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

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'complaint'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Request for Community Support
  • Connect with Community
  • Learn about RTI
  • Website News & Support
  • Read RTI News & Stories
  • RTI Act Critics's RTI Act Critics Topics
  • Fans of RTI India's Fans of RTI India Topics
  • Insurance Consumer's Insurance Consumer Topics
  • Activists of Transparency and Accountability's Activists of Transparency and Accountability Topics
  • Issues with BWSSB's Issues with BWSSB Topics
  • Law+Order-Bangalore-32's Law+Order-Bangalore-32 Topics
  • Issues With Electricity Board's Issues With Electricity Board Topics
  • RTI Activists's RTI Activists Topics
  • YOGA's YOGA Topics
  • help each other's help each other Topics
  • forest and wild life's forest and wild life Topics
  • Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C.'s Indian Police Officials not following Cr.P.C. Topics
  • RTI Activist+Politics's RTI Activist+Politics Topics
  • hostels and lodging places's hostels and lodging places Topics
  • RTI Activists in Rajasthan.'s RTI Activists in Rajasthan. Topics
  • RTI info warriors in Haryana's RTI info warriors in Haryana Topics
  • DisABILITY Rights and RTI's DisABILITY Rights and RTI Topics
  • Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI.'s Govt Servant, Local Bodies or PSU Employees using RTI. Topics
  • Eco club's Eco club Topics
  • Self Employment in Sport's Self Employment in Sport Topics
  • RTI related to land issue's RTI related to land issue Topics
  • Open SourceTechnology support to RTI's Open SourceTechnology support to RTI Topics
  • TRAP group's TRAP group Topics
  • Odisha RTI Activists's Odisha RTI Activists Topics
  • right to information activists's right to information activists Topics
  • Mumbai's Mumbai Topics
  • Chartered Accountants's Chartered Accountants Topics
  • ngosamachar's ngosamachar Topics
  • Growing INDIA's Growing INDIA Topics
  • we are all friends.'s we are all friends. Topics
  • RTI for Government employees's RTI for Government employees Topics
  • Dhanus - Pending Salaries's Dhanus - Pending Salaries Topics
  • Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors's Insurance Surveyor & Loss Assessors Topics
  • Mahamumbai's Mahamumbai Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • anti corrupt police's anti corrupt police Topics
  • Save Girl in Punjab's Save Girl in Punjab Topics
  • Rent Apartment in US's Rent Apartment in US Topics
  • RTI Kerala's RTI Kerala Topics
  • maharashtra's maharashtra Topics
  • Right Way Of India(RTI)'s Right Way Of India(RTI) Topics
  • Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India's Whistle- Blowers against corrupt India Topics
  • Navi Mumbai's Navi Mumbai Topics
  • electricity curruption in up's electricity curruption in up Topics
  • SHARE n STOCKS trading's SHARE n STOCKS trading Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • ex-serviceman activities's ex-serviceman activities Topics
  • SSCC's SSCC Topics
  • Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates's Remove Corrupt Bueraucrates Topics
  • jharkhand RTI activist group's jharkhand RTI activist group Topics
  • Suhail's Suhail Topics
  • govt.servant's govt.servant Topics
  • RTI Uttar pradesh's RTI Uttar pradesh Topics
  • anti-corruption team's anti-corruption team Topics
  • Manaism's Manaism Topics
  • Insurance's Insurance Topics
  • sonitpur datri sewa samity's sonitpur datri sewa samity Topics
  • indian youth manch's indian youth manch Topics
  • HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies's HUDA Co- Operative Group Housing Societies Topics
  • youth's youth Topics
  • aastha's aastha Topics
  • RTI for Citizens's RTI for Citizens Topics
  • learn always's learn always Topics
  • R.T.I.'s R.T.I. Topics
  • Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana's Karnataka Karmika Kalyana Prathishtana Topics
  • Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna's Akhil Bhart anti corruption sangathna Topics
  • MBA, business and new entrepreneur.....'s MBA, business and new entrepreneur..... Topics
  • students seeking help's students seeking help Topics
  • RTI Corporate's RTI Corporate Topics
  • Electrical group's Electrical group Topics
  • V4LRights's V4LRights Topics
  • Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool's Pirated software in GOvt oofice and sc hool Topics
  • Gaming's Gaming Topics
  • WE Born to help's WE Born to help Topics
  • help the elderly citizen's help the elderly citizen Topics
  • Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association's Ballygunge Government Hogh School Alumni Association Topics
  • Corruption free Country's Corruption free Country Topics
  • surajyam's surajyam Topics
  • kanpurvictims's kanpurvictims Topics
  • Railway Group A Services's Railway Group A Services Topics
  • Encroachment of public property by private giants's Encroachment of public property by private giants Topics
  • Case Status - Anti Corruption's Case Status - Anti Corruption Topics
  • Aam Aadmi (The Common Man)'s Aam Aadmi (The Common Man) Topics
  • Court Marriage in Punjab's Court Marriage in Punjab Topics
  • ALL's ALL Topics
  • Youth India Social Group (YISG)'s Youth India Social Group (YISG) Topics
  • ye kya fandda h's ye kya fandda h Topics
  • mindset's mindset Topics
  • anti corruption's anti corruption Topics
  • activism's activism Topics
  • common's common Topics
  • state group's state group Topics
  • social help group's social help group Topics
  • landlords of uttar pradesh's landlords of uttar pradesh Topics
  • Concern Citizens Forum for India's Concern Citizens Forum for India Topics
  • edusystem's edusystem Topics
  • Ratna Jyoti's Ratna Jyoti Topics
  • development in indian village's development in indian village Topics
  • technovision's technovision Topics
  • Mighty India's Mighty India Topics
  • Against Corporate Fraud's Against Corporate Fraud Topics
  • Stop crime's Stop crime Topics
  • NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti's NVS - Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti Topics
  • Authenticated Public Plateform's Authenticated Public Plateform Topics
  • shalin's shalin Topics
  • terminater's terminater Topics
  • RTI Wind Energy's RTI Wind Energy Topics
  • Go..................?'s Go..................? Topics
  • Co-Op Housing Society's Co-Op Housing Society Topics
  • we are equal's we are equal Topics
  • Phoenix Deals's Phoenix Deals Topics
  • Theft Cases in chandigarh's Theft Cases in chandigarh Topics
  • Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits's Economically Weaker Section Certificate & Benifits Topics
  • Solar Systems's Solar Systems Topics
  • Get aware about ur Education and related rights's Get aware about ur Education and related rights Topics
  • Save Mumbai's Save Mumbai Topics
  • Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board's Complaints to MCD & Delhi Jal Board Topics
  • ashayen's ashayen Topics
  • unemployment's unemployment Topics
  • Employee Solution's Employee Solution Topics
  • is kanpur university against sc/st's is kanpur university against sc/st Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics


