Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'rti rules'.

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 Act


  • News


  • Quotes


  • RTI Videos


  • 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 12 results

  1. New Delhi: The registrars of the Supreme Court and high courts and the state governments have been asked by the Centre to harmonise rules to ensure uniformity in fee charged by them under Right to Information (RTI) Act.The move assumes significance as various public authorities, especially in the states, charge different fees for providing information under the transparency law.Read more at: Harmonise RTI rules on fee charged: Centre to SC, HCs, states | Zee News
  2. [caption id=attachment_2102" align="alignright" width="210] Mansukhlal Ruparelia[/caption] By M.V.Ruparelia via email: This is the extract of the correspondence sent to Shri V. Narayanasamy, Hon Minister of State, Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pension, with a request for Up-dation of Central Information Commission (Appeal Procedure), 2012- GSR 603(E) dt 31-7-12 & other important Procedure Orders. We are very much thankful to Ministry of Personnel for expanding and elaborating the scope of Suo Motu Disclosures under Sec 4 of RTI Act through Secretary`s D.O. no.1/6/2011-IR dt 15-4-13 & 21-11-13. We are also grateful for up-dating Guide on RTI Act, 2005 under no. 1/32/2013-IR dt 28-11-13. We request that Right to Information Rules, 2012 notified under GSR 603 (E) dt 31-7-12 in Gazette of India may also be updated very early, as Citizens are facing various difficulties in dealing with CIC, as brought out in our representation dt 12-7-13 to you, Our Representation dt 21-5-12 to President of India and other representations dt 30-8-12, 5-9-12 etc. The difficulties caused in following respects of existing Rules, 2012 dt 31-7-12 are again brought out for early action:- Rule 3: Application Fee: Though Fee is prescribed for Application only under sub-section (1) of Sec 6, Fee for Complaints under Sec 18 is being asked by CPIO of CIC and States. (e.g. CIC`s no.CIC/CPIO/Misc/2013/153690 dt 31-7-13). Kindly, amplify and clarify this Rule for Fee for Complaints. Rule 6: Mode of Payment of Fee: Provision for payment of fee through nominated Post Offices under Role of Department of Post Offices as per instructions from Prime Minister are not included in this Rule. CPIO of CIC is rejecting applications sent through nominated post offices with Fee paid to Post Office. (e.g. CIC/CPIO/2011/1953 DT 2-11-11). Rule 7:Appointment of Secretary: No duties of Secretary and other Registrars are laid down. After declaring RTI-CIC (Management Regulations), 2007 dt 13-6-07 by Court as null & void, it is necessary to incorporate such Management Regulation Rules in this. Rule 10: Process of Appeal: 3(b): In cases of IInd Appeals, where AA has not passed orders, CIC asks AA to give orders and asks Appellant to send IInd Appeal afresh, if not satisfied with AA`s orders instead of calling AA for hearing and/or dealing with same IInd Appeal papers, resulting in unnecessary expenses to Appellants of getting 4 copies of large number of papers typed/zeroxed etc, 2 copies for CIC, 1 for CPIO & 1 for AA! Rule 11: Procedure for deciding Appeals: In many cases, ICs do not examine papers submitted by Appellants in IInd Appeals and Rejoinders and do not give opportunity to be heard to Appellants through phone and give Speaking Orders based on information given by ACPIO/Representatives of PA during hearing. This can be verified by DOPT by simple reading of CIC`s decisions in their Web Site. Rule must be amplified to lay down that IC/CIC must discuss view points of both parties in detail in Speaking Orders invariably and give reasons for arriving at his conclusion. It must also be laid down to indicate whether rejoinder was received and examined. We have given examples of several cases in which papers were not examined in our previous representations and can give still more examples of careless dealings without keeping in view even rules of Natural Justice, if required! Rule 12(2): Presence of Appellant: In many cases, Video Conferencing Centres are also 20-25 miles away and it is not physically possible for disabled/handicapped citizens and Senior Citizens of 75+ to go to such Centres. Many IC/CIC are permitting Phone Representation but some do not give this facility and do not record reasons in Speaking Orders for denying this. They are in hurry to close the cases!! Proper provision of giving opportunity to be heard on phone in deserving cases may please be provided. Many a times, 7 days clear notice for Hearing does not reach to the Appellant. If he speaks on phone or sends E/Mail for giving opportunity to be heard on phone, it should be recorded by Registrar on file and also mentioned in Speaking Orders, if rejected. Not only, Applications/Appeals sent by E/Mail are not dealt with without hard copy and that may be rightly but all communications through E/Mails are ignored, which is not correct. Rule 15: Orders of the Commission: Orders are treated as final, even if completely defective and without examining view point of Appellant as given in IInd Appeal & Rejoinders and no Review Petition lies and Appellant is asked to go to High Court for reviewing incorrect and against Natural Justice Speaking Orders!! Proper Review Petitions must be provided in these Rules. No replies are given to representations to CIC for such defective Speaking Orders in terms of para 66 & 67 of Office Manual. Large number of cases can be produced before your Ministry, if required, though some are already reported. As per Notification no.CIC/Legal/2007/006 dt 13-2-08 and minutes of meeting held by CIC on 13-12-11, it was notified for the information of general public that the Appeals and Complaints filed by senior citizens shall be taken up by the Commission on priority basis and norms & procedure for according priority to Appellants in Hearing Appeals/Complaints filed before the Commission were decided in minutes dt 13-12-11. Appeals/Complaints from senior citizens and differently abled persons were to be put up to the Bench of the Commission where such cases are registered. According to me this is not being done for last 5 years and not a single case of senior citizen is given any preference, inspite of showing by Appellants on top of each Appeal/Complaint that preference is to be given in terms of CIC orders and age is indicated and proof of age is given. I also feel that wrong information is being given by your Ministry to MPs for Parliamentary Questions that preference is being given, when there is not a single case of