Latest RTI news of India
Political parties under RTI - Election Commission contradicts CIC directive
Election Commission says political parties not under RTI ambit, contradicts top authority’s order . Former Chief Information Commissioner AN Tiwari said " The election panel’s order has no merit "
RTI Application form
Political parties are out of the purview of the RTI Act, the Election Commission has said in an order which is contrary to the Central Information Commission’s directive bringing six national parties under the transparency law.
The First Appellate Authority in the Election Commission K.F. Wilfred, the Senior Principal Secretary in the poll panel, wrote in the order that he agrees with the view taken by the CPIO.
Six national parties — the BJP, the Congress, the BSP, the NCP, the CPI and the CPI(M) — for which information was sought by the applicant were brought under the ambit of the RTI Act by a full bench of the commission on June 3, 2013. (The Trinamool Congress was recognised as the seventh national party in September 2016).
The RTI query had sought to know the donations collected by the Bharatiya Janata Party, the Congress, the Bahujan Samaj Party, the Nationalist Congress Party, the Communist Party of India and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) through electoral bonds. The applicant also wanted to know the donations collected by the Samajwadi Party, which is not a national party.
The Central Information Commission is the only institution that can declare a body as a public authority accountable under the Right to Information Act.
“When the Central Information Commission has declared six national political parties as public authority, the Election Commission cannot take a position contrary to that unless the order of the CIC has been overturned by the Supreme Court or High Courts,” former Chief Information Commissioner AN Tiwari told PTI. “The order of EC has no merit.”
Venkatesh Nayak, a noted RTI activist, said the public information officer of the Election Commission has exceeded his limits in giving this order. “The June 2013 order of the CIC bringing six national political parties under the RTI Act remains in force even if the political parties do not obey it. It has not been stayed or set aside by any court. Therefore, as far as national political parties are concerned they are squarely covered under the RTI Act,” Mr. Nayak said.
Political parties under RTI - Election Commission contradicts CIC directiveUPSC Marks Can't be Given Under RTI - Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is not obligated to disclose raw and scaled marks of civil services examinations under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
RTI Application Form for UPSC
[caption id="attachment_292" align="aligncenter" width="621"] UPSC rti[/caption]The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) is not obligated to disclose raw and scaled marks of civil services examinations under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Supreme Court has ruled.
How to File RTI in UPSC
The top court has refused to reconsider its ruling whereby it had earlier cited confidentiality and integrity of the UPSC exams to put the scores of India’s most prestigious exam outside the purview of the ‘right to know’.
The court dismissed a bunch of review petitions filed against the order in February and reaffirmed its judgment setting aside the Delhi High Court ruling and dismissing all the writ petitions filed by civil services aspirants seeking disclosure of marks under RTI.
In February, the apex court had noted that disclosure of marks could have severe negative impact on the evaluation process and not only the prestige but the very integrity of the system could be compromised.
UPSC Marks Can't be Given Under RTI - Supreme CourtApply for Birth/Death certificate through RTI
Birth/Death Certificates Can Be Applied Under RTI Act . Right to information Application Not To Be Rejected Only Because Alternative Procedure Is Available Under Another Statute said Punjab & Haryana HC
Now you can apply for Birth and Death certificates and other documents through RTI. The Punjab and Haryana High court recently allowed a plea of a man who had applied death certificate of his mother through RTI.
Justice Augustine George Masih held that in case of an application preferred under the Right to Information Act where alternative procedure and conditions are prescribed under any other statute/law, the said application cannot be rejected and/or info.
Before the high court, Shakti Singh had challenged the order of State Information Commission that held that he is not entitled to information under the RTI Act and he should, in the light of the provisions of Section 17 of the Registration of Births .
The court observed: “There being no inconsistency under the RTI Act and the provisions of the other statute/law, the option and prerogative is with the citizen to select and choose to exercise his right under such Act/law or the RTI Act. In case the .
