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 'rti'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • 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
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM KARNATAKA 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
  • FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS's FREE LEGAL HELP AND SUGGESTIONS Topics
  • M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech's M.Sc/MCA and ME/M.Tech Topics
  • Corruption's Corruption Topics
  • ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION's ASSOCIATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Topics
  • MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS's MAHARASHTRA- ADVOCATE/LAWYERS Topics
  • INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES's INDIAN WOMEN- LAWYERS /ADVOCATES Topics
  • minority engineering colleges in maharashtra's minority engineering colleges in maharashtra Topics
  • AAKANKSHA's AAKANKSHA Topics
  • RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE's RTI AGAINST INDIAN AIR FORCE MALPRACTISE Topics
  • RiGhTs's RiGhTs Topics
  • ram's ram Topics
  • JVG DUPED CUST.'s JVG DUPED CUST. 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
  • WEWANTJUSTICE's WEWANTJUSTICE Topics
  • Civil Engineers-CAD's Civil Engineers-CAD Topics
  • Nitin Aggarwal's Nitin Aggarwal Topics
  • MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS's MEWAT EDUCATION AWARENESS 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
  • ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA's ALL PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERS OF INDIA 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
  • UN-DO CORRUPTION's UN-DO CORRUPTION 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
  • NATIONAL ISSUE's NATIONAL ISSUE 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
  • RTI BALLIA's RTI BALLIA 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
  • RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT's RTI ACTIVISTS FROM MEERUT 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
  • PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION.'s PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION. 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
  • AMICE (INDIA)'s AMICE (INDIA) Topics
  • HELPING HAND !'s HELPING HAND ! 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
  • AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS's AHMEDABAD ACTIVISTS 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
  • URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL's URBAN PLANNER PROFESSIONAL Topics
  • RTI HELP INDIA's RTI HELP INDIA Topics
  • prayatna's prayatna Topics
  • Parking woes's Parking woes Topics
  • Helping RTI INDIA web development's Helping RTI INDIA web development Topics

Categories

  • 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)
  • BSNL & MTNL
  • 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

Categories

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

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 9,211 results

  1. Dear Friends I filed my rti application reply received with back dated letter date post office stamp on evelop is 20 day later had also called for file inspection went to the office 3rice Pio was no available , have not mantained physical record the offfice staff is aware of this got file inspection asked for copies , collected copies as more clarification as the info was not clear pio assistent said will send further info subsiquenty no reply followed for the reply , had also asked for spot inspection as in the application the info provided need to be verified as its not the same , ACCURATE followed with pio for spot inspection , says will lokk into it is busy have drafted my first appeal to file first appeal in the letetr it stated need t do in 30 days of receiving reply how ever its now rti application date was 23/06/17 reply date was 20/7/17 posted on augt 10th received on 18th augt pio hass given ambigious reply hence no clarity can we still file the first appeal now do we have to condone delay file inspection was done on 8/9/17
  2. We bought land bokaro ,jharkhand in 2011. We did registration in government office. We are build our in 2015 suddenly in Aug 2nd 2015 forest department of bokaro demolished boundary and gate without any legal notice. So can I get loss due to such illegal action. And forest department officer will get punishment for this. Sent from my Nexus 5 using RTI INDIA mobile app
  3. Guest