preference given for last 5 years and no record is maintained for this. This is serious and may be looked into for laying down proper instructions. On cancellation of RTI-CIC (Management Regulations), 2007 by Court, it is necessary that various Rules in those Regulations are brought in these Rules, 2012. According to Rule 4(xv) of cancelled notification, Registrars were responsible to ensure compliance of decisions of IC/CIC. This responsibility is now refused by Registrars. Examples can be produced, if required. Proper provision may please be made in these Rules. As per Rule 15-Personal Presence of Appellant, if Appellant is prevented from being heard, second opportunity is to be given before final decision is given. This is not followed. Many examples can be produced. Proper detailed provision for this may be made in these Rules. As per Rule 23 (2)-Finality of Decision, Special Review Appeal is laid down. On cancellation of entire Regulations from legal point of view by Court, this opportunity of Review petition is denied in each case!! This is too much!! Many examples have been brought to your Ministry`s notice and still more can be produced. Proper provision may please be made in these Rules for review. Suggestions on improvement of Right to Information Rules As the main Aim of RTI Act is to promote transparency & accountability in the working of all Public Authority and streamlining their working, please provide proper guidelines in these Rules that CPIO & AAs will ensure that all lacunas came or brought to their notice through dealing with Applications & Appeals are set right by bringing to the notice of concerned competent authorities of their organizations. Examples: All prescribed columns are not filled in Status Position of Letters, Appeals, Complaints etc in CIC Web Site. Date given by Citizens for their letters, appeals etc are not shown, resulting in difficulties to locate. Appeals & Complaints are not admitted and shown in Status Position for months together. Non-compliance cases are not chased even after 10-15 reminders. No preference is given to Appeals & representations of Senior Citizens. Large number of letters, appeals, complaints sent by registered posts are not recorded/shown in status Position with dates given by citizens. We shall be grateful, if these important aspects are got examined and remedial action taken, giving reply to us in terms of Para 66-67 of Office Manual. Opinion and Suggestion by M.V.Ruparelia Discussions over forum: Feedback required on RTI Rules Amendment: http://rti.cc/3c Proposed amendments to RTI Rules of Central Govt: http://rti.cc/3d
  3. Dear Team 1. I have filed an RTI with the Department of Urban Local Bodies on 19 Sep 2013. 2. The same RTI was transferred under section 5(4)(5) by the PIO of Department of Urban Local Bodies to the PIO of Municipal Council, Rewari. 3. I am reading a previous post of J.P Sir (26 May 2010 at 11.40am) :- Applicants are facing a situation when PIO transfers application to other PIO within the same public authority and advises applicant to collect the same from that PIO. Under these circumstances, while filing first appeal following paragraphs should be quoted. A] As per sub sections 4 and 5 of section 5 of RTI Act PIO to whom application is submitted is duty bound to collect information from any source within the public authority and to supply to the applicant. Transfer of RTI application within public authority is against provisions of RTI Act. B] PIO has also violated directives issued by Government of India Department of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi as contained in its notification No.1/14/2008-IR dated 28-07-08, which deals with transfer of applications. C] CIC has been quoted as under in judgement pronounced on 02.09.2009 by HIGH COURT OF DELHI in W.P. © 288/2009 CPIO, SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, versus SUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL & ANR [Judges’ assets case] “23. In view of this, the question of transferring an application under Section 6(3) of the Right to Information Act by the CPIO of the Supreme Court cannot arise. It is the duty of the CPIO to obtain the information that is held by or available with the public authority. Each of the sections or department of a public Authority cannot be treated as a separate or distinct public authority. If any information is available with one section or the department, it shall be deemed to be available with the Public Authority as one single entity CPIO cannot take a view contrary to this.” Note: I will not advise filing of first appeal, if you get proper information even when application is wrongly transferred. Above paragraphs can be highlighted only when filing first/second appeal for non-receipt of reply or incomplete reply. 4. Also please find the attached copy where in it is clearly mentioned that :- 2. According to the Act, it is the responsibility of the officer who is designated as the PIO by the public authority to provide information to the applicant or reject the application for any reasons specified in sections 8 and 9 of the Act. The Act enables the PIO to seek assistanc~ of any other officer to enable him to provide information to the information seeker, but it does not give him authority to designate any other officer as PIO and direct him to send reply to the applicant. The import of sub-section (5) of section 5 is that, if the officer whose assistance is sought by the PIa, does not render necessary help to him, the Information Commission may impose penalty on such officer or recommend disciplinary action against him the same way as the Comm Sir, please refer the attached copy of the circular, As per the act, I understand that the PIO can seek assistance of any other officer to enable him to provide information to the information seeker, but it does not give him authority to designate any other officer as PIO and direct him to send reply to the applicant. Then how can he transfer my RTI, please suggest, Copy of the notice is attached. Regards Rajender Soni Notice - Urban Local Bodies.pdf Important judgement.pdf
  4. Many members on this forum have made posts/threads on the issue of: 1. Abnormally high application fees / further fees prescribed by some States / Courts 2. Different modes of payment of fees from state to state It now seems that the Government has finally woken up to these complaints and DoPT has issues a circular to all States and Competent Authorities requesting them to consider harmonising the RTI Rules and Fees with those of the Centre. The full circular is attached to this post. Harmonisation of RTI Rules and Fees.pdf
  5. ssv280_hyd