  • Uncategorized
  • Section 18 (1)
  • Section 11
  • For Common Man
  • Section 16
  • Section 2(h)
  • Section 8 (1)(j)
  • Simplified RTI
  • Government Employee and RTI
  • RTI Act 2005
  • Success Stories
  • Exempt Organisation
  • DG IT
  • Section 8 (1) (e)
  • Section 2 (h) (d) (i)
  • Supreme Court Decisions
  • Section 2 (j) (i)
  • Section 2
  • Section 8
  • Section 20
  • Section 19
  • SIC Punjab
  • High Court Decisions
  • Section 9
  • Section 24
  • DoPT
  • RTI Awareness
  • Section 6 (3)
  • Section 6
  • Section 2 (f)
  • Opinion
  • Department of Posts
  • Ministry of Railways
  • Departments
  • Ministry of Home Affairs
  • Ministry of Corporate Affairs
  • Ministry of Law & Justice
  • Government of NCT of Delhi
  • Delhi Police
  • Ministry of Human Resource Development
  • Staff Selection Commission
  • Court Decisions
  • CIC Decisions
  • Activism
  • Section 25
  • University
  • Section 7
  • Ministry of Agriculture
  • Section 3
  • RTI Discussions
  • Section 19 (8) (b)
  • Section (1) (d)
  • Section 8 (1) (d)
  • DIrectorate of Education
  • Govt of NCT of Delhi
  • Cooperative Housing Society
  • RTI for School
  • Member RTI
  • Municipal Corporation
  • Ministry of Defence


  • RTI Directory
  • Important RTI Decisions
  • Other Important Court Decisions
  • Sample RTI
  • Acts & Circulars


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...

