CMJ University lost its status as University in October 2013…

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

CMJ University lost its status as University in 2013. October 01..

CMJ University lost its status as University in 2013. October 01..

The UGC and Meghalaya Government has withdrawn its approval to the Chandra Mohan Jha University (CMJ) as deemed university..
It came into existence in 2009, afterwards it was under flacks for awarding illegitimate degrees to students at Ph.D and M.Phil levels..
Approx 1479 degrees have been found to be distributed by the university,in violation of the UGC norms of minimum Standards for institutions awarding degrees to students.
It has come to an end in October 2013…
Here is the Photocopy of the RTI reply given by the UGC in this regards…

 

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

Supreme Court Trashes National Judicial Appointment Bill…

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

Supreme Court Trashes National Judicial Appointment Bill…

Says Unconstitutional.

 

It is extraordinary that there should be near-unanimity in the country that the present system of judicial appointments that was put in place in 1993 is deeply unsatisfactory, and yet the most significant legislative effort to reform it should fail before the Supreme Court. It is no surprise that a five-judge Bench has struck down the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act, 2014, by which the government established a National Judicial Appointments Commission to select members of the higher judiciary. There were doubts whether the composition of the NJAC, especially the inclusion in it of the Union Law Minister and two “eminent persons” appointed by the government, would survive judicial scrutiny. For, the law also gave any two members a veto over all decisions, raising the question whether the judicial members could be overruled by the executive representatives. The Attorney General could not convince the court that the amendment, along with the NJAC Act, was aimed at restoring the system of checks and balances which, according to the government, was lost after the Supreme Court created the collegium scheme of appointments. The core question was whether the new institutional mechanism to appoint judges impinged on the independence of the judiciary, a basic feature of the Constitution. The court has ruled that it does. Justice J.S. Khehar, writing the main judgment, has held that the clauses provided in the amendment are inadequate to preserve the primacy of the judiciary. The inclusion of the Law Minister in the body impinged on both the independence of the judiciary and the doctrine of separation of powers.

Nobody on either side of the debate disagrees that the judiciary should be insulated from political interference. Yet, should the judiciary retain its primacy, or should the executive have a say in order that flawed choices do not erode the institution’s credibility? Justice Khehar has said the conduct of the political executive showed it tended to reward favourites in many fields. Preserving the primacy of the judiciary was a safe way to shield the institution from “the regime of the spoils system”. Justice J. Chelameswar, in his dissenting opinion, is candid in questioning the lack of transparency in the collegium system. Even while restoring this system, the majority has invited suggestions to improve it so that it is more responsive to the expectations of civil society. While to some it may appear that striking down a Constitution amendment passed unanimously in both Houses of Parliament and ratified by 20 State Assemblies amounts to negating the people’s will, it cannot be forgotten that the judiciary remains the sole authority to decide whether a law violates the basic structure of the Constitution. What the situation indicates is that India is still struggling to put together a transparent appointment system not vitiated by executive patronage or judicial nepotism.

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

Digital India complements RTI’

Digital India complements RTI’

The Hindu 17 October 2015…

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday emphasised that transparency was vital to good governance.

He was speaking at the 10th Annual Convention of the Right to Information (RTI) law. The theme of the two-day convention celebrating a decade of the transparency law is ‘RTI: Outlook for the future – Trust through Transparency.’ The Right to Information Act was passed by the Rajya Sabha on May 12, 2005.

Inaugurating the convention, Mr. Modi said that his government’s Digital India initiative was, “complementary to RTI, because putting information online brings transparency, which in turn builds trust. RTI has become a tool for good governance. The RTI Act should not just be limited to a citizen’s right to know but it should empower every one to hold truth to power.”

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley complemented the Central Information Commissioners (CIC) on the completion of a decade of the RTI Act and called it an ‘exemplary law.’ The transparency law had transformed society and India had passed the first stage of civilised governance. The use of technology has made the transparency law more effective, less time-consuming and cost-effective, he added.

Meanwhile, prominent RTI activists like Aruna Roy, Anjali Bhardwaj, Nikhil Dey, Shekhar Singh and Venkatesh Nayak stayed away from the celebrations, after a vast majority of activists were not cleared by the Intelligence Bureau to attend the seminar. Of the 80 lakh people who use the transparency law, only seven activists were approved by the IB, after detailed background checks, Ms. Roy informed.

“This should have been an occasion to celebrate. Activists are being treated like criminals. The IB has never been involved in the past, despite the fact the PMs have been attending the valedictory. We decided to boycott the inaugural session. When we arrived for the sessions, the PM was not attending, we were still not allowed inside. Eventually, the Joint Registrar of the Commission had to get us in. The easiest thing to do would be to boycott the entire session but we had to raise questions. We need to assert our rights and will be attending the sessions tomorrow,” said Mr. Nayak.

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

 

CIC/SG/C/2009/000441/4069, dated 11-03-2015

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

CIC2 CIC4

CIC5 CIC2 CIC3   CIC/SG/C/2009/000441/4069, dated 11-03-2015

CIC has declared all the private institutions approved by the UGC and/or AICTE as public authority

In a landmark judgment dated 11-03-2015, CIC has declared that all private universities and institutions approved by the State or central government by a notification in official gazettes as Public authority under section 2 (h) of the RTI Act 2005.

They must comply with the RTI Act and appoint Public information officers and appellate authorities at their institutions.

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

Central government appoints new CIC chief to pacify the anguish of RTI activists:

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/

Central government appoints new CIC chief to pacify the anguish of RTI activists:

Will it serve the purpose? Because thousands of appeals are pending before commission and the new CIC chief with his very short can hardly clear the thousands backlog appeals.

Central government has appointed Vijay Sharma as new chief information commissioner of Central information commission who is retiring in the month of December 2015.

It is clear that he has only a few months in hand and already thousands of applications are piled up before the commission, how can he clear scores of appeals with very short stint of just 6 months?

It has raised eyebrows of whistleblowers all across the country, with the RTI activists claiming and alleging the central government of cheating people by appointing such a chief for very short term although the CIC chief’s post has been lying vacant for the last months.

But the question over here is that when government was not worried for the last nine months to appoint a chief does it seem logical that after the CIC chief gets retirement in December 2015, Modi govt. will be quick to appoint new chief? This is a major question hauling the minds of RTI activists.

In my opinion a chief should have been appointed for at least one year so that he could get elbow room to clear the prolonged pending cases before the commission.

To bring transparency in the functioning of the government it is of the dire need to have CIC CVC and Lokayukta seats always filled. Government should be quick in appointing and making arrangements for such key posts before they get laid vacant.

Nonetheless at last Modi government hit the nail on the head by appointing chief of CIC, now the new chief has some challenges ahead, how he takes decisions and what will be his priorities in dealing with the bundles of appeals is a major concern for him.

Any way it is a good move by the Modi government that after much too furore and hue and cry in the media and by the RTI activists, it appoints new chief and it will give, if not so much, a little breather for the withering Central information commission.

https://www.filertionline.in/rti/