifications dated 28.01.2009 and 12.09.2009 and all actions shall be deemed to have been taken under the Aadhaar Act. (13) Parental consent for providing biometric information under Regulation 3 & demographic information under Regulation 4 has to be read for enrolment of children between 5 to 18 years to uphold the constitutionality of Regulations 3 & 4 of Aadhaar (Enrolment and Update) Regulations, 2016. (14) Rule 9 as amended by PMLA (Second Amendment) Rules, 2017 is not unconstitutional and does not violate Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 & 300A of the Constitution and Sections 3, 7 & 51 of the Aadhaar Act. Further Rule 9 as amended is not ultra vires to PMLA Act, 2002. (15) Circular dated 23.03.2017 being unconstitutional is set aside. (16) Aadhaar Act has been rightly passed as Money Bill. The decision of Speaker certifying the Aadhaar Bill, 2016 as Money Bill is not immuned from Judicial Review. (17) Section 139­AA does not breach fundamental Right of Privacy as per Privacy Judgment in Puttaswamy case. (18) The Aadhaar Act does not violate the interim orders passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 494 of 2012 and other Writ Petitions.
  5. 1 point
    Divya, who was lauded by the Commission for making “constructive use of RTI for larger public interest” and for scripting “one of the success stories of the RTI”, had submitted before the Commission that the villagers were facing a serious problem because of the difference in spelling used for the name of the village by the post office and the revenue authorities. The CIC reprimanded the Department of Posts for insisting without any logic that the name was actually “Harha” and for demanding that the villagers get it changed in all their other documents accordingly. In his order, Acharyulu held that the Hadha post office was “duty-bound” to write the correct spelling of every town or village, because a name is the only way of identification and it should therefore be in sync the with revenue and other records. Subsequently, R.K. Mishra of National Informatics Centre, Unnao submitted to the Commission that as per the directions of the CIC, the Postmaster General, Kanpur on July 6 ordered the change in spelling of Harha to the correct “Hadha” in accordance with all the revenue and other official records. He also submitted that a new nameboard has been fixed with the correct spelling in the post office.
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