    RTI Rules

    hello, I was curious after going through various RTI articles and some gazettes on the internet. I realized and was inquisitive to see what are these RTI Rules, but I couldnt' find any relevant information regarding RTI Rules. Would someone help me in downloading the RTI Rules just like the RTI Act download. Thanks.
  6. Atul Patankar

    Listening to complaints 9 to 5

    As reported at timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 25 August, 2009 LUCKNOW: The working of the State Information Commission (SIC) might soon be a `9 to 6' thing. In order to implement the provisions inherently defined under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, UPSIC has come up with Rules-2008 and having well-defined working hours is just one part of it. If these provisions get implemented, commission will have defined vacations as well. More than anything else, it will be helpful for the applicants who rue they never get a timely hearing. The SIC has evolved a set of regulations with a purpose to expedite the functioning of the commission and dispose cases as soon as possible. The regulations have been already uploaded on UPSIC website and await a formal approval from the new chief information commissioner. When contacted Ranjit Singh Pankaj, the new CIC said, "We will look into their implementation." The new regulations specify that applicants will have to be more restrained in voicing their complaints as the SIC will only consider appeals written in dignified language. Besides, the complaints/appeals will have to be completed in all respects. These regulations are already defined in the Act but the motive is to lay stress on them as a set of new regulations is to do with regularising these provisions. If these regulations come into force, even the old cases marked for further hearings will be dealt with in accordance with the new guidelines. The Rules-2008 have also taken into consideration the common complaint that lot of applicants could not make to the hearing as they are not informed on time by the commission. With new regulations being implemented, applicants will have to be informed seven days in advance of the date of hearing. Besides, after coming into force, the rules will make filing of appeal/complaint a bit of `responsible' affair for applicants/complainants. To give commission a proper view into his case, applicant/complainant will have to attach self-attested copies of the applications submitted to the PIO along with the receipt of the fee deposited and of the PIO's order, if any. The `rules' will make the functioning of the commission orderly and timely. The main motive behind formulation of this set of rules is to get exercise checks right at the entry level of the commission. There are many applications seeking information from one or the other government department that come directly to the commission instead of going to the department concerned. If applicants are made to follow the new rules much of this burden on commission's staff will be reduced. The practice of accepting only the right kind of application is already present in other state information commissions. It is a broad-based plan defining the work of commission's officers as well. But it can make a change only when it gets implemented. Source: Listening to complaints 9 to 5 - Lucknow - City - NEWS - The Times of India
  7. slchowdhary