Found 179 results

  1. With poor infrastructure, this management threaten parents to pay excess fee structure..
  2. Over 3.70 lakh complaints have been received by bank ombudsman during last 5 years, reveales a RTI Act response. Read more at; 3.7 lakh complaints against banks in five years, revelas RTI response | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis
  3. Over 3.70 lakh complaints against banks in 5 years New Delhi, Mar 15 (PTI) Over 3.70 lakh complaints have been received by the banking ombudsman during last five years with highest number of complaints, 1.02 lakh, against State Bank of India, reveals an RTI response. The data received shows that 3,70,543 complaints have been received by 15 banking ombudsman during 2009-10 to 2013-14. Read More: fullstory
  4. thakur jitender

    whom o complain against PIO

    Hello, If behaviour of PIO is to not provide information under rti under one pretax or other .Can we complain against him to someone?Whom?
  5. [h=1]1,121 complaints pending with NCM in last three years[/h] New Delhi: As many as 1,121 complaints received by National Commission for Minorities over the last three years are yet to be resolved, according to an RTI reply. NCM received 7,629 complaints from April 2011-June 2014, out of which 1,121 or 14.7 per cent are still pending. In the same period, 3,344 complaints were settled by the Commission, while 2,137 were either forwarded to the authorities concerned or closed. Report was sought in 1,027 cases while proceedings in 1,121 cases are still in process. Moradabad-based RTI activist Salim Baig had filed a Right to Information application seeking information on the number of complaints received by NCM and their completion status. The maximum number of 3,090 complaints were received from Uttar Pradesh of which 463 cases are at the stage of hearing while 1,332 cases have been closed, according to NCM’s reply. As many as 950 complaints have been forwarded to relevant authorities while report has been sought in 345 cases. The NCM received 900 complaints from Delhi, of which 149 are at a hearing stage while 358 have been closed. As many as 205 complaints received from Delhi have been forwarded while report was sought in 188 cases. Read More: 1,121 complaints pending with NCM in last three years | State Times
  6. Krishna nlr

    Section details

    Hi Team, When we give some application to any Govt office, if there is no reply from them then we can file an RTI for asking an status of that Requestion. I would like to know the section for that application...under what section from RTI Act 2005 we write that RTI application? Can someone help me
  7. I have recently applied an RTI and the PIO had asked me to come for inspection even for queries in yes or no format. This kind of PIO approch is to block the information. Futher, i do not want to meet the PIO. What should i do. Hon'ble members value suggestion is solicited. RTI-PPCL-1.doc

