Jump to content

Prasad GLN

Pro User
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Prasad GLN last won the day on April 20

Prasad GLN had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

540 Excellent


About Prasad GLN

Personal Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

700 profile views
  1. A third party audit under the Central Information Commission is the need of the hour, as RTI statistics submitted by PSBs do not prove the “constraint theory” identified by the Nayak Committee. This committee identified the application of The Right to Information Act, 2005 to all PSBs as a “major constraint” affecting their governance amongst others. No statistics or anecdotal information was, however, furnished in support of this finding. However, as the CHRI report clearly shows citing CIC figures, there is no evidence of any undue burden on PSBs as the average load factor on each branch of a PSB was less than two RTI applications a year. There is, therefore, need for the CIC to urgently launch a third party audit of banks receiving the most number of RTI applications as well as those reporting a very high proportion of rejections in order to make an assessment of the manner in which banks are disposing RTI applications. In the matter of Reserve Bank of India vs Jayantilal N Mistry and related cases, the Supreme Court had directed the RBI to disclose information about NPAs to RTI applicants. Whether the court’s directives are being complied with or not can be ascertained only by examining the RTI applications and the responses of each bank. So a third party audit under the aegis of the CIC is the need of the hour. Link: https://thewire.in/banking/public-sector-banks-are-rejecting-more-rtis-than-ever-before For me it appears funny..as it is not lakhs of non performing assets that are bothering the PSB but less than two applications per branch is bothering PSB as a "major constraint'. If only Banks upload the appraisal after sanction in their websites, then these lakhs of NPAs may not be eating into depositor's money. They want money from depositors, but they do not wish to be accountable for any one. When PSBs have three types of regular audit like Surprise, regular, concurrent, statutory audit,-- now do they require external audit by CIC, when providing information is also a statutory obligation ? (It is a different matter that all those rituals can not arrest Non performing advances growth) PSBs want facials with public money ?
  2. False Affidavit

    Why all this for the present. In facing a litigation, providing of that information/document is alone before Court is sufficient. CIC is not concerned as incorrect information was not provided under RTI, and filing false affidavit was in court and not under RTI. Filing a false affidavit as counter is a serious thing by public authority, and that must be specifically stated in court proceedings for perjury as well for recommending disciplinary action against PIO by Court. As far as appellant is concerned, he need not bother about the counter, and it is the evidence not counter that is taken into account while deciding a case. I personally think that it is their burden to prove either the counter or information as correct. It is the evidence part only that counts and not counter. In counter, any person may tell many things that are not relevant, not correct, but ultimately proving those statements with evidence is only material in Court.
  3. Amendments to RTI Act

    As per the proposed amendments, salaries and allowances of information commissioners will no longer be equivalent to those of a Supreme Court judge. The amendments seek to empower the Central government and the state governments to decide salaries of information commissioners through rules. The rationale provided is that treating information commissioners on par with functionaries of the election commission is incorrect, as the latter is a constitutional body while information commissions are statutory bodies. Link https://thewire.in/rights/rti-law-dilution-information-commission Should ordinary citizens be bothered by this proposed amendment really ? However our experts like Hon CJK are against all amendments and state that if you give one inch, they occupy miles. Those who are interested in serving community without bothering about perks can only apply, what is the harm for a common man due to proposed amendment. (Not knowing about other amendments if any as the report is not made public)
  4. Wrong information

  5. There is no such specific and separate First Appel for Life or Liberty clause. Just mention on TOP of the first appeal in a conspicuous place in bold and underline with big fonts LIFE OR LIBERTY CLAUSE. First Appeal under RTI under LIFE OR LIBERTY CLAUSE dt... This guidance is not a confirmation that a natural calamity clause comes under LIFE OR LIBERTY CLAUSE and it appellant has to justify such clause
  6. Not giving proper information

    RTI Act has taken care of such situations, and you may go for First appeal and then for second appeal . The burden of proof that correct, complete and relevant information was provided rests on PIO. Search the website of public authority and find out laid down procedure for first appeal and seek personal hearing of appeal.
  7. Degree verification

    This forum is dedicated for guiding citizens in seeking information from public authorities under RTI Act and members are not competent or empowered to certify any such certificates as proper, as candidate himself must know before getting those certificates. Please go through a blog given by Chattabarik, wherein he has listed the list of approved Universities. If you have obtained the degree by completing the course as per laid down norms, search website of university and seek such verification by them as per their laid down procedure with such fees.
  8. CIC decision not satisfactory.

    If you can establish that the employee has resorted to foul means, you have every right to seek remedy. But, the writ should not appear as personal grudges against him. There is no use in commenting on a delivered decision. To me it appears that DU is not having the particulars sought by you and one can seek information that is available in material form. You and advocate are the better judges. Proceed only if you are sure that they are having that information in material form and suppressing the same, and also justify your action in not going for inspection.
  9. CIC decision not satisfactory.

    The next remedy is through writ to High Court.
  10. You have opened 5 threads on one issue, not related to RTI. This is against discipline of the forum. Please avoid opening of more than one thread on one issue.
  11. Multiple Copies of same information under RTI

    You can seek such information as there is no bar on such copies/limits on information. You can also ask four of your friends to file similar application. The fact may be explained to PIO in person while filing application and his attention may be invited to Indian Evidence Act Sec.76 where public authorities are under obligation to provide certified copies. One can not foretell PIO response, and first file application and take necessary amendment during first appeal.
  12. Three posts by same member. Moderators kindly merge all the three posts.
  13. Hire CCTV cameras and write SOS letter to SP for providing protection and to take a bind over from invaders. Enclose copy of FIRS to the Supdt of Police with your request for protection. Remember, you have to take your own precautions for your safety, and no one case protect any person for all 24 x 7. There must be something serious behind this attack, as even hardened criminals think twice before resorting to such threats by forcing into their home.
  14. Non compliance of court order

    This post is very old post and appeared in various forums. The court is not involved in any way in this matter. RTI has no role to play. Instead of proceeding to HRC, it is better to proceed to Legal Services Authority.

Our Moderators

karira karira Super Moderator
ganpat1956 ganpat1956 Super Moderator
ambrish.p ambrish.p Moderators
Sunil Ahya Sunil Ahya Moderators
jps50 jps50 Moderators

About Us

RTI INDIA established in the year 2006, attracts a broad audience of citizens, experts, professionals and Government Officers interested in the latest development in the field of Right to Information. We also boast an active community focused on helping citizens to File RTI, First Appeal and Second Appeals. Our download section contains many sample RTI forms for everybody to use.

Social Links


Important Information

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