Showing posts with label RTI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RTI. Show all posts
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Monday, May 9, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
Whistle-blower case: 'It's a classic case of harassment'
CHANDIGARH: A central committee has termed the matter of Haryana's whistle-blower as a classic case of the state government which itself broke the law, protected violators and punished IFS Sanjiv Chaturvedi, who tried to uphold law. In its report of over 100 pages, the committee has suggested ways how honest officers can be protected in the country.
Taking the case of Chaturvedi as an example of harassment, the inquiry committee comprising inspector general of forests AK Srivastava and assistant inspector general of forests Shally Ranjan have recommended long-term actions to be taken by the Union ministry of environment and forests (MoEF).
''To prevent the misuse of powers under Rule 7 of All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, regarding institution of disciplinary proceedings, it should be made mandatory for the state governments to get the chargesheet of major penalties, approved by the central government before serving to the officer concerned. This is judicially established position that the chargesheet for major penalty should be issued only after the approval of appointing authority, which in the case of All India Service officers, is the central government,'' said the committee in its report.
''One of the main reasons for a large number of cases pending in the courts in which government is litigant against its own employees, is that the authorities concerned never decide or pass speaking orders on the representations of the employees. The service rules should be suitably modified to ensure a time-bound decision by the competent authorities on the representations of the employees,'' suggested the committee.
Taking Haryana's case as an example, the panel said, ''The service rules should be suitably modified so that in case of any violation, the erring officials have to pay penalty either in the monetary form or otherwise. This can prevent situations like repeated violations of cadre rules in states like Haryana. Such cases should be brought in the ambit of the central vigilance commission for wholesome treatment and also for deterrence to the erring officers. The state vigilance bureaus should be given more teeth and immunity from the state machinery. The mechanism for the protection of the whistle-blowers should be strengthened at the state level.''
Notably, the strong recommendations came after the panel established that Chaturvedi, who had just joined the state cadre after completing his training was harassed for his attempts to prevent the destruction of a wildlife sanctuary and preventing the misuse or misappropriation of government funds in various plantation projects or schemes including that of developing a herbal park on private land belonging to politically influential persons at the cost of public exchequer. The committee has quoted a letter of the cabinet secretary, dated March 3, 2010, to all chief secretaries clearly reiterating the path which the civil servants must always endeavour to tread. However, the present case portrays a contrary picture, in which instead of showing zero tolerance towards corruption, zero tolerance was shown for integrity, honesty and lawful duty,'' the panel observed.
All powers available with the vested interests in the state government including suspension, issuing chargesheet and keeping it pending for more than three years, frequent transfers, slapping false cases were applied on the officer. Even the orders of central government, Supreme Court-appointed panel (central empowered committee), Central Administrative Tribunal, State Information Commission and even the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) could not deter the powerful vested interests in Haryana from harassing the officer,'' concluded the committee.
Interestingly, its unique case in the country when the President intervened twice; first to revocate illegal suspension of Chaturvedi in 2008 and recently when the first citizen of the country quashed the fabricated chargesheet issued against the whistle-blower. The panel has also highlighted how RTI Act helped the officer in challenging his illegal suspension and fabricated chargesheet before the central government.
Taking the case of Chaturvedi as an example of harassment, the inquiry committee comprising inspector general of forests AK Srivastava and assistant inspector general of forests Shally Ranjan have recommended long-term actions to be taken by the Union ministry of environment and forests (MoEF).
''To prevent the misuse of powers under Rule 7 of All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, regarding institution of disciplinary proceedings, it should be made mandatory for the state governments to get the chargesheet of major penalties, approved by the central government before serving to the officer concerned. This is judicially established position that the chargesheet for major penalty should be issued only after the approval of appointing authority, which in the case of All India Service officers, is the central government,'' said the committee in its report.
''One of the main reasons for a large number of cases pending in the courts in which government is litigant against its own employees, is that the authorities concerned never decide or pass speaking orders on the representations of the employees. The service rules should be suitably modified to ensure a time-bound decision by the competent authorities on the representations of the employees,'' suggested the committee.
Taking Haryana's case as an example, the panel said, ''The service rules should be suitably modified so that in case of any violation, the erring officials have to pay penalty either in the monetary form or otherwise. This can prevent situations like repeated violations of cadre rules in states like Haryana. Such cases should be brought in the ambit of the central vigilance commission for wholesome treatment and also for deterrence to the erring officers. The state vigilance bureaus should be given more teeth and immunity from the state machinery. The mechanism for the protection of the whistle-blowers should be strengthened at the state level.''