    Pf transfer

    I submitted application form 13 for pf transfer from KUKATPALLY to BOMMASANDRA after getting APPROVAL from both employers and submitted to present EMPLOYER which in turn submitted to BOMMASANDRA sro i applied for rti to BOMMASANDRA sro which gave rti reply they submitted form to KUKATPALLY but when applied rti to KUKATPALLY they replied they didn't get any form and disposed of my rti application.....now what should I do???
  4. Sir, I have applied rti request on 7/10/2017 to Office no-1 online and the query is related to Office no-2 which is divisional office of office No.1. Office no.1 replied me on 10/11/2017 that rti request sent to Office no.2 but no reply received after completing 30 days. Than i preferred first appeal on 23/11/2017 and applied the same to office no 1 online since no online rti option is available for office no 2. Now office no 1 replied on 8/12/2017 that appeal related to office no 2 so apply appeal to appellate authority of office no 2. should i go for offline rti appeal to office no 2 or any other alternative?? Thankyou
  5. Composite building cracked my wall Sent from my A33f using RTI INDIA mobile app
  6. Hello, Good Morning! I have come question related land record. Detail as follow 1, We got the Grama Nathan Patta under UDR scheme. 2, Our records are present in Chitta and Adangal list. It clearly mentioned that land is belong to us. Based on chitta and Adangal report. 3, But In the survey A register record (1848-49), our survey number classified as “Contonment Poramboku" in A register year of 1848-49. 4, Based on the A register record government authority (Tahsildar and VAO) issue a evict notice to us. 5, The question here is, does A register will not be get update from government authority. Based on chitta and Adangal reference? 6, RDO/some offical authority have rights to change the "A" register based on the chitta and Adangal record? 7, On what time frame period "A" register will update and on what base ? 8, Are we suppose to get the latest "A" register record and village map from government? 9, Where we suppose to get those detail, does in local official office or some centralised record session of TN gov. 10, please help on this with necessary inputs, it really help us to proceed further. Thanks Abdul Sent from my Moto G (4) using RTI INDIA mobile app
  7. May I know that if I want to get some details of a restaurant than where I m supposed to file an rti and what things rti cover like if I want to know any details of a restaurant employee regarding cl,pl,epf, salary,attandance and all Sent from my YU5510A using RTI INDIA mobile app
  8. I am working as a Accountant in Haryana Govt Police department. Will u plz guide which type of information should not open in rti Sent from my S6 using RTI INDIA mobile app
  9. Sir /madam in our village some unqualified persons are running tution classes in the name of IIT & MEDICAL foundation classes.. are there any prescribed rules and regulations for such tution classes . Help me to get such details about them through RTI Sent from my Moto E (4) Plus using RTI INDIA mobile app
  10. Guest

    Excess water bill

    In Dec 2016 my water connection was disconnected due to non payment of bills from 5 years. Since the landlord renovated the area near my water meter, during renovating he buried my meter. So it was buried for about 5years. After the payment of the dues the water connection was restored by the water department. I had cleared all dues up-to Feb 2017. During restoration they installed the old meter which they claimed they had tested. Now till 9months I visited the water department every month for the water bill. They said tht they Hav nt yet generated it. After 9 months they gave us a bill of 15000 Rs. On enquiring they said that the meter was not operational. For which I asked why were we nt informed so they had no answer. They insisted that the bill which is generated Hav to b paid. I agreed to that and also gave them a letter to install a new meter. But it has been 1 month and still no one has come to replace it. I really don't know wht to do. Sent from my X9009 using RTI INDIA mobile app
  11. Sir I need court case documents 1992 year. Case is completely at 1993 year. Now can I apply for Court under rti Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using RTI INDIA mobile app
  12. subhendu pattanayak

