- 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 'notings'.
Found 6 results
vkgarg posted a question in Ask for RTI SupportSir, After having not received the reply from PIO of New Delhi Municipal Council New Delhi, with in stipulated period of 35 days I filled a First Appeal with Director Fiananc as per attached first Appeal. On receipt of my 1st appeal Director Fiananc called me for hearing and accordingly I attended the same. During the proceedings PIO told the FAA that they have not received the application. I submitted before FAA that my RTI was duly received. Accordingly FAA told PIO that you put up details and I was told by FAA that reply shall be sent to you. No proceedings note was prepared by FAA and got signed by PIO/Myself. Now a reply has been received by me from PIO and No ID reference is given, further the information contained in reply as asked by me not in order. Therefore should I filled 2nd Appeal with CIC and some suitable drafting for the appeal may be suggested as per my First Appeal and reply received. Thanks
In a recent decision, Central Information Commission directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) to provide certified copy of the Shadow file under RTI. This issue was discussed in the discussions here "Shadow files in Government". As per the Manual of Office Procedure of Government of India: "If the reference seeks an opinion, ruling-or concurrence of the receiving Department and requires detailed examination, such examination will normally be done separately and only the officer responsible for commenting upon the reference will record the final views on the file. This separate examination can be done through routine notes or on what is commonly known as "shadow files"' which are opened subject wise in the receiving department." In the discussion it was raised that "The Main file is available under RTI, but the shadow file is not revealed. Has anybody got the copies of the shadow file under RTI? If one gets to access the shadow file, which generally contains a lot more information than what main file would contain, the level of transparency shall improve..." Shadow file under RTI In this decision of the CIC where the PIO could not find the original file, and in turn produced 'Shadow file' in front of the CIC, a certified true copy of the shadow file was allowed. The decision can be read here!
karira posted a topic in RTI Appeals decisionsCIC has ordered the disclosure of file notings related to the appointment of the chairperson of SBI, since the appointment process is now over. Earlier, CPIO and FAA denied it citing Sec 8(1)(i). Full order is attached to this post. =============== NOTE: Here is the link to the decision: http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_MP_A_2014_000465_M_144849.pdf (sorry, the webpage is not opening now). ORDER 1. The appellant, Shri G Nageswara Reddy, submitted RTI application dated 17 October 2013 before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), Department of Financial services, New Delhi; seeking information regarding the relevant File Notings of the appointment of Smt. Arundhati Bhattacharya as chairman, SBI on 7.10.2013 vide notification F.No:2/5/2013BOI. 2. Vide reply dated 18 November 2013, the CPIO denied the information u/s 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act, 2005 as the information sought for was part of ‘cabinet paper’. Not satisfied with the CPIO’s reply, the appellant preferred an appeal dated 26 November 2013 to the first appellate authority (FAA) stating that as the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) had already decided the matter and the aforesaid decision has already been implemented on 7.10.2013, the cabinet papers could no longer be held back in accordance with the provisions of Section 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act, 2005. Vide order dated 31 December 2013, the FAA, however, upheld CPIO’s decision. 3. Dissatisfied with the response of the public authority, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commission. 4. The matter was heard by the Commission. The appellant was not present during the hearing. The respondent submitted that the appellant vide his RTI application dated 17.10.2013 had sought copy of file notings of the appointment of Smt. Arundhati Bhattacharya as chairman, SBI which was part of the proposal to be placed before the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet which they had denied under the exemption given u/s 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act, 2005. The FAA had also upheld the decision of the CPIO. 5. During the hearing, the respondents stated that the selection process had been concluded and therefore, they will be able to provide the information sought by the appellant. 6. In view of the above, the Commission directs the respondent to furnish the information sought for to the appellant by 31st December 2014 keeping in view the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 & RTI Rules, 2012. The appeal is disposed of. (Manjula Prasher) Information Commissioner Citation: Shri G Nageswara Reddy v. Department of Financial services in Appeal No. CIC/MP/A/2014/000465