Notably, the strong recommendations came after the panel established that Chaturvedi, who had just joined the state cadre after completing his training was harassed for his attempts to prevent the destruction of a wildlife sanctuary and preventing the misuse or misappropriation of government funds in various plantation projects or schemes including that of developing a herbal park on private land belonging to politically influential persons at the cost of public exchequer. The committee has quoted a letter of the cabinet secretary, dated March 3, 2010, to all chief secretaries clearly reiterating the path which the civil servants must always endeavour to tread. However, the present case portrays a contrary picture, in which instead of showing zero tolerance towards corruption, zero tolerance was shown for integrity, honesty and lawful duty,'' the panel observed.
All powers available with the vested interests in the state government including suspension, issuing chargesheet and keeping it pending for more than three years, frequent transfers, slapping false cases were applied on the officer. Even the orders of central government, Supreme Court-appointed panel (central empowered committee), Central Administrative Tribunal, State Information Commission and even the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) could not deter the powerful vested interests in Haryana from harassing the officer,'' concluded the committee.
Interestingly, its unique case in the country when the President intervened twice; first to revocate illegal suspension of Chaturvedi in 2008 and recently when the first citizen of the country quashed the fabricated chargesheet issued against the whistle-blower. The panel has also highlighted how RTI Act helped the officer in challenging his illegal suspension and fabricated chargesheet before the central government.
Courtesy: TOI
Saturday, January 22, 2011
CIC and CSIR
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 308, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New
Delhi-110066
Delhi-110066
File No. CIC/DS/A/2010/000332/LS
APPELLANT Sh. Dharam Raj
PUBLIC AUTHORITY CSIR, M/o Science & Technology
DATE OF HEARING 1.11.2010
DATE OF DECISION 1.11.2010
PUBLIC AUTHORITY CSIR, M/o Science & Technology
DATE OF HEARING 1.11.2010
DATE OF DECISION 1.11.2010
Facts :-
Heard today dated 1.11.2010. Appellant present. CSIR is represented by Dr. D.S. Bedi, PIO and Ms. Valsala Kutty, Consultant, RTI.
2. The matter, in short, is that a fire broke out on 23.7.2009 at the Headquarters of CSIR located at 2, Rafi Marg, New Delhi, in which, unfortunately, three employees lost their lives. The appellant is a Section Officer in CSIR. He had filed an RTI application dated 25.8.2009 seeking information on 16 paras regarding the security system in the CSIR Headquarters and the matters related there-with. The CPIO had responded to it vide letter dated 25.09.2009 wherein information on certain paras was supplied to the appellant but it was held back in respect of certain other paras. On appeal, interestingly, the first Appellate Authority took a totally contrary view and came to the conclusion that the Public Authority was not obliged to provide the requested information. His order is extracted below:-
“I have gone through your original application wherein you have sought information on a number of issues. In this connection, I would like to bring to your notice the judgments of the CIC in the case of Dr. D.V. Rao Vs APIO, Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi and in the case of Shri P.L. Sanyal Vs Sh. Amit Jha, CPIO and Sh. Naved Masood,
Appellate Authority, Deptt. of Agriculture & Cooperation, New Delhi. You will note that the CIC has clearly taken the stand in their cases that “the petitioner’s entitlement to information is only in respect of categories of information mentioned in Section 2(f). It is not open to an appellant to ask, in the guise of seeking information, questions to the Public
authorities about the nature and quality of their actions. The RTI Act does not cast on the Public Authority the obligation to answer queries.”
2. In my opinion the queries made by you are similar in nature and as such the Public Authority is not obliged to provide you with the information sought.
3. However, in case you are not satisfied with above decision, you may file a second appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act-2005 with Central Information Commission within 90 days from the receipt of this decision. The address of CIC is as under.”
Heard today dated 1.11.2010. Appellant present. CSIR is represented by Dr. D.S. Bedi, PIO and Ms. Valsala Kutty, Consultant, RTI.