    Section 18

    Recently I read section 18 more carefully. I did not find any clause under which I can complain against a PA for not following section 4 properly. I am particularly concerned with Raj High Court Rules not available either on net or with book sellers. My one complaint to IC was dismissed perfunctorily. When I made one RTI appl to Raj High Court, I was asked to submit it on a prescribed form. But not informed where the form will be available. They also require a fee of Rs 100 in nonjudicial stamps along with a photo. I want a set of rules before I can make a fresh RTI appl or a petition to High court to protest the people unfriendly rules.
  8. As reported by Abhinav Garg, TNN at timesofindia.indiatimes.com on 31 May 2009 NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court thinks any transparency on action taken against errant trial court judges is "an unwarranted invasion of their privacy.'' For it has quelled an attempt to access these details in an application made to it under the Right to Information Act. HC has sought refuge behind its rule 5 (b) of Delhi High Court (RTI rules) to block information as the rule allows it to withhold information on this ground. "A number of complaints against judicial officers have been received in the vigilance branch during the last 10 years and on the basis of that, necessary action has been taken against erring judicial officers. The details of same can't be disclosed as it would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual'' says an RTI reply received from HC. The reply came on an RTI filed by a lawyer who had asked the method by which HC monitors the conduct of trial court judges, along with details of action taken against whom complaints were received pertaining to corruption or misconduct. While HC was quick to acknowledge that it has a vigilance branch for "supervizing and keeping watch on the conduct of trial court judges'' it chose to be non-transparent when asked to elaborate. For instance, the RTI pleas' pointed query on details of 10 oldest complaints still pending against trial court judges was shot down, again on the ground that it would cause "unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual.'' Similarly, when the RTI plea demanded to know the standards on which performance of judges is evaluated, HC promptly outlines these as knowledge of law/procedure, disposal of cases, quality of judgments, efficiency, reputation for honesty etc. But it remained unyielding on disclosing anything more. On being pressed for details like "how many judges have failed to meet the required evaluation consideration'' or "what action is taken against a judge who fails to meet the standard'' HC relied on its special RTI rule to deny information. The most that the court was willing to reveal was that whenever a complaint is received against any judicial officer, it is "laid before chief justice for consideration and orders and necessary action is then taken.'' Source: HC refuses to share info on errant judges - Delhi - Cities - The Times of India
  9. karira