Shrawan posted a topic in RTI in MediaFile notings under RTI after debate with section of society: Wajahat Habibullah Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said if the government decides to bring the bill to keep file notings outside the purview of the Right To Information (RTI) Act in the winter session, it will only be after debate with all sections of the society. "The civil society and the government are the decision makers on the Act. The Central Information Commission job is only to implement the Act, ' Habibullah said speaking at an interactive session on Right to Information Amendment Bill, 2006 organised by the NGO CUTS International. He said that all government departments have been directed to make a comprehensive compliance report of Section 4 of the Act dealing with maintaining data and information catalogue of information related to the department and submit it to CIC. The report will be submitted to the Parliament in the forthcoming winter session. Arvind Kejriwal, CEO of Parivartan and 2006 Magsaysay Award winner, said that the amendments do not pertain to file notings only as has been projected in the media. "If the amendments come through, the government will be able to keep the entire country out of the decision-making process. This is because the amendments provide that the departments will not give information on any issue till such time the matter is completed," Kejriwal said. Another important lacuna, he said, was that even after the decision was made, the entire information would not be provided and only file notings related to social and development work will be available. "So, if a citizen wants to know the status of his ration card or passport he would not get any information because this did not pertain to any social or developmental work," Kejriwal said. Also, all matters related to personnel will be out of the purview of RTI. Any information related to examinations process will also not be shown, he said. Pradeep S Mehta, secretary general of CUTS International, urged CIC to take up the role of advocacy given the extremely low public awareness on the usage of the act. [sourse: Business Standerd Aricle published dated 15th Sept 2006]
ganpat1956 posted a topic in RTI in MediaNEW DELHI: The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the President's Secretariat to furnish 'file notings' on its decision to seek Election Commission's opinion on a petition against a Cabinet Minister. A Delhi-based society 'Dr B R Ambedkar Vichar Manch' had filed an application seeking disclosure of file notings relating to a petition against Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Meira Kumar in which she was accused of holding an 'Office of Profit'. The CIC in its order on Wednesday asked the President Secretariat to provide within 10 days the file notings to the Societies' General Secretary R L Kain, who had also sought information on several counts including queries raised by the President on the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Bill of 2006. Denying disclosure of the file notings, Chief Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the President's Secretariat had said "... the Competent Authority has decided not to give the notings until a final view is taken by DoPT on the issue." Rejecting the President's Secretariat's stand to deny disclosure of the file notings, the Commission referred to its full-bench decision of January 29 this year which had brought disclosure of notings under the purview of the RTI Act. "The plea that DoPT has not taken a final view is immaterial in this matter since DoPT itself is a public authority whereas under the provisions of RTI Act the decision of CIC is final." the panel headed by Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah said. Prez Sect to furnish file notings on Election petition: CIC-India-The Times of India '; if (doweshowbellyad==1) bellyad.innerHTML = b2;
ganpat1956 posted a topic in RTI in MediaNew Delhi, March 27: The department of personnel and training (DoPT), which is the government's nodal agency for instructions on the RTI Act, has been "misleading" several government offices with its website saying that file notings do not come under the law's ambit. The Central Information Commission (CIC) has made it clear through its decisions that disclosure of file notings under the RTI Act could be made to information seekers. The issue once again came up before the CIC after the President's secretariat, on an RTI application of one S S Bhamra, denied information pertaining to certain file notings on grounds that the DoPT website specifically talks of non-disclosure of such file notings. "We have earlier advised DoPT to remove this misleading information from their site. We expect them to do so immediately if the result of this inclusion on their site has been to mislead even so august an office as that of the President of India", said Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah in a recent order. Bhamra, an assistant in the President's secretariat, had filed two applications under the act before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the President's secretariat seeking disclosure of certain file notings with regard to its recruitment rules. The CPIO and, thereafter, the appellate authority in the President's secretariat while denying certain parts of the information sought, had said "...The appellant is hereby informed that the DoPT instructions exclude file notings from coming under the purview of information which can be accessed by the individuals." The commission, in an earlier order passed on January 29 this year, had asked DoPT to amend its website by removing its contradictory instructions which stated that the term "information" does not include "file notings". The CIC in its January decision, which came upon a RTI appeal of one Pyare Lal Verma against Ministry of Railways, had instructed DoPT to amend its website within a month. Zee News - DoPT portal "misleads" President`s office on file notings