2. The matter, in short, is that a fire broke out on 23.7.2009 at the Headquarters of CSIR located at 2, Rafi Marg, New Delhi, in which, unfortunately, three employees lost their lives. The appellant is a Section Officer in CSIR. He had filed an RTI application dated 25.8.2009 seeking information on 16 paras regarding the security system in the CSIR Headquarters and the matters related there-with. The CPIO had responded to it vide letter dated 25.09.2009 wherein information on certain paras was supplied to the appellant but it was held back in respect of certain other paras. On appeal, interestingly, the first Appellate Authority took a totally contrary view and came to the conclusion that the Public Authority was not obliged to provide the requested information. His order is extracted below:-
“I have gone through your original application wherein you have sought information on a number of issues. In this connection, I would like to bring to your notice the judgments of the CIC in the case of Dr. D.V. Rao Vs APIO, Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi and in the case of Shri P.L. Sanyal Vs Sh. Amit Jha, CPIO and Sh. Naved Masood,
Appellate Authority, Deptt. of Agriculture & Cooperation, New Delhi. You will note that the CIC has clearly taken the stand in their cases that “the petitioner’s entitlement to information is only in respect of categories of information mentioned in Section 2(f). It is not open to an appellant to ask, in the guise of seeking information, questions to the Public
authorities about the nature and quality of their actions. The RTI Act does not cast on the Public Authority the obligation to answer queries.”
2. In my opinion the queries made by you are similar in nature and as such the Public Authority is not obliged to provide you with the information sought.
3. However, in case you are not satisfied with above decision, you may file a second appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act-2005 with Central Information Commission within 90 days from the receipt of this decision. The address of CIC is as under.”
In other words, the Appellate Authority has set aside the order of CPIO and put a blanket ban on disclosure of any information.
3. Hence, the present appeal.
4. I have heard the appellant. He is not satisfied with the information provided to him in para No.1. He also protests against non-supply of copy of the report of the Fact Finding Committee constituted by the competent authority. It is his submission that he is seeking this information in the larger public interest.
5. I have perused the RTI application and the response of CPIO in respect of each para. I have also heard Ms Valsala Kutty when she submits that information in respect of certain paras was not provided to the appellant as the queries were starting with words like why, what, when etc. On a thoughtful consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the appellant has raised very pertinent queries about the security set up in CSIR Headquarters as also about the matters relating to the fire incident. His queries do, indeed, fall in the ambit of section 2(f) of the RTI Act and, therefore, he is entitled to parawise information
in respect thereof. In view of the above discussion, it is ordered that the appellant may be provided information in regard to para 01 limited to the number of security personnel deployed on security duty. Importantly, he may be provided a copy of the report of the Fact Finding Committee headed by Dr. S.K. Joshi, former Director General, CSIR. Further, accurate parawise information also may be provided to him regarding paras 06 to 12 and 14 to 16 of the RTI application.
6. Before parting with this matter, we would like to observe that total denial of information by the Appellate Authority, relying on the decision dated 21.4.2006 of this Commission in File No. CIC/AT/A/2006/000045 is not based on correct appreciation of law. It needs to be underlined that RTI Act aims at setting out a practical regime of Right to Information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every Public Authority. The view taken by the Appellate Authority goes against the very spirit of the RTI Act and, therefore, is not sustainable. To illustrate, how can it be denied by the public authority that a Fact Finding Committee was constituted by the competent authority and that it submitted a report and so on. The CPIO and AA are advised to decide the cases in the true spirit of the RTI Act in future.
5. The order of the Commission may be complied with in 03 weeks time.
Sd/-3. Hence, the present appeal.
4. I have heard the appellant. He is not satisfied with the information provided to him in para No.1. He also protests against non-supply of copy of the report of the Fact Finding Committee constituted by the competent authority. It is his submission that he is seeking this information in the larger public interest.
5. I have perused the RTI application and the response of CPIO in respect of each para. I have also heard Ms Valsala Kutty when she submits that information in respect of certain paras was not provided to the appellant as the queries were starting with words like why, what, when etc. On a thoughtful consideration of the matter, I am of the opinion that the appellant has raised very pertinent queries about the security set up in CSIR Headquarters as also about the matters relating to the fire incident. His queries do, indeed, fall in the ambit of section 2(f) of the RTI Act and, therefore, he is entitled to parawise information
in respect thereof. In view of the above discussion, it is ordered that the appellant may be provided information in regard to para 01 limited to the number of security personnel deployed on security duty. Importantly, he may be provided a copy of the report of the Fact Finding Committee headed by Dr. S.K. Joshi, former Director General, CSIR. Further, accurate parawise information also may be provided to him regarding paras 06 to 12 and 14 to 16 of the RTI application.