    Enquiry Report of police officer

    A police officer has submitted an enquiry Report before Executive Magistrate which states that some people have encroached some portion of a village road and some portion of a disputed private plot by constructing a permanent structure.The owner of private plot also filed a petition before EM seeking initiation of U/S144 cr.pc on his land.But nobody applied for demarcation of disputed private plot.Accordingly, the EM then started proceedings under 144 crpc and called for reports from local police and concerned R.I. No such report was submitted by R.I before Executive. Magistrate. Now E.M is going for eviction of disputed structure.So, I obtained the certified copy of criminal miscase no.------ in which only a police enquiry Report is attached.There is no R.I. report and we know that police is not the competent authority to submit any report on encroachment without help of R.I. or Amin of revenue department. So I filed RTI seeking certified copy of R.I report from Tahasil office.The PIO. replied as below: ''Perused your application and information sought for your application considers no merit in view of orders passed by Hon'ble information commissioner, Odisha, Bhubaneswar on 24th May 2013 in 2nd appeal case number 668/2012.'' I downloaded this SIC decision which reveals that SIC has never prohibited any public authority to supply CC of R.I. report to any applicant.So, the information provided by PIO is not only misleading but also illegal and improper.PIO cannot misinterpret any SIC decision indiscriminately and deny information. Then I filed 1st appeal before Tahasildar cum FAA. All ready 3 months passed but no response from FAA. Shall I go for a 2nd appeal and wait for years or reconstruct a fresh RTI? I want the information that would reveal that actually no demarcation is conducted by Tahasildar and eviction is arbitrary with vested interest. Sent from my SM-J200G using RTI INDIA mobile app
  13. I have filed an RTI in 3/8/17 to get a registered copy of my Biochemsitry answer sheet. The department refused to give me the information. I filed a first appeal to FAA and he didn't showed up on the date he gave me for the resolution. Now I don't know whom to and how to file second appeal. The address or state information commission of MP is also not available.
  14. Can i file a rti if I want to know what necessary action had been taken to execute the NBW Sent from my SM-J730GM using RTI INDIA mobile app
  15. I have a matrimonial issue in the court,i just want to know the status of my case and want to know whether my wife has submitted a petition in the same court,i have the registration numbers as said by the advocate,can i File an RTI to know the Status of my case and how should i do it online,kindly furnish Details Sent from my MI MAX using RTI INDIA mobile app
  16. Delhi HC to CIC: Impose Fine as Per Law, Token Penalty for Delay Not Valid Vinita Deshmukh 18 May 2017 1 Extract: "Can a Central Information Commissioner impose a penalty as per his whims and fancies? Early this week, the Delhi High Court slapped a show cause notice on the Central Information Commission (CIC), seeking an explanation for arbitrarily imposing a Rs5,000 penalty on a Public Information Officer (PIO) instead of going by Section 20 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The court stated, “Section 20 (of the RTI Act) mandates a penalty of Rs250 for each day’s delay subject to a maximum of Rs25,000…there is no concept of token penalty…once the explanation rendered by respondent is rejected, the CIC was obliged to impose the penalty in terms of Section 20.” The court has issued a notice to the CIC and the CPIO to respond by 22nd September. The petitioner, Dinesh Pandey, referred to the Supreme Court decision in the case of Union of India Vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors, where the apex court, while dealing with the concept of levy of mandatory penalty provided under Central Excise Act, 1944, has held that “when the statutory provision provides for mandatory penalty, the authorities cannot impose lesser penalty when no discretion is available on quantum of penalty under the said statutory provisions”. The petitioner also referred to two other decisions, of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana and High Court of Himachal Pradesh, which observed, “We find no provision in the Act which empowers the Commission to either reduce or enhance this penalty. If the Commission comes to the conclusion that there are reasonable grounds for delay and that the Public Information Officer (PIO) concerned has satisfactorily explained the delay then no penalty can be imposed. However once the Commission come to the conclusion that the penalty has to be imposed then the same must be @ Rs250 per day and not at any other rate at the whims and fancy of the Commission...” READ ENTIRE ARTICLE: http://HTTP://WWW.MONEYLIFE.IN/ARTICLE/DELHI-HC-TO-CIC-IMPOSE-FINE-AS-PER-LAW-TOKEN-PENALTY-FOR-DELAY-NOT-VALID/50540.HTML
  17. Central Information Commission Decision No. 287/IC(A)/2006 F. No. CIC/MA/A/2006/00417 Dated, the 20th September, 2006 Name of the Appellant: Sh. A.J. Gedam, “Jagannathshree”, 13-A, Vanjarinagar, P.O. Ajni, Nagpur – 440 003. Name of the public Authority: State Bank of Hyderabad, Regional Office, Rachna Sansad, 1st floor, 278 S.G. Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025. DECISION Facts of the case: The appellant, an employee of the Bank, had sought information relating to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against another lady officer, and the complaint filed by her against the appellant. The CPIO refused to furnish the information on the ground that information sought relate to another person, the disclosure of which is not in public interest. Hence, exempt u/s 8(1) (j) of the Act. The appellate authority upheld the decision of the CPIO. Since there is no overriding public interest in disclosure of information sought, the denial of information by the CPIO u/s 8(1) (j) is justified. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (Prof M. M. Ansari) Information Commissioner Download the decision from download segment.
  18. Rajesh pandurang thakur