    RTI activist meets NAAC team

    RTI activist meets NAAC team, complains of PU's disregard for rules HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times, Chandigarh | Updated: Mar 05, 2015 07:37 City-based RTI activist RK Singla met the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC) team to appraise them about alleged irregularities in the Panjab University. During the meeting, RK Singla alleged that promotions and recruitments are being made in a violation of norms, especially University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations on calculating academic performance indicator (API) score which have become effective with effective from July 14, 2013, without any relation/exemption of any kind. RK Singla also maintained that PhD degrees awarded after 2009 by Indian Universities are valid only if they are awarded in compliance with UGC Regulations, 2009. However, PU has dispensed with these regulations and has been awarding PhD Degrees. Regarding the violation of UGC regulations on affiliation of colleges, the issue was highlighted in view of the appointment and continuance of unapproved teachers whose PhD degrees were obtained from CMJ University, Shillong stands null and void because the government of Meghalaya has dissolved the university after declaring all its degrees illegal. He said that the members assured him to take up the matter with the vice-chancellor of Punjab University.
  9. I sent a mail To PIO, Punjab National Bank seeking reason for delay in sactioning my education loan under RTI. After a month I'm still waiting for the information. Where am I supposed to apply/complain now as PNB have turned their back on me. I went to CIC website but was perplexed by ministry and department they were asking for.
  10. The Uttar Pradesh Govt. has released draft RTI Rules covering RTI applications, appeals and complaints. They are attached to this post. UP Draft RTI Rules 2015.pdf
  11. [h=1]Maharashtra govt won’t probe anonymous graft complaints[/h] In a severe blow to whistleblowers in Maharashtra, the BJP-led state government has made it clear that anonymous complaints, irrespective of how serious allegations are levelled in them, won’t be probed. The General Administration Department, headed by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, has issued directives to all state departments stating that complaints not carrying the name and the address of the complainant must be closed without any action. It further states that the same rule should be followed in complaints that carry the name of the complainant, but the allegations levelled in them are “vague” in nature. Even in cases where the complainant chooses to identify himself/herself and the allegations are “verifiable”, the approval of the competent authority should be taken for taking cognisance of such a complaint. After which, it must first be referred back to the complainant to ascertain if he/she owns up to filing the complaint. If nothing is heard from the complainant within a month, such complaints must be treated as “pseudonymous” in nature and discarded without any probe, the directive adds. Sources in the government said the move was to arrest policy paralysis in the bureaucracy. But anti-corruption activists said that it would discourage people from becoming whistleblowers and exposing corruption. The government, on the other hand, has argued that whistleblowers who desire to protect their identity were already protected under the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informers Resolution, 2004, where the identify of a complainant is kept a secret. Read More: Maharashtra govt won’t probe anonymous graft complaints | The Indian Express
  12. Hello, 1.I filed a complaint with Director Local Bodies (DLB),Rajasthan regarding irregularities in issuing licence under Rajasthan Municipal act in a specific case. 2.DLB forwarded my complaint to Commissioner (HQ),Jaipur Nagar Nigam for necessary action and information to me of action taken. 3.Commissioner( HQ) in turn forwarded the same to Commissioner,Sanganer Zone due to the jurisdiction. 4.Since there was no intimation of action to me, I filed RTI application with Commissioner (HQ) but no reply about action taken on my complaint with DLB. 5.I filed first appeal with FAA and he passed order in my favour but no response to my RTI application. Meanwhile,Commissioner (HQ) transferred file to Commissoner Sanganer Zone. 5.I filed a complaint with SIC . 6.SIC Secretary called both i.e.applicant and PIO for settlement under new procedure called 'Miscellaneous Application'. 6.I attended but no one came from PIO side and few days later I received some papers . 7.Commissioner ,Sanganer Zone, claims that he has not received the papers sent by Commissioner( HQ) and hence there is no information on action taken. He claims to have received other papers under this reference number. 8.Now,hearing has been fixed in next week with SIC. 9.I understand that advocate appearing on their behalf will take the same plea that when no papers have been received by them ,they are under no liability to provide information. 10.How can Commissioner (HQ)be implicated for not acting on the information to him about loss of papers related to complaint under RTI act. 11.Having attended few SIC appeals,I suspect that their advocate will take this plea that no information can be provided for lost documents. 12. For fixing responsibility,file another RTI or complaint. I request honorable moderators to guide me in this matter to fix the responsibility on Commissioner HQ,otherwise for me it will be a lost battle and I will have to start from scratch. Thanks and regards