6. Before parting with this matter, we would like to observe that total denial of information by the Appellate Authority, relying on the decision dated 21.4.2006 of this Commission in File No. CIC/AT/A/2006/000045 is not based on correct appreciation of law. It needs to be underlined that RTI Act aims at setting out a practical regime of Right to Information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every Public Authority. The view taken by the Appellate Authority goes against the very spirit of the RTI Act and, therefore, is not sustainable. To illustrate, how can it be denied by the public authority that a Fact Finding Committee was constituted by the competent authority and that it submitted a report and so on. The CPIO and AA are advised to decide the cases in the true spirit of the RTI Act in future.
5. The order of the Commission may be complied with in 03 weeks time.
(M.L. Sharma)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied
against application and payment of the charges, prescribed under the Act, to the
CPIO of this Commission.
( K.L. Das )
Assistant Registrar
Friday, October 29, 2010
RTI Logo & Portal Launched
The Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions Shri Prithviraj Chavan launched the Logo on RTI and the RTI portal today in the presence of Shri. A N. Tiwari, Chief Information Commission and Shri. Shantanu Consul, Secretary, DoPT.
It is a simple and iconic logo depicting a sheet of paper with information on it, and the public authority – providing the information. This represents people’s empowerment through transfer and accountability in Governance. The logo’s shape and structure make it easy to remember, recall and replicate with minimal distortion.
In the last five years the RTI regime has heralded a regime of transparency and accountability and strengthened the democratic structure of the country. Success stories of citizens using the RTI Act abound. The Act has achieved great success in empowering the citizens of India. However it was felt that the core values of the RTI regime – Empowerment, Transparency and Accountability- need to be given a shape in the form of a logo. The logo would be displayed at all public authorities and will be used in various communications related to RTI.
The Right to Information Portal – A Gateway on RTI – was also formally launched on this occasion. The portal is one stop knowledge bank for information seekers, information providers, trainers, Information Commissions, students and academicians. It provides for a digital library, discussion fora, e- newsletter and a blog. Latest judgments of the High Courts and Information Commissions; reports, articles, guides, manuals, handbooks for various stakeholders; online certificate course are also available on this portal. There is facility for stakeholders to interact through dedicated and open discussion forum and register as resource persons. The web URL for the Portal is www.rtigateway.org.in.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Huge response to DoPT On-line Course on RTI (PIB)
The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Online Certificate Course on RTI began today on a pilot project basis. The 15-day course started on a Pilot Project basis is being taken by various stakeholders on, both, the demand and supply sides of the RTI implementation regime. This Course on RTI is in association with the Centre for Good Governance, Hyderabad. The first batch has 60 candidates. The response to the course was overwhelming with 1452 applications. Those other than in the Pilot batch will be covered in subsequent batches.
The Online Certificate Course is aimed at:
>> Public Information Officers (PIOs)
>> Assistant Public Information Officers (APIOs)
>> Appellate Authorities
>> Officials assisting the above designated officers or other public officials
>> Citizens
>> Representative of Civil Society Organisations (including Media Organisations)
>> Any other person(s) who could be a direct/indirect stakeholder
The objectives of the Course are:
>> Reaching out to those who have not had an opportunity to participate in any training/sensitization initiatives on RTI Act, 2005
>> Bringing greater clarity on RTI among designated implementing officials like APIOs/ PIOs/ FAOs
>> Ensuring appreciation for RTI Act, 2005 and its mandate among the officials designated under it and also among the citizens
>> Facilitating timely delivery of information by PIOs
>> Having better informed citizens, civil society and other stakeholders
The outcomes expected from this initiative are:
>> A sound knowledge of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 among the people taking this course
>> Good understanding of the roles and responsibilities of organizations/ persons concerned with implementing the law and with enforcing the rights under this law
>> Proper appreciation of rights/obligations as applicable for effective use of RTI
>> Reliable guidance on following the right process/procedure to implement the provisions of this Act and to benefit from this Act.
>> Good understanding of remedies available when an implementing organization fails to comply with this Act.