    Complaint letter missing

    As I have filed complaint in govt department on 30.01.2018 i visited concern office yesterday the entry of my complaint display they gave me inward no. But my complaint letter was missing. How can I find out my complaint letter. Does i have to provide them duplicate copy as this has happened third time. As per i think I have to file RTI. Please suggest you experts and also provide me few v point on RTI. Thanks in advance. Sent from my SM-G7102 using RTI INDIA mobile app
  19. I wish to know, How to file RTI to information about OBC Non Creamy Layer. As per OM, for children of class iii/class c state government officer income test is not applicable. But OBC issuing authority/SDM of our state is not aware of this and rejects our application. So i filled an RTI to get information about same, but got reply as queries/clarification does not come under RTI act. So how do i file an RTI to know applicability of INCOME TEST for CLASS C officer. Please reply..........
  20. Dear sir Please 1 year old rti file no information my department Sent from my A37fw using RTI INDIA mobile app
  21. The scholarships of 18 students transaction failed by the public finance management system of session 2015-16 .what to do so that our transaction could be done once again successfully ..unlike the previous time Sent from my ASUS_Z010D using RTI INDIA mobile app
  22. ashakantasharma

    Right to Information - International Positions

    Right to Information - International Positions Right to Information (hereinafter read as RTI) which is the cynosure of this discourse is not something new. In fact there is a long history at international level towards the attainment of this right and mobilization of the masses for achieving it. With development of human ideals and establishment of democratic governments in most of the civilized countries, this topic came to the fore. The United States and Sweden constitute the two main models for Freedom of Information. While the Swedish law is a precedent to the American one by 200 years, both are considered important legal precedents that helped shape other Freedom of Information (hereinafter read as FOI) laws around the world. i) Sweden Sweden is a constitutional monarchy, with a king or queen as the head of state (the King or Queen who occupies the throne of Sweden in accordance with the Act of Succession shall be the Head of State). But like in most liberal democracies, the royal head of state has no real political power. The Swedish system is unique because of a high degree of institutional autonomy underlying power dispersal to various levels of government. The Swedish system is known for ―its ideology of local government, which basically means that local governments enjoy a great deal of autonomy, limited only by the legislative powers of its national counterpart. The father of the Swedish Freedom of Information Act (hereinafter read as FOIA), Chydenius, was a member of the Captions party who introduced freedom of information as a means of ―promoting social reforms and opposing the supremacy of the nobility.‖ Chynedius was inspired by John Locke among other political philosophers during that era (which is known in Sweden as ―the age of Liberty).‖ John Locke saw ―the supreme power of the State residing in a legislature and behind the legislature in the people. The people would govern, but ―they were not the government.‖ Chydenius considered the introduction of the right to access for citizens as his greatest lifetime achievement. The Swedish parliament passed the legislation in 1766, and established the world‘s first parliamentary Ombudsman (the word itself is Swedish for delegate and has been imported directly into the English language). Birkinshaw observes that ―a very large degree of Swedish public administration is depoliticized in so far as many, sometimes important, decisions are not taken by political overlords.‖ The principle of openness ―Offentlighetsgrundsatsen‖ (in Swedish public sector) has been long enshrined in Swedish politics. The major underlying incentive for adopting the FOIA in Sweden, was ―an information-starved political opposition that was given a rare chance to pass legislation that would grant them and all citizens access to government-held documents and information‖. The introduction to the Swedish Constitution describes a time of great change: ―the death of Carl XII in 1718 brought to an end not only Sweden‘s great power status but autocratic rule as well. The pendulum now swung back in the other direction. A new form of government took shape, which became significantly known as the Age of Liberty government‖ Swedish FOI system is found in the Swedish Constitution (in the basic principles of the form of government): ―All public power in Sweden proceeds from the people. Swedish democracy is founded on the free formation of opinion and on universal and equal suffrage. It shall be realized through a representative and parliamentary polity and through local self government. Public power shall be exercised under the law.‖ This premise resulted in four fundamental laws found in the Swedish Constitution. One of these laws is the ―Instrument of Government and the Freedom of the Press Act,‖ which specifically provides for freedom of information and the right of citizen‘s access. Chapter 2, Article 1 of ‗the Instrument of Government‘ guarantees that all citizens have the right of: ―freedom of information: that is, the freedom to procure and receive information and otherwise acquaint oneself with the utterances of others.