  13. Please see the below judgment of the Karnataka High Court. In it the court has declared the decision passed by the SIC (while disposing a Complaint under Sec 18 ), directing PIO to provide "information" is not correct since the SC has already passed an judgment (State of Manipur case) that under Sec 18, the commission cannot order disclosure of information. However, in this case, the dates are very relevant: Date of RTI application: 11.02.2009 Date of PIOs reply: 06.04.2009 Date of complaint to SIC: 15.07.2009 Date of SIC decision: 04.02.2010 Date of Supreme Court judgment: 12.12.2011 (Well after all the above dates !) But still the High Court has quashed the SIC order in the above matter. Is it valid ? ========================== Karnataka High Court Shri Chandrashekar vs The Commissioner on 6 January, 2015 Author: S.Abdul Nazeer IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER WRIT PETITION NO.4460/2011 (GM-RES) Between: Shri Chandrashekar, S/o late Madhava Rao, Aged about 59 years, Presently working as Tahasildar, Shimoga Taluk & Dist. .... Petitioner. (By Sri S.V.Prakash, Adv.) And: 1 The Commissioner, Karnataka Information Commission, Gate No.2, 2nd and 3rd Floors, M.S.Bldg., Ambedkar Veedhi, Bangalore - 560 001. 2 The Assistant Commissioner, Shimoga District. 2 3 Sri Rangaswamy, S/o Kariyappa, Major, R/a Near Children Care Centre, 4th Cross, Hosmane Extension, Shimoga City 577 201. .... Respondents. (By Sri M.I.Arun, AGA for R1 and R2 R3 served) --- This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 24.6.2010 at Annexure 'H', etc. This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in 'B' Group this day, the Court passed the following: ORDER The third respondent had filed an application seeking information before the Public Information Officer on 11.2.2009. The Public Information Officer issued an endorsement at Annexure 'B' dated 6.4.2009 stating that the information sought for by him is not available in the office of the Tahsildar, Shimoga Taluk and District. 2. The petitioner was posted as the Public Information Officer on 15.7.2009. The 3rd respondent filed an application under Section 18 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 ('Act' for short) before the first respondent herein seeking the very same information. The first respondent passed an order dated 4.2.2010 directing the petitioner herein to furnish the information. Since the information was not furnished by the petitioner, an order at Annexure 'H' dated 24.6.2010 was passed imposing penalty of Rs.10,000/-. This was followed by yet another order at Annexure 'A' dated 29.10.2010 whereby the 1st respondent directed the 2nd respondent to deduct the penalty amount from the salary of the petitioner. The petitioner has called in question the validity of the said order in this writ petition. 3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 4. As noticed above, the Public Information Officer has responded to the application of the 3rd respondent by issuing an endorsement at Annexure 'B' dated 6.4.2009 stating that the information sought for by him is not available in the office of the Tahsildar, Shimoga Taluk and District. This order has not been challenged by the 3rd respondent under Section 19 of the Act. On the other hand, the 3rd respondent has directly filed an application under Section 18 of the Act seeking information before the first respondent, which was not permissible in law. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF MANIPUR AND ANOTHER - AIR 2012 SC 864 has held that the Central Information Commission or the State Information Commission has no power under Section 18 to provide access to the information which has been requested for by any person but which has been denied to him. Remedy for such person, who has been refused information is provided under Section 19 of the Act. Nature of power under Section 18 is supervisory in character whereas procedure under Section 19 is appellate procedure and a person, who is aggrieved by refusal in receiving information, which he has sought for can only seek redress in manner provided in statute, namely, by following procedure under Section 19. 5. It is thus clear that the application filed by the 3rd respondent seeking information under Section 18 before the first respondent was not maintainable. Consequently, the order passed on the said application is without jurisdiction. Thus, the impugned order at Annexure 'H' dated 24.6.2010 and the consequential order at Annexure 'M' dated 29.10.2010 passed by the first respondent are without authority of law. 6. Even otherwise, it is clear from the materials on record that during the relevant period, the petitioner was posted on election duty. That is why the petitioner could not appear before the Commission and respond to the notice issued by the Commission. 7. In the result, the writ petition succeeds and it is accordingly allowed. The order at Annexure 'H' dated 24.6.2010 and the consequential order at Annexure 'M' dated 29.10.2010 passed by the first respondent are hereby quashed. No costs. Sd/-JUDGE.BMM/-
  14. Abhay Shikerkar