The Online Certificate Course is aimed at:
>> Public Information Officers (PIOs)
>> Assistant Public Information Officers (APIOs)
>> Appellate Authorities
>> Officials assisting the above designated officers or other public officials
>> Citizens
>> Representative of Civil Society Organisations (including Media Organisations)
>> Any other person(s) who could be a direct/indirect stakeholder
The objectives of the Course are:
>> Reaching out to those who have not had an opportunity to participate in any training/sensitization initiatives on RTI Act, 2005
>> Bringing greater clarity on RTI among designated implementing officials like APIOs/ PIOs/ FAOs
>> Ensuring appreciation for RTI Act, 2005 and its mandate among the officials designated under it and also among the citizens
>> Facilitating timely delivery of information by PIOs
>> Having better informed citizens, civil society and other stakeholders
The outcomes expected from this initiative are:
>> A sound knowledge of the provisions of the RTI Act, 2005 among the people taking this course
>> Good understanding of the roles and responsibilities of organizations/ persons concerned with implementing the law and with enforcing the rights under this law
>> Proper appreciation of rights/obligations as applicable for effective use of RTI
>> Reliable guidance on following the right process/procedure to implement the provisions of this Act and to benefit from this Act.
>> Good understanding of remedies available when an implementing organization fails to comply with this Act.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Online Certificate Course on RTI by DoPT
The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India (GoI) has launched an 'Online Certificate Course on RTI' for various stakeholders on, both, the demand and supply sides of the RTI implementation regime.
This Online Certificate Course on RTI is launched in association with the Centre for Good Governance, Hyderabad.
This Online Certificate Course is aimed at:
- Public Information Officers (PIOs)
- Assistant Public Information Officers (APIOs)
- Appellate Authorities
- Officials assisting the above designated officers or other public officials
- Citizens
- Representative of Civil Society Organisations (including Media Organisations)
- Any other person(s) who could be a direct / indirect stakeholder
Click here to register
Monday, August 3, 2009
DoPT initiatives to strengthen RTI Act
Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) has initiated action on a proposal to review the Second Schedule to the RTI Act, 2005 which contains the names of security and intelligence organizations exempt from its purview, with a view to strengthen the RTI Act. It is being examined whether some of the organizations could be deleted from the Schedule. Another proposal under examination of the Department is to add some more categories of information to the list given in section 4 (1) of the Act which all public authorities are required to publish suo motu. This will enable greater proactive disclosures by public authorities.
The law officers of the Government pointed out that there is no provision in the RTI Act enabling the Commission to decide the cases through Benches. So as to ensure that nothing legally wrong is done, the Government advised the Information Commission that decisions on the appeals/complaints should be taken by the Commission and not by the Benches of the Commission. Some parties, without understanding the intricacies of law, have been trying to create an impression that Government is trying to limit the powers of the Commission, which is far from the truth. The only concern of the Government in the matter is that nothing illegal should be done. However, the Government is considering suitable amendments in the Act in order to enable the Commissions to function through Benches.
The Government of India has launched a Centrally Sponsored Scheme in October, 2008 which aims at strengthening of the State Information Commissions by providing funds for their IT enablement and propagation of RTI. Funds have already been released to 19 State Information Commissions so far. The scheme also proposes to impart training to various stake-holders through the Administrative Training Institutes and to create awareness through the Department of Posts, the Directorate of Audio Visual Publicity (DAVP) and the NCERT.
83,000 stakeholders have already been trained under the UNDP funded ‘Capacity Building for Access to Information Programme’ launched in 2005. With the purpose of understanding the weaknesses and strengths of the system of implementing the provisions of the RTI Act, the Government had a study done through an independent private organization. The study recommended measures for enhancing accountability and clarity of role of various stake holders; improving RTI awareness; improving convenience in filing requests; enhancing infrastructure and capacity building; improving efficiency at Information Commissions; institutionalising Third Party audit. Government has already acted upon some of the recommendations made by the study.
The enactment of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is a momentous step towards transparency in the functioning of the Government and the Government is committed to make it a success and strengthen it further. The Department of Personnel & Training has recently clarified through an Office Memorandum that file notings are to be disclosed. The address of the President to the Joint session of the Parliament reiterates the commitment of the Government to initiate action within 100 days for strengthening the right to information by suitably amending the law.