‖ Specific rules on access are contained in the Freedom of the Press Act, which was first adopted in 1766. The current version was adopted in 1949 and amended in 1976. Sweden was the first to enforce the policy of openness in administration. There all governmental information is public unless certain matters are specifically listed as exemptions from the general rule. They have provided for a system of appeal against the wrongful withholding of information by public officials, as long ago as 1766. It provided constitutional safeguards under Freedom of Press Act, 1766, the oldest and probably still the most liberal of its kind in the world. It has been revised and modernized a number of times, most recently in 1978. Sweden has proved that legitimate national interests can as well be safeguarded under conditions of administrative openness. Sweden has established cultures that access to government department and documents as a right and non-access an exception. The principle gives any one, actually even aliens, the right to turn to a State or municipal agencies and ask to be shown any document kept in their files, regardless of whether the document concerns him personally or not. Officials are legally required to comply and even to supply copies of the document requested if this is feasible. In Sweden and other Scandinavian countries documents dealing with national security, foreign policy and foreign affairs can be withheld from public scrutiny but the government is bound to give a written statement quoting legal authority for withholding the document ii) United States of America The US constitutional fathers created the three arms of government legislative (Congress), executive (President) and judiciary (the Courts); the separation of powers accounts for a system of checks and balances. At the heart of the US political system is the concept of the ‗balance of power.‘ According to some sources, the US is indeed an important role model for FOI worldwide. Lidberg (2006) notes that, ―the US FOI model grew out of a global move towards more open government following World War II.‖ America and democracy are generally synonymous. America apparently proclaims it to the torchbearer of the plethora of democratic rights that ought to be the part of a true democratic framework. The same applies on the dispensation of information too. Antipathy towards the inherent secrecy is therefore not a surprising attribute exhibited by the Americans. Schwartz observes, ―Americans firmly believe in the healthy effects of publicity and have a strong antipathy to the inherent secretiveness of government agencies.‖ The Freedom of Information Act, 1966 and The Administrative Procedure Act, 1946 are two main statutes which confer RTI. The Constitution of America does not deal specifically with RTI. However, such right is considered to be corollary of the First Amendment freedoms. A provision of a statute was held to be a restriction on the unfettered exercise of First Amendment Rights and hence was declared invalid by the Supreme Court. Similarly in Stanley v. Georgia it was observed that freedom of speech necessarily protects the right to receive information. In America there are three Acts which upheld the freedom of press and information. (A) Freedom of Information Act was made in 1966, which was amended in 1974 to make it more effective, (B) The Privacy Act, 1974 protected individual privacy against the misuse of federal records while granting access to records concerning them which are maintained by federal agencies and (C) The Government in the Sunshine Act, 1976 provided that meetings of government agencies shall be open to the public. The US Supreme Court has recognized the right to know more than fifty years ago. The right to freedom of speech and press has broad scope. This freedom embraces the right to distribute literature and necessarily protects the right to receive it." First Amendment contains no specific guarantee of access to publications. The basis of right to know is the freedom of speech, which is protected under Bill of Rights. The policy behind the Freedom of Information Act is to make disclosure a general rule and not the exception, to provide equal rights of access to all individuals, to place burden on the government to justify the withholding of a document, not on the person who requests it, to provide right to seek injunctive relief in the court if individuals are denied access improperly. Right to know is the cornerstone of citizen participation. Under the Information Act any person, nor merely an affected individual or group, is eligible to ask for information because what is aimed at is not merely redressal of grievances but encouragement of an informed citizenry. The 1966 Freedom of Information Act requires executive branch agencies and independent commissions to make available to citizens, upon request, all documents and record except those, which fall into the following exempt categories: 1. Secret national security or foreign policy information. 2. Internal personnel practices. 3. Information exempted by law. 4. Trade secrets or other confidential commercial or financial information. 5. Inter agency or intra-agency memos. 6. Personal information, personnel or medical files. 