    Himachal govt reduced RTI fee

    As reported in himvani.com on 26 October 2008: HimVani.com :: Voice of Himachal :: News, Travel, Jobs, Property, People, Culture, Issues, Weather, Citizen journalism & RSS Himachal govt reduced RTI fee Himachal govt reduced RTI fee Shimla: In a major victory for activists involved in propagating the Right to Information Act, the Himachal Pradesh government has finally decided to reduce the fee for providing information to applicants under the Act. An official spokesperson said the fee had been reduced from Rs 10 to Rs 2 per page. No fee would be charged from below poverty line families for providing the required information.
  10. As reported in thestatesman.net on 28 September 2008: The Statesman Cabinet approval KOLKATA, Sept 26 : The state Cabinet yesterday approved the amendment to the West Bengal Right To Information Rules 2006. allowing other forms of payment like non-judicial stamp paper, demand draft and postal order to be used in addition to “court fees” amounting to Rs 10 which a person wishing to get information under these rules has to furnish with his application. Mr Sandip Srimani, government counsel informed this to the Division Bench of Mr S S Nijjar, Chief Justice and Mr Justice Sanjib Banerjee of Calcutta High Court today. The Division Bench suggested that the proposal of paying cash of this amount for the application be also considered. The amendment follows a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by Human Rights Law Network seeking that non-judicial stamp paper, demand draft and postal order be taken with such application as fees beside “court fees” which are only available in the court premises .
  11. In a recent order, the CIC hs ruled that any RTI Rules cannot be in direct conflict with the main RTI Act. Applicant asked for the following information from the Delhi High Court: 1. “Who are the class III and class IV employees recruited / employed by the High Court from 1990 to date? 2. Were any advertisements issued for the recruitment of these persons mentioned in Q. 2? 3. Whether any tests / interviews / selections were conducted for these persons mentioned in Q. 2? Period for which information asked for: 1990 to Sept. 2006.” Delhi High Court denied the information citing the following RTI rules formulated by the Delhi High Court: “Rule 4(iv). In so far as decisions which are taken administratively or quasi judicially, information therefore, shall be available only to the affected persons1. 5. Exemption from disclosure of information. The information specified under Section 8 of the Act shall not be disclosed and made available and in particular the following information shall not be disclosed. a. Such information which is not in the public domain or does not relate to judicial functions and duties of the Court and matters incidental and ancillary thereto. First appeal was rejected and applicant approached the CIC with Second Appeal under Sec 19(3). Appellant argued that: a) The rules framed by the Delhi High Court are inconsistent with the RTI Act 2005 and therefore contravene Sec 22 of the RTI Act: Section 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. b) Under Sec 6(1) applicant is not supposed to give any reason for seeking information c) Information can only be denied only under exemptions listed in Sec 8 or 9 d) Therefore RTI Rules framed by the High Court are ultravires of the Act e) Only CIC has the powers under the RTI Act to decide whether information can be disclosed or not Delhi High Court responded: a) The High Court was a constitutional authority while CIC was a statutory authority b) The Chief Justice of the High Court was a competent authority as defined in Sec 2(e)(iii) and therefore empowered to frame rules under the RTI Act ORDER In its order, CIC invoked Sec 19(8)(a) and Sec 25(5) of the RTI Act and ruled that: It is, therefore, clear that rule 4(iv) and 5(a) are inconsistent with the RTI Act and, therefore, the provisions of this Act shall have effect not withstanding the content of the inconsistent rules. and further ordered: 1) The Registrar Delhi High Court will take such steps as may be necessary to provide access to the information sought under sec. 19(a)(i) to appellant Ms Jaiswal in the form in which it had been sought. This will be done within ten working days of the date of receipt of this Decision Notice 2) We find u/s 25(5) of the RI Act, 2005 that the practice of the High Court in relation to providing access to information under this Act in terms of sec. 4(iv) and sec. 5(a) of the Delhi High Court (Right to Information) Rules does not conform expressly with the provisions of the Act. It is recommended to the Delhi High Court, therefore, that such steps may be taken to amend these rules as would make them consistent with the sec. 6 and sec. 7 of the RTI Act. Full decision is attached to this post. WB-23092008-02.pdf
  12. As reported by Punjab Newsline Netwrok on punjabnewsline.com on 14 February 2008: PunjabNewsline.com - Chandigarh Admin amends RTI Rules, 2005 Chandigarh Admin amends RTI Rules, 2005 CHANDIGARH: The Chandigarh Administration has amended the Union Territory, Chandigarh, Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005 which would now be called the Union Territory, Chandigarh, Right of Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) (Amendment) Rules, 2008. Fee of Rupees fifty will be levied on an application for any request for obtaining information. This is already applicable in states of Punjab and Haryana. As per the new amendments, now the Union Territory, Chandigarh, Right to Information (Regulation of Fee and Cost) Rules, 2005, (here-in-after referred to as rules), Rule 3 would be substituted as "Rule 3 – A request for obtaining information under sub-section (1) of Section 6, shall be accompanied by an application fee of rupees fifty by way of cash against proper receipt or by demand draft or bankers cheque or by Indian Postal Order (IPO) payable to the Accounts Officer of the Public Authority". Rule 4 shall be substituted as "Rule 4 – For providing the information under sub-section (1) of Section 7, the fee shall be charged by way of cash against proper receipt or by demand draft or bankers cheque or by Indian Postal Order (IPO) payable to the Accounts officer of the Public Authority at Rupee ten for each page created or copied, actual cost or price for samples or models and for inspection of record, Rs. 20 per 15 minutes or a fraction thereof." Rule 5 will be substituted as "Rule 5 – For providing the information under sub-section (5) of Section 7, the fee shall be charged by way of cash against proper receipt or by demand draft or bankers cheque or Indian Postal Order (IPO) payable to the Accounts Officer of the Public Authority at Rs. 100 per floppy and Rs. 200 per CD and for information provided in printed form, at the price fixed for such publication or rupees ten per page of photocopy for extracts from the publication."
  • Create New...

Important Information

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