Courtesy : PIB
The law officers of the Government pointed out that there is no provision in the RTI Act enabling the Commission to decide the cases through Benches. So as to ensure that nothing legally wrong is done, the Government advised the Information Commission that decisions on the appeals/complaints should be taken by the Commission and not by the Benches of the Commission. Some parties, without understanding the intricacies of law, have been trying to create an impression that Government is trying to limit the powers of the Commission, which is far from the truth. The only concern of the Government in the matter is that nothing illegal should be done. However, the Government is considering suitable amendments in the Act in order to enable the Commissions to function through Benches.
The Government of India has launched a Centrally Sponsored Scheme in October, 2008 which aims at strengthening of the State Information Commissions by providing funds for their IT enablement and propagation of RTI. Funds have already been released to 19 State Information Commissions so far. The scheme also proposes to impart training to various stake-holders through the Administrative Training Institutes and to create awareness through the Department of Posts, the Directorate of Audio Visual Publicity (DAVP) and the NCERT.
83,000 stakeholders have already been trained under the UNDP funded ‘Capacity Building for Access to Information Programme’ launched in 2005. With the purpose of understanding the weaknesses and strengths of the system of implementing the provisions of the RTI Act, the Government had a study done through an independent private organization. The study recommended measures for enhancing accountability and clarity of role of various stake holders; improving RTI awareness; improving convenience in filing requests; enhancing infrastructure and capacity building; improving efficiency at Information Commissions; institutionalising Third Party audit. Government has already acted upon some of the recommendations made by the study.
The enactment of the Right to Information Act, 2005 is a momentous step towards transparency in the functioning of the Government and the Government is committed to make it a success and strengthen it further. The Department of Personnel & Training has recently clarified through an Office Memorandum that file notings are to be disclosed. The address of the President to the Joint session of the Parliament reiterates the commitment of the Government to initiate action within 100 days for strengthening the right to information by suitably amending the law.
Courtesy : PIB
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Amendment to RTI Act
The Government proposes to strengthen right to information by suitably amending the laws to provide for disclosure by government in all non-strategic areas. In this regard, it is proposed to review the number of organizations in the second schedule to the Right to Information Act, 2005 and make rules for more disclosure of information by public authorities.
Government has received representations expressing doubts about the proposed amendments. Non-Governmental Organisations and Social activists will be consulted on the proposed amendments. However No time frame can be fixed for completion of the process.
This information was given by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Shri Prithviraj Chavan in a written reply to a question in Lok Sabha today.
Government has received representations expressing doubts about the proposed amendments. Non-Governmental Organisations and Social activists will be consulted on the proposed amendments. However No time frame can be fixed for completion of the process.
This information was given by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Shri Prithviraj Chavan in a written reply to a question in Lok Sabha today.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Govt officer fined for delay in providing info under RTI
New Delhi The CIC has slapped a maximum penalty of Rs 25,000 on an employee of the Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions for not providing information to an RTI applicant on time.
The applicant Mahendra Kumar Gupta had sought some information from Kendriya Bhandar, which is under the Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions.
But the Central Public Information Officer of the department R K Singh provided the information after a delay of 215 days.
The information was to be provided by September 27, 2007, as per provisions of RTI Act.
The commission in its order imposed penalty of Rs 250 per day not exceeding Rs 25,000 as per the provision of RTI Act and directed the Kendriya Bhandar chairperson to recovered it from Singh's salary either directly or through deducting Rs 5,000 per month.
The CIC in its earlier hearing had directed the department to show cause as to "why a penalty of Rs 250 per day from the date when information fell due September 27, 2007 to the date when the information is actually supplied, April 30, 2008, not exceeding Rs 25,000 should not be imposed."
Courtesy: Indian express
Courtesy: Indian express
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Video conferencing to help RTI applicants
CHENNAI: For the past three years, M Sivaraj, an RTI activist from Vellore, has been spending Rs 1,000 every month towards travel and other expenses. The former tahsildar travels at least 900km a month to appear at hearings conducted by the State Information Commission (SIC) at its headquarters in Chennai.
With SIC planning to introduce video conferencing for petitioners, Sivaraj and other petitioners will have less trouble in future.