7. Law enforcement investigatory information. 8. Information related to reports on financial institutions. 9. Geological and geophysical information. But there are major problems. They are: Bureaucratic delay and cost of bringing suit to force disclosure, and excessive charges levied by the agencies for finding and providing the requested information. To meet these problems, Act was amended in 1974. Main provision of amendment is allowing federal judge to review a decision of the government to classify certain material. Another provision set deadlines for the agency to respond to a request for information under the law. Another amendment permitted judges to order payment of attorney's fees and court costs for plaintiffs who won suits brought for information under the act. Other Countries like Mexico, Peru, Thailand, Australia, Canada, Uganda, the United Kingdom,261 New Zealand and South Africa have also enacted similar legislations to enforce a measure of accountability and transparency on the agencies of the State. To say in the spirit of a democratic world order, it is necessary that each one of us everywhere on this earth under the Sun has a right to know and a duty to shape the course of things, on a national also as on international level. The philosophy of freedom of information and open government has been well described by the U.S. House Committee on Government Operations, which approved the Feedom of Information Act, in 1966, "A democratic society requires an informed, intelligent electorate, and the intelligence of the electorate varies as the quantity and quality of its information varies. A danger signal to our democratic society in the United States is the fact that such a truism needs repeating....". The root truth is that freedom without information is meaningless and liberty without light will perish because "all governments are obscure and invisible." There is a burden on the government to justify secrecy. Failure on this front is bound to spell dangerous consequences. In a democracy, citizens' right to know is assumed rather than guaranteed. This right is derived from the accountability and answerability of the government to the people. In the period of analysis immediately after the war, he US and several other members of the newly formed United Nations concluded that too much secrecy in too many countries had provided fertile soil for conflict. The case of the US displays is a struggle of maintaining the principle and practice access to public records. One expert on US FOIA explains why this is a struggle, the legacy acquired from the British Empire is for bureaucracies to be secretive; since those times knowledge and information meant power; and trading information was ―power trading‖ among bureaucratic agencies. Today, standards should allow for power sharing. Everyone, everywhere has the right to know. In the 1970s in the US, the Department of Defense showed high compliance to FOIA because the military were used to obeying legal orders. Whereas, the Department of Agriculture struggled with the newly adopted practice of power sharing and exercised high levels of secrecy; the bureaucrats were simply not used to openness.‖ In addition, Court records and legislative materials have been open to the public for a long time. In 1946, Congress enacted the Administrative Procedures Act. It required ―that government bodies publish information about their structures, powers and procedures and make available all final opinions or orders in the adjudication of cases (except those required for good cause to be held confidential and not cited as precedents) and all rules.‖ During the 1950‘s both Congress and media groups started to advocate for a more wideranging and assertive law. The first effective attempt for a FOIA came in 1958 in the form of an amendment to the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act, which made it mandatory for government agencies to ―keep and maintain records.‖ FOIA forced agency compliance and required that proof of justification be given when denying access to records. Following a long period of hearings based on the 1958 amendment the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was enacted in 1966 and went into effect in 1967. The US FOIA is inspired from and based on the First Amendment of the Constitution. Before 1966, statutes had existed but only allowing the public ―access to government documents if a need to know was established,‖ this also allowed agencies the prerogative to hold withhold information for a good cause. A comprehensive ―Citizens Guide to FOIA‖ published in 1966 points out the paradigm and practice shift that the enactment of this legislation caused; ―the need to know has been replaced by the right to know.‖ Thomas Susman served as Chief Counsel and General Counsel to the Antitrust and Administrative Practice Subcommittees and to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Susman was the principal Senate staff lawyer responsible for development of the 1974 Freedom of Information Act Amendments. He explains that ―prior to 1974 FOIA was ineffective and in fact the real road to change in US government transparency began with the 1974 amendments. In the 1966 version the ability to obtain court reviews was difficult for example.‖ Susman noted that ―the 1974 amendments responded to the failures in the 1966 FOIA but placing fee restrictions for instance.