Setting aside the commission’s order, the court said: "The Commission has rejected the claim of the petitioner under the RTI Act proceeding upon the wrong assumption that the 6 of 7 Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969, being a legislation and and statutory in nature, is not overridden by the RTI Act. It may be added here that the information under the RTI Act can only be denied if the same is exempted from disclosure of information under the provisions of RTI Act itself such as Sections 8 , 9 and 11 thereof "
Source : livelaw
Apply for Birth/Death certificate through RTIANDHRA PRADESH - Poorest performer in RTI implementation
ANDHRA PRADESH has failed to appoint State Information Commission Failure to appoint a full-fledged State Information Commission (SIC) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act has put Andhra Pradesh at the bottom of the performance list at the national-level.
The term of the last SIC in the composite State was over on May 17 last year and there has been a gap of 18 months for the constitution of a Commission for AP.
A report card, released jointly by the Delhi-based Satark Nagrik Sangathan (SNS) and the Centre for Equity Studies (CES) in March 2018, shows non-adherence of the clauses of the Act mainly due to the State government’s failure to put in place a full-fledged Commission.
The SIC office set up at Mangalagiri in August last has been dysfunctional. Following several pleas by RTI activists and members of the civil society and a directive by the High Court, the government appointed former IFS officer M. Ravi Kumar, former IPS officer B. V. Ramana Kumar and advocate Katta Janardhana Rao as SICs but there was no mention of a State Chief Information Commissioner (SCIC).
A total of 42,782 second appeals — those filed by applicants who are unhappy with the decision of the appellate authority — were are received by the state information commission between 2005- 2016. On average, it takes 18 months for the second appeal to be heard. In Andhra Pradesh, which has one of the highest number of pending appeals at 12,456, every month about 681 second appeals are disposed.
ANDHRA PRADESH - Poorest performer in RTI implementationYou can get Info of Phone Tapping Under RTI from TRAI
The Delhi high court has ruled that the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has to provide information on phone tapping to citizens under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI) after obtaining the same from telecom operators.
How to File RTI in Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
RTI Application Form for Telecom Regulatory Authority Of India
Supreme Court lawyer Kabir Shankar had sought information on “surveillance, tracking or tapping” of his phone from his service operator Vodafone and TRAI.
When Vodafone denied Kabir Shankar the information on the grounds that it wasn’t a public authority, he approached the Central Information Commission, which directed the telecom regulator to provide the information to him after collecting it legally from the service provider.
TRAI then challenged the CIC order in the Delhi high court, arguing that the information sought under the RTI was not a part of its records and it was hence not obliged to furnish the information to the applicant.
The court upheld the CIC order that directed TRAI to collect the relevant information sought in the RTI application from Vodafone India and furnish it to the applicant. The court held that since TRAI was a public authority, it was under an obligation to furnish all information which can be legally accessed by it from a private body.
From : thewire
You can get Info of Phone Tapping Under RTI from TRAIHow to File RTI in JAMMU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
Jammu Municipal Corporation, the erstwhile Jammu Municipality was established after the reforms under taken by Lord Rippan in the first quarter of 19th Century. The Provision of elective element in the Municipalities was introduced in the Year 1930. Next step towards the development of Municipality in the state was the passage of J & K Municipal Act 1941.
How to File RTI in JAMMU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
-
The application may be typed or neatly hand-written , wherein mention atop " application under RTI act 2005". The application may preferably be in writing though an e-mail is accepted as a mode as per law.
-
Some Public Authorities have devised their own format for the applications. But there is no compulsion under the law to stick to such proforma. Applications cannot be rejected on the ground that they were not in the prescribed proforma.The application should be in English, Hindi or the official language of the area in which application is being made.
-
Address is to the competent authority, (need not mention his/her name), simply address to the " public information officer".
-
Application should be in a simple and easy language.Mention your question point wise, avoid asking vague questions, ask direct questions.Avoid using too technical terms or legal jargon.
-
Attach Government RTI Fee in the form of IPO/DD/MO etc as applicable with the RTI Application.
-
Undersign the application, do not forget to take a photocopy for your future references.At the end of the application make a declaration that you are an indian citizen.
RTI Application Form for JAMMU MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ,jammu and kashmir
Get a copy of occupancy certificate through RTI from local municipal
An occupancy certificate is issued by the local municipal authorities or by the building proposal department declaring that the construction of the building is in accordance with the approved plans. This certificate is given when a building is constructed and is ready to be occupied. The certificate implies that the building has proper civic infrastructures like water, sanitation and electricity.