The hi-tech facility funded by the Union government will be introduced after the general elections. "The contract has been awarded to the Electronic Corporation of Tamil Nadu (ELCOT), for development. We hope that petitioners will not have to travel all the way from different parts of the state to Chennai, spending time and money. Officials, too, need not reclaim amounts from the public exchequer for travel expenses," SIC chief commissioner S Ramakrishnan told The Times of India.
With the district headquarters in Tamil Nadu having video-conferencing facilities at the collectorates, it would take only a few months to stabilise the system, Ramakrishnan added.
The plan envisages the commission having a state-wide area network connectivity from ELCOT's data centre in Taramani or the common service centre at the DMS campus in Teynampet. ELCOT will install equipment and related infrastructure, costing Rs 13 lakh.
On an average, SIC receives 40,000 petitions every year, the highest in India, seeking details from various government departments. Almost 90% of the petitions come from the southern districts. About 30 cases are taken up for hearing daily.
"If such devices are not introduced forthwith, there will be deterioration in services rendered by the commission," Ramakrishnan pointed out.
The commission has six commissioners, besides the chief commissioner, to look into appeals.
The commission is holding talks with the Centre for Good Governance (CGG), a central government agency, to develop software modules for designing a website, complete with the decisions and cause list so that applicants from any part of the state can get updated information on cases.
It also plans to include success stories and the status of applications on the website, with the application status being conveyed through SMSes, too.
"The decision to seek CGG support came about after the National Informatics Centre, which designed the SIC website, failed in uploading relevant data over the past four months," official sources said.
The urgency in dealing with a flood of applications has put SIC in a spot. With only 15 stenographers available for administrative work, analysing information has become a problem area.
julie.mariappan@timesgroup.com
With SIC planning to introduce video conferencing for petitioners, Sivaraj and other petitioners will have less trouble in future.
The hi-tech facility funded by the Union government will be introduced after the general elections. "The contract has been awarded to the Electronic Corporation of Tamil Nadu (ELCOT), for development. We hope that petitioners will not have to travel all the way from different parts of the state to Chennai, spending time and money. Officials, too, need not reclaim amounts from the public exchequer for travel expenses," SIC chief commissioner S Ramakrishnan told The Times of India.
With the district headquarters in Tamil Nadu having video-conferencing facilities at the collectorates, it would take only a few months to stabilise the system, Ramakrishnan added.
The plan envisages the commission having a state-wide area network connectivity from ELCOT's data centre in Taramani or the common service centre at the DMS campus in Teynampet. ELCOT will install equipment and related infrastructure, costing Rs 13 lakh.
On an average, SIC receives 40,000 petitions every year, the highest in India, seeking details from various government departments. Almost 90% of the petitions come from the southern districts. About 30 cases are taken up for hearing daily.
"If such devices are not introduced forthwith, there will be deterioration in services rendered by the commission," Ramakrishnan pointed out.
The commission has six commissioners, besides the chief commissioner, to look into appeals.
The commission is holding talks with the Centre for Good Governance (CGG), a central government agency, to develop software modules for designing a website, complete with the decisions and cause list so that applicants from any part of the state can get updated information on cases.
It also plans to include success stories and the status of applications on the website, with the application status being conveyed through SMSes, too.
"The decision to seek CGG support came about after the National Informatics Centre, which designed the SIC website, failed in uploading relevant data over the past four months," official sources said.
The urgency in dealing with a flood of applications has put SIC in a spot. With only 15 stenographers available for administrative work, analysing information has become a problem area.
julie.mariappan@timesgroup.com
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Publish reasons for all decisions that affect the public, CIC tells UT Admn
The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the Chandigarh Administration to publish reasons for all its decisions that affect the public and ensure proper implementation of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The CIC also asked the Administration to convert all records in electronic format, catalogue, index and computerise them and then put them online for easy accessibility. The UT has been given three months to comply with the directions.
The commission referred to the instructions of the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, dated September 21, 2007, on the matter, which says: “The clause (Section 4) also requires the public authority to have its records computerised and connected through a network all over the country. ” The directions were issued in response to 52 separate complaints — later clubbed by the CIC — filed against various UT departments .
Information Commissioner M L Sharma ordered: “The public authorities are required to publish all relevant facts about such policies and decisions for the information of the public at large, as mandated under Section 4(1)(c) of the Act.” The order said such information should be provided free of cost. It read: “The information disclosed by the public authorities is proactive disclosure and they are required to provide immediate access to this material as and when requested, without the requirement of filing any written request and charging any fee.”