‖ The original 1966 Act only allowed occasional disclosure while after 1974 Americans enjoyed broader maximum disclosure. All information available today was made available because of the successful lawsuits that employed the 1974 Act. FOIA became a long term strategy for advocates, industries, businesses, lawyers, journalists, NGOs and citizens to participate in government processes. The Act was amended most recently in 1996 by the Electronic Freedom of Information Act (which allows any person or organization, regardless of citizenship or country of origin, to ask for records held by federal government agencies). The Act‘s objective is ―to provide public access to an agency‘s records.‖ The applicant does not have to demonstrate a specific interest in a matter to view relevant documents – an idle curiosity suffices. Agencies covered within the Act include ―executive and military departments, government corporations and other entities which perform government functions except for Congress, the courts or the President‘s immediate staff at the White House, including the National Security Council.‖Each agency or public body that is included within the FOIA has to publish in the ‗Federal Register‘ the details of its organization as well as the rules and policies of its procedures. There are nine categories of discretionary exemptions: ―national security, internal agency rules, information protected by other statutes, business information, inter and intra-agency memos, personal privacy, law enforcement records, financial institutions and oil wells data.‖ The US FOIA is similar to the Swedish FOIA in that it emphasizes that ―the request for documents should have priorities; that real avenues for citizen appeals should exist, and that legally binding rulings would ensure repercussions for the public servants that refuse to comply.‖ It differs from the Swedish FOIA because freedom of information in the United States is not a constitutional concept. Moreover, the cost of processing a request and photocopying documents is much higher in the US. Appeals of denials or complaints about extensive delays can be made internally to the agency concerned. The federal courts review appeals and can overturn agency decisions. The courts have heard thousands of cases in the 40 years of the Act. Alongside, FOIA the Sunshine Act (also known as an ‗open meeting‘ law) allows―access to the meeting of those agencies within its scope. Its aim is to open up to the public portions of the ‗deliberative processes‘ of certain agencies.‖ A week‘s notice is required of the time, date, topic and location of the meeting. In addition, ―a named official with a publicized telephone number must be appointed to answer queries.‖ The US FOIA mode of management is characterized by decentralization; The US Justice Department (DOJ) provides some guidance and training for agencies and represents the agencies in most court cases. The 1996 E-FOIA amendments require agencies to create electronic reading rooms and make available electronically the information that must be published along with common documents requested. In 2000, the U.S. federal government received more than two million FOIA requests from citizens, corporations, and foreigners.According to Banisar‘s 2006 survey, the American FOIA ―has been hampered further delay. Many international organizations and regional groups recognized this right to be part of their systems. Swedish Freedom of Information Law (a literal translation of the native term indicates the Freedom of Printing Act) passed in the year 1766 is considered to be the oldest and earliest legislative recognition of RTI. This law was passed by Sweden. A large number of countries have followed the same line and have enacted access laws after it. For example, Finland in 1950, Denmark in 1950, Norway in 1970, and United States of America in 1966 enacted such laws in order to facilitate information access. Before discussing the various international instruments, let us first analyse the status of RTI in the two most developed democracies of the world U.S.A and England. iii) Position in England Democracy has been the basic tenet of England since ages but ‗secrecy‘ is emphasised rather than openness. This is due to the innate tendency of legislature and executive to enshroud policies instead of making it transparent. England has enacted Freedom of Information Act, 2005. But basically, the present law is contained in the Official Secrets Acts of 1911, 1920, 1939. Judiciary in England has approved of openness in Government. The same is reflected in the decision of House of Lords where it established its jurisdiction to order the disclosure of any document. However, it was also emphasized that balance between conflicting interests of secrecy and publicity should be maintained. Importance of freedom of expression in English law can be ascertained by the observation of Lord Steyn in a case which goes as following: ―Freedom of speech is the lifeblood of democracy. The free flow of information and ideas informs political debate. It is a safety valve; people are more ready to accept decisions that go against them if they can in principle seek to influence them. It acts as a brake on the abuse of power by public officials. It facilitates the exposure of errors in the governance and administration of justice of the country….