    Rti complaint unanswered

    This matter is from Goa, and related to devasthan properties. Here Devasthans are governed by devasthan regulation act and mamlatdar is defined as administrator, in the case were no local committee exists he is wasted with powers to look directly or through person. Now while doing his duties he is also the revenue officer and looks after tenancy matters. In case of my query this officer has declared pujari of devasthan as a tenant in devasthan property. Same property is given on perpetual lease to one family which has abondoned by it and encroched upon by other family. In capacity of member of original fly I filed the query to give me details of the decision. Which are not answered within stipulated time limit of 35 days. I am thinking to approach first appellate authority. Please comment.
  15. 79 percent rise in graft complaints to CVC, crosses 63K mark in 2014 New Delhi: More than 63,000 corruption complaints were received by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) in 2014, a rise of 79 percent over the preceding year. The anti-corruption watchdog said it received 63,288 complaints last year as against 35,332 in 2013. These complaints include those filed by whistleblowers and anonymous complainants. "The commission has processed a record number of corruption complaints in the last year. All of them were dealt with within the prescribed time-frame," a CVC official said. The complaints were related to allegations of corruption in various central government ministries and departments, he said. The total of 63,288 is based on CVC's monthly reports for 2014. The final figure may go up or come down. "The final figure will be mentioned in the Commission's annual report, which is tabled in Parliament after June every year and then made public," the official said. Most of these complaints did not require any action due to lack of verifiable allegations and were merely filed as per the CVC corruption handling policy. Rest of them were sent to Chief Vigilance Officers of the ministries concerned for necessary action and report, he said. The anti-corruption watchdog had received 37,039, 16,929 and 16,260 complaints in 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, according to its annual reports. Similarly, 14,206 and 10,142 complaints were received in 2009 and 2008, respectively. In 2007 and 2006, the Commission had received 11,062 and 10,798 complaints, respectively. Also, 9,320, 10,735, 11,397 complaints were received by it during 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, as per the annual reports. The Commission, which is working without its regular chief for over four months, also dealt with 5,743 cases last year in which it recommended penalty and action against corrupt government officials. The CVC gives its advice in cases of corruption against corrupt government officials and the disciplinary authority of the ministry concerned acts on it. It had disposed of 4,801 cases in 2013, according to the Commission's data. In 2012 and 2011, the probity watchdog tendered its advice in 5,720 and 5,341 cases, respectively. Central Vigilance Commissioner Pradeep Kumar and Vigilance Commissioner J M Garg completed their term on September 28 and September 7, last year, respectively. The CVC is headed by a Central Vigilance Commissioner and has two Vigilance Commissioners. Rajiv, a former Director General of Central Industrial Security Force, is acting as interim chief of the transparency watchdog. As many as 5,522, 5,317 and 4,328 cases were disposed of in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. In 2007 and 2006, the CVC finalised proceedings in 4,672 and 4,683 cases, respectively. "CVC has been stressing on processing all cases referred to it for its advice as early as possible. More number of cases have been disposed of in 2014 as against 2013. This has been done when CVC is facing shortage of staff," the official said. About 230 employees are working in the Commission as against its sanctioned strength of 296, according to its latest annual report. Read More: 79 percent rise in graft complaints to CVC, crosses 63K mark in 2014 | Zee News
  16. Pio stated COPY OF RTI APPLICATION NECESSARY AS ATTACHMENT FOR COMPLAINTS CASE. but hon. Faa heard all legal aspect by audio conference. agreed and ordered relief OUT OF process by ordering pio to RECIEVE . Also I think faa decision will be in cic website. Can be used to cite for admission of complaints under SEC 18 1A .MAY BE Though there was also delay in providing info but I am fully satisfied by hon FAA decision . No grievance left all points accepted also in audio resulting in relief provided.