The CIC said all public authorities should also take immediate steps to publish detailed, complete and unambiguous information under the 16 categories of Section 4(1)(b) and thereafter update the information as and when necessary, but definitely every year. It added: “The names, room numbers, telephone numbers, e-mail address of the CPIOs/ACPIOs may be prominently displaced in each office. If the complete disclosures are also available with any other officer(s) other than the CPIO, ACPIO, their names, designations, room numbers and telephone numbers must be prominently displayed.”
Addressing the contentions of the complainant, regarding difficulty in submitting the fee for RTI , the commission said: “The CPIO should accept the requisite fee without delay. Such fee should be acceptable in any form as prescribed under the rules by way of cash against proper receipt or by demand draft or banker’s cheque or Indian postal order. The ‘payee’ or the name of the officer in whose favour payment is to be made should be displayed on the notice board of the public authority.” The commission held that no particular format was necessary to seek information under the RTI Act.
Courtesy: Indian Express
Sunday, April 19, 2009
CIC asks CSIR to make NET exam papers public
New Delhi (PTI): The Central Information Commission has directed the CSIR to bring NET examination papers of previous years, kept under wraps till now, in public domain to improve the overall "processes" of administering and undertaking of exams in the country.
Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi in his hard hitting order had asked CSIR to provide the information free of cost to the appellant before April 25.
Refuting the CSIR's contention that "if question papers are in public domain the scientific interest of the State will be affected", the CIC said, "transparency will only improve all institution and processes".
Disallowing the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research's (CSIR) contention that disclosing the examination papers would "expose the CSIR examinations system", the CIC in its order said, "if a student can really master all fundamentals of the Science and Technology portion, no exam system can really want to test anything else".
The CIC also dismissed CSIR's stand that "there is a limited scope of framing questions as the basic concept and their interpretation are established facts".
Saturday, January 10, 2009
CIC said that if certain bench mark is decided for promotion, then there is no reason why that bench mark should not be known
New Delhi: In a move that may improve career prospects of millions of government sector employees, Central Information Commission (CIC) has ordered that the promotion process be made more transparent by sharing the benchmark for promotions with the officers considered for the same.
Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra, while hearing the petition of a Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) employee, said: “If certain bench mark is decided for promotion, then there is no reason why that bench mark should not be known, at least to those who are being considered for such promotion.”
The employee had sought the information on the criteria, norms and bench marks for departmental promotion from the post of Assistant Security Officer to Security Officer.
In its response, the DAE said that marks obtained by a candidate in written test, interview and his performance appraisal report are added for promotion, but refused to divulge the bench mark score calling it as being held in ‘fiduciary relationship’.
Refusing to accept that the DPC recommendations were held in fiduciary relationship, the Commission directed the department to provide the score adopted by the committee for promotion by 15 January.
“We cannot agree with this argument. The DPC has to follow the rules and regulations governing promotion from one rank to other in government and its proceedings have to be on transparent and objective criteria,” the CIC said.
In his order, Mishra clarified that the recommendations made by DPC were made while discharging their duties and thus part of official record.
“Such recommendations cannot be described as information held in fiduciary relationship,” he said adding that these information cannot be exempted from disclosure under RTI Act.
Original order Here
Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra, while hearing the petition of a Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) employee, said: “If certain bench mark is decided for promotion, then there is no reason why that bench mark should not be known, at least to those who are being considered for such promotion.”
The employee had sought the information on the criteria, norms and bench marks for departmental promotion from the post of Assistant Security Officer to Security Officer.
In its response, the DAE said that marks obtained by a candidate in written test, interview and his performance appraisal report are added for promotion, but refused to divulge the bench mark score calling it as being held in ‘fiduciary relationship’.
Refusing to accept that the DPC recommendations were held in fiduciary relationship, the Commission directed the department to provide the score adopted by the committee for promotion by 15 January.
“We cannot agree with this argument. The DPC has to follow the rules and regulations governing promotion from one rank to other in government and its proceedings have to be on transparent and objective criteria,” the CIC said.
In his order, Mishra clarified that the recommendations made by DPC were made while discharging their duties and thus part of official record.
“Such recommendations cannot be described as information held in fiduciary relationship,” he said adding that these information cannot be exempted from disclosure under RTI Act.
Original order Here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)