‖ In Britain, the campaign for reduction of secrecy was going on. They have rule for non-disclosure of sensitive information for about thirty years. When 1957 documents were released, they showed that Prime Minister Harold Macmillan had ordered suppression of information on the Wind scale nuclear accident. It was a startling revelation because it was the worst known nuclear disaster before Chernobyl. But the nation came to know only after thirty years. Under their Official Secret Act some documents could even be blocked for a hundred years. Even in America the tendency is to increase the items under the list of exemptions to freedom of information. When some documents were released under the Act revealed that FBI and CIA illegally harassed Dr Martin Luther King Jr. and several other things like illegal surveillance of dozens of writers and political groups for over a period of 30 years. In 2000, the Freedom of Information Act came into existence. Australians are amongst the world's most avid media consumers and there is legislation protecting their rights of access to Federal Government documents of interest to them. In December 1982, Australia enacted Freedom of Information legislation, which gives its citizens and persons entitled to permanent resident status in Australia a free access to various Federal Government Records. Main features of this Act are the creation of public right of access to documents, the right to amend or update incorrect government records, the right of appeal against administrative decisions barring access and the waiving of any need to establish interest before being granted access to documents. iv) Public Charter of Official Documents in Finland Finland has a law on the Public Charter of Official Documents in 1951. Norway and Denmark have also statutorised public access to official information sources. Canada and Australia also made useful legislation on this subject. A French Commission on Access to Administrative Documents has been formulated. French Constitution recognizes the free communication of thoughts and opinions as among the most precious rights of man. v) Open Democracy Bill in South Africa The South African Law on this right is a unique example of principle of open governance. The South African Open Democracy Bill provides for public access as "swiftly inexpensively and effortlessly and reasonably possible to information held by governmental and bodies without jeopardising good governance, personal privacy and commercial confidentiality. It also empowers the public to effectively scrutinise and participate in governmental decision making that affects them. It also provided a mechanism to correct the inaccurate information possessed by the government about them and protects individuals against abuse of information about themselves held by the government or private bodies. Canada made Access to Information Act, 1980, and New Zealand enacted the Official Information Act, 1982
  23. Reservation system in India has always been in controversies. A majority of citizens of India specially students demand reservation based on financial status of individual. However, Govt has not even processed a single case to resolve this issue. I want to know that what kind of hurdles are there in changing reservation system in India. Is it really impossible or just a Vote Bank for political parties ??? Sent from my SM-G925F using RTI INDIA mobile app
  24. The RTI query, sent to the Ministry of Finance, sought details on individual exposure of various PSBs to corporate borrowers. The questions that were asked in the RTI query sought information on the loans given to the Reliance Industries, Adani Group, GVK Group, GMR and Jaypee Group. The RTI was first directed to the Finance Ministry, which then forwarded the RTI request to various banks asking them to provide the information. The RTI had questions on the money loaned to big industrial houses by government-run banks. However, all public sector banks except Andhra Bank and Allahabad Bank have refused to divulge information citing either the 'personal nature' of questions or how they don't fit under the provisions of the RTI Act. In their reply to the RTI query, the banks have said that the information available with banks under "fiduciary relationship" is exempted from disclosure. Read about: Fiduciary Relationship under RTI While Andhra Bank and Allahabad Bank have disclosed the loans given to big corporates, all other lenders refused to do so. Banks which did not disclose any detail in their reply to the RTI query include State Bank of India (SBI), Bank of Maharashtra, Corporation Bank, Indian Bank, Canara Bank, UCO Bank, Indian Overseas Bank, Central Bank of India, Bank of India and Syndicate Bank. Earlier this month, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley informed the Rajya Sabha that loans worth Rs 81,683 crore were written-off by public sector banks (PSBs) in 2016-17. Country's largest public sector lender, the SBI, said, "The information sought by you under point number three to eight is the third party personal information held by the bank in a fiduciary capacity, the disclosure of which is not warranted for any larger public interest and as such is exempted from disclosure."
  25. Whether an application made under RTI through e-mail is valid or not?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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