  17. Mysuru: Karnataka State Information Commissioner Dr. D Shekar expressed satisfaction that the maximum complaints under Right to Information Act being cleared at the first level of appeal. "The Act would be more effective if more number of Public Information Officers are deputed", he said on Tuesday here. Read at: "Maximum complaints under the RTI Act cleared at the first level of appeal"
  18. Hello, Respected experts, In the year 2012 on my Application under RTI, the PIO send me reply that the file from which the required information sought was not traceable from the record and therefore on the said ground the required information was denied. Thereafter I addressed a letter to the PIO asking when the said file was missing and also requested to furnish a sworn Affidavit to that effect. There was no response. I made two reminders also, but there was no reply. Brief Facts: The plot where I am residing in the old Chawl, there was another society building which was demolished by the developer and reconstruction of Tower was under process. I also found that the Society grabbed the FSI of the Chawl and consumed over the Tower leaving the Chawl retained as ground floor structure. On inspection of the present building proposal file, I found that there was no occupation certificate granted to the original old building of the society and also found the number of the proposal of old building. Therefore I filed RTI Application for obtaining Occupation Certificate and sanctioned Plan of the old building for which the PIO has denied as aforesaid. As there was no occupation certificate and the final sanctioned plan having stamp of Full Occupation Certificate included in the new building proposal file for demolition and reconstruction of the same, the construction of new building tower in lieu of the old one is totally unauthorized (Old building without OC and building Completion Certificate is unauthorized and liable to be demolished under section 351 of the MMC Act) Though the said illegal construction was allowed to continue even after my aforesaid RTI Application, now the Executive Engineer has granted the Full Occupation Certificate to the said new building Tower. Now I got a copy of the Authority in the Decision of Hon'ble CIC in (Sh.Om Prakash Vs. Land & Building Dept, GNCTD) ruling that the PIO who send Reply under RTI stating concerned file not traceable is liable for imprisonment of Five years and penalty. Kindly inform me how to write complaint before the CIC or if any draft of such complaint as per above judgment may be provided. Is the Complaint to be filed before CIC? Regards, Sadanand B. Mestry
  19. Hello, Any Corrections,Experienced friends, Kindly enlighten. Thanks. The Right to Information Act, 2005 Appeal before State Information Commissioner 13th floor, New Administrative Bldg., Madam Cama Road, Opp. Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032 Appeal No. ----------------------- Dated ------------------------ [For office use only] As I am aggrieved by non implementation of your order by State Public Information Officer/First Appellate Authority, I hereby file this complaint. More than sufficient time has elapsed. On inquiry, telephonic assurances given have been to circumvent the order issued. 1. Details of appellant: 1.1 Full Name: - 1.2. Full Address: - 1.3 .Cell No.: - 1.4 Email ID 2. State Public Information Officer 2.1 Name/Designation: - Mr. K.R. DOSHI/ Assistant Engineer ( Building&Proposal)W.S. ‘H’ ward 2.2 Full Address: Office of the Dy. Chief Engineer ( Building&Proposal) Western Sub – I, 1st Floor, R.K. Patkar Marg, Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400 050 2.3 Name of Public Authority: - M.C.G.M. 3. Details of First Appellate Authority [FAA]: 3.1 Name/Designation of the FAA: - U.V. Mahale/ Executive Engineer ( Bldg. Proposal ‘H” Ward. 3.2 Full Address of FAA: -: Office of the Dy. Chief Engineer ( Building & Proposal) Western Sub – I, 1st Floor, R.K. Patkar Marg, Bandra (West), Mumbai – 400 050 4. Dates of RTI application/first appeal 4.1 To SPIO: 15/4/2014 & Hand delivered on 15/4/2014 ( copy Attached ) 4.2 To FAA: - 30/4/2014 & Hand delivered on: -30/4/2014 ( copy Attached) 5. Particulars of Decisions: 5.1 Reference No & Date SPIO’s Decision: - Dy.Ch. Eng/BP/CRIA/4701/WS-1 [H-C] dated 11/4/2014 ( copy attached ) 5.2 Reference No & Date of FAA’s Decision: - Dy Ch E/BP/199/WS-1/CRIA/APPEAL dated 04/6/2014 ( copy Attached ) 5.3 Date/s of personal hearing by FAA: - 21/5/2014 between 15.00 to 15.30 hrs. ( copy Attached ) 6. Dates of receipt of replies by appellant from: 6.1 SPIO: - 22/4/2014 6.2 FAA: -18/6/2014 7. Details of information sought: - Building and proposal file no. CE/5368/BSII/AH 8. Brief facts of the case: Society lost most of the records in deluge of year 2005, reconstructing records, since building constructed in year 1960, conveyed in year 1965. 