- 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 'exempt'.
Found 7 results
rti happenings: Multi-crore CLAT agreement with 13 other NLUs is so secret it’s exempt from RTI, claims RMLNLU
akhilesh yadav posted a topic in RTI in MediaCommon Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2015 convenor RMLNLU Lucknow claimed secrecy for the three CLAT memorandums of understanding (MoU) signed between national law universities (NLU) since 2007. The convenor with a letter dated 1 July rejected a Right to Information (RTI) request dated 10 June 2015, which was filed by the Increasing Diversity by Increasing Access (IDIA) scheme, asking for a copy each of the MoU signed between seven NLUs on 23 November 2007, and the MoUs signed between 14 NLUs in 2014 and on 10 May 2015. The convenor, via RMLNLU joint registrar Dr JD Ganwar, rejected the request stating that the information was exempt from disclosure under “Section 8(e)” of the RTI Act 2005. Read more at: Multi-crore CLAT agreement with 13 other NLUs is so secret it?s exempt from RTI, claims RMLNLU - Legally India
HARIPREETH posted a question in Ask for Non RTI SupportHello, what,s the rate of a gas second cylinder under non domestic exempt catogory?
akhilesh yadav posted a topic in RTI in MediaNEW DELHI: Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee has written to lieutenant governor Najeeb Jung asking him to exempt Sikh women from wearing helmets. To claim the exemption, they cited an RTI reply from Delhi Police as proof showing that no Sikh woman had died in a motorbike accident last year. Avtar Singh Sethi, president of Delhi Sikh Citizen's Council said that he had filed the RTI to the office of special commissioner (traffic), Taj Hassan. Traffic cops then asked them toapproach the district police who replied that no data of a Sikh woman being killed in a fatal accident was received by them. The groups also wrote to the LG asking him to exempt Sikh women from wearing helmets since it would be hurting their religious sentiments. Read more: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Gurdwara-body-opposes-helmet-rule-for-women/articleshow/35965581.cms
Vigilance bodies out of RTI Act purview as reported in Express Buz Express News Service 20 Sep 2008 CHENNAI: Following a flood of applications under the Right to Information (RTI) Act seeking information regarding the progress of corruption cases handled by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) and the Tamil Nadu State Vigilance Commission (TSVC), the State Government has exempted both organisations from the purview of the RTI Act. A Government Order issued in this regard recently said revealing any information to any agency, including the aggrieved person, would be detrimental to the progress of the case. Of late, there has been a tendency on the part of some citizens to ask for a lot of information under the RTI Act, the GO observed. The DVAC and the TSVC primarily deal with investigation into alleged corrupt activities of public servants. The investigations and subsequent actions culminate in disciplinary action or criminal action in the appropriate courts of law, the GO said. “Confidentiality and secrecy in certain cases requires to be maintained during the whole process from the initial stage up to filing charge-sheet in the court on the one hand and up to issue of final orders in the case of disciplinary proceedings,” the order pointed out. “The government feels that in vigilance cases giving information at the initial stages, investigation stage and even prosecution stage would lead to unnecessary embarrassment and will definitely hamper due process on investigation,” the GO added. The State government has passed orders in this regard according to sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the RTI Act. The Section states that “nothing contained in the Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisations established by the State Government, from time to time, by notification in the official gazette”. It may be recalled that former Social Welfare Minister Poongothai had to step down from the office following the release of her telephonic conversation with the former DVAC chief SK Upadhyay, who is now under suspension. Express Buzz - Vigilance bodies out of RTI Act purview
ganpat1956 posted a topic in RTI in MediaNew Delhi, Sept. 28 (PTI): The Central Information Commission (CIC) has asked ministries and government departments to refrain from exempting public bodies from the purview of RTI Act, adding that it was the "competent authority" for taking such a decision. The ruling came after the Securities and Exchange Board of India, declining information on certain bonds of IFCI Ltd to Mumbai resident V T Gokhale, concurred with the Finance Ministry which kept the company out of the purview of the transparency law. The order was passed despite IFCI being directed earlier by the Commission to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act. "The fact whether an entity is a public authority or not is to be determined under the provisions of the RTI Act and by the authority competent to take such decision. Not only it is incorrect for such entities like IFCI, to seek such certificates from the ministries/departments, it is even more incorrect for such ministries/departments to issue such certificates," Information Commissioner A N Tiwari said in his decision. The Commission in its earlier decision on May 31 this year had ruled IFCI to be a "public authority" under the RTI Act, after noting that as on March 31, the government provided for 23.53 per cent of the company's finances. It also noted that although IFCI was presently a private company, it was established by the government as part of a parliamentary legislation in 1948. The Commission directed it to comply to the norms as prescribed under the RTI Act. The Hindu News Update Service Related thread:Panel pulls up IFCI for dodging RTI Act
Shrawan posted a topic in RTI Appeals decisionsCentral Information Commission Decision No. 297/IC(A)/2006 F. No. CIC/MA/A/2006/00663 Dated, the 21st September, 2006 Name of the Appellant : Shri S. Gangaiah Nayakar, 3/488, Rajapalayam Salai, T. N.C.Alangulam, District - Virudhunagar-626127 Name of the Public Authority: Indian Overseas Bank, Customers Service Department, Central office, 763,Anna Salai, Channai-600 002. DECISION The appellant had sought certain information, which was largely furnished to him. The CPIO however denied the information relating to the details of loan accounts of another person and other documents submitted by him. The CPIO contented that the information sought is related to personal information, which is exempted u/s 8(1)(j) of the Act. The appellate authority upheld the decision of the CPIO. There is no denial of information to the appellant. The Banks are expected to maintain confidentiality of the accounts of its customers and that the documents submitted by its customers do not fall under public domain. Hence, exempted u/s 8(1)(j) of the Act. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (Prof M. M. Ansari) Information Commissioner Download the decision from Download Segment
Shrawan posted a topic in RTI Appeals decisionsCentral Information Commission Decision No. 294/IC(A)/2006 F.No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00336 Dated, the 21st Sep., 2006 Name of the Appellant : Shri Om Prakash Agarwal, 25, Strand Road, 723, Marshall House, Kolkata-700001. Name of the Public Authority : The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India, ICAI Bhavan, Indraprastha marg, P.B. No.7100, New Delhi-110002. DECISION Facts: The appellant had sought certain information which are furnished by the member companies and are available with the respondent in fiduciary capacity. The CPIO has denied the information on the ground that the information sought has no relation with public action or interest. The CPIO has also mentioned that the appellant has filed a complaint against the companies whose information are being sought. He has therefore contended that disclosure of information would impede the process of investigation. He has thus soughtexemption u/s 8(1) (h) of the Act. Commissionâ€™s Decision: Information sought relate to the personal information of third parties, the disclosure of which do not fall under public domain. As such, there is no overriding public interest in disclosure of information sought, which is exempt u/s 8(1) (j) of the Act. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- (Prof. M.M. Ansari) Information Commissioner Download the decision from Download segment