9. Reasons/grounds for this appeal: No records with the society after the flooding of Mumbai city in the year 2005 10. Any other information in support of appeal: Copies of the answer by SPIO and FAA 11. Order of STATE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER dated 27/10/2014 ( copy attached ) 12. Copy of DEMAND NOTICE sent to SPIO/FAA respectively, dated 13//1/2015 received by them on 13/1/2015 ( Both copies attached) 13. Prayer: kindly instruct the SPIO to give copy of all the pages of the said File or have the same reconstructed and copies given,( as per your order issued ) with suitable penalty be imposed under rules of Right To Information Act, 2005. 14. Grounds for complaint : 1. The complaint is necessary instead of the appeal so that the Commission may conduct a field enquiry in respect of the information which is the subject matter of this complaint. 2. The Complainant submits that both Respondents have flagrantly violated the letter and the spirit of the RTI Act which was enacted to not only ensure access to information but also to fix accountability RELIEFS SOUGHT 1. A thorough enquiry be conducted including inspection of all the sites to which the request for information pertains in order to ascertain the information which the PIO has concealed in a malafide manner. 2. The PIO be directed to provide complete and comprehensive information free of cost in one batch immediately. 3. Penalty be imposed on the PIO under section 20(1) of the Act for denying information in a malafide manner. 4. Disciplinary action be recommended against PIO under section 20(2). 5. The concerned public authority be directed to pay a nominal sum of Rs.20,000 to the Complainant towards costs under section 19(8)(b). 6. Any other directions/orders as the Hon’ble Commission may deem fit may be passed/has passed in the order. 15. Personal Presence at hearing: YES 16. Declaration: I hereby state that the information and particulars given above are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also declare that I have not received any communiqué, in the said matter from SPI0/FAA till date. Place: - MUMBAI Date: - 03/02/2015 Signature of appellant
  20. CHENNAI: Corporation of Chennai's expenditure on mosquito eradication was 8 crore in 2013-14. This is more than double the amount spent the previous year (3.56 crore), but public complaints about the winged menace also doubled in the period, from 2,457 in 2012-13 to 4,664 in 2013-14. In response to an RTI application filed by Pradeep Bhatt, coordinator of Bangalore-based Onlinerti.com, the civic body said it spent 3.56 crore in 2012-13 and 5.09 crore in 2013-14 for mosquito fogging in the city. The quantity of diesel used for fogging in the city has also increased over the past few years - from 5.8 lakh litres in 2009 to 16.41 lakh litres in 2012. The number of fogging machines also went up from 236 in 2011 to 347 in 2014. Read at: Corporation spend on mosquitoes doubles, so do complaints - The Times of India
  21. Hello Friends I need your very serious suggestion. Please help to get rid of one problem. Problem is from temple in front of my home. Every second day there is some function with high volume Parking problem everyday Captured govt park and installed murtis so that there is no play area for kids Can any body help me to whom should I address this problem Plz help Temple authorities are not ready to listen Navi
  22. Hello, I have number from which I get miss calls or calls in midnight or late evening. How to post a RTI to find who is the person. Thanks in advance. Kuldeep
  23. Dear Sir, would you kindly suggest where to complain against principal and teachers of aided english school in mumbai Thanks dingankar
  24. Hello, where to complain against principal and teachers of aided school in mumbai
  • Create New...

Important Information

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