[caption id="attachment_289" align="aligncenter" width="621"] FILE RTI ONLINE[/caption]RTI APPLICATION Form
At the time of purchase, you may forget to demand this important document. Completion Certificate is an important condition precedent for issuing Occupancy Certificate. If the construction is not completed in accordance with the building regulations and standards, the Authorities may decline Occupancy Certificate to the Builder. If the builder is reluctant to produce or supply this document on demand, you can obtain it from the Municipal authorities or the Development Agency by filing RTI Application .
How to file RTI application for occupancy certificate
The application may be typed or neatly hand-written , wherein mention atop " application under RTI act 2005". The application may preferably be in writing though an e-mail is accepted as a mode as per law.
-
Address it to the competent authority, (need not mention his/her name), simply address to the " public information officer".
-
Application should be in a simple and easy language.Mention your question point wise, avoid asking vague questions, ask direct questions.Avoid using too technical terms or legal jargon.
Q1. Certified copy of the Occupancy Certificate issued by your public in respect of the housing scheme mentioned above.
-
Attach Government RTI Fee in the form of IPO/DD/MO etc as applicable with the RTI Application.
Sudhir Bhargava is a new CIC Chief (Central Information Commission)
The government has appointed Sudhir Bhargava as chief information commissioner (CIC) along with four information commissioners, all of whom were bureaucrats, in the Central Information Commission.
Bhargava was Information Commissioner in the CIC. The panel was functioning with three members against the sanctioned strength of 11, including the chief information commissioner.
Ram Nath Kovind has approved the appointment of former IFS officer Yashwardhan Kumar Sinha, former IRS officer Vanaja N Sarna, former IAS Neeraj Kumar Gupta and former law secretary Suresh Chandra as information commissioners in the central information commission, a government order accessed by said.
The Supreme Court had asked the Centre and states to maintain transparency in appointments of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners and upload the details of search committees and applicants on their website.
Sudhir Bhargava is a new CIC Chief (Central Information Commission)RTI propagation funds slashed by about 38 per cent
Funds for the propagation of the right to information have been slashed by over 38 percent in the Union Budget 2019-20 as compared to last fiscal's allocation.
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced an allocation of Rs 5.5 crore for the ‘CIC and RTI’ as compared to Rs 9 crore allocated in the Budget for 2018-19.
In last year's budget, Rs seven crore was earmarked for the CIC and the RTI, but it was revised to Rs nine crore.
The CIC has also received funds under a separate head of ‘CIC and PESB’ with an increase of 9.36 percent from the last Budget. It has been allocated Rs 32.01 crore as compared to Rs 29.27 crore last year.
This provision is for “establishment-related expenditure of Public Enterprises Selection Board and Central Information Commission”, the document said.
RTI propagation funds slashed by about 38 per centRisk threat on RTI ACT due to the amendment bill
The Lok Sabha on Monday ( 22 July 2019 ) passed the Right to Information (Amendment) Bill 2019 which seeks to amend the RTI Act 2005.
Another attempt has been made to amend the RTI Act. This effort is somewhat different from earlier efforts. In the efforts made so far, an amendment proposal was drafted for discussions between different classes and the public. The present amendment proposal was presented directly in Parliament without any discussion. It is perhaps a sign of the fact that the government has decided that it has to be passed. In this decision, the heavy majority in the ruling party's Lok Sabha also has some effect. The Right to Information Act was implemented in 2005. The parliament passed it with the majority. Only one year after its implementation, it was proposed to amend it. Going into a little depth showed that the real aim of the amendment was to weaken the law. After knowing this, the RTI activists protested strongly, after that government withdrew the offer. Efforts were made to make such a proposal three times, but due to the opposition, they had to be withdrawn.
The present government tried to make changes in this law even during its first term, but it was withdrawn. Important modifications will be made now in the status and function of the information commissioners and the condition of the service under which the proposals are proposed to be embodied. Present status of the information commissioners and the status of work and service are under the control of the Parliament. If the proposed amendments are passed, then all these rights will be fully met to the Central Government and the government can do whatever it wants, without the approval of the Parliament. The result will be that the information commissioners will be completely under the central government. Their freedom will end at last. In such a situation, the Information Commission will be very scared to take any decision against the will of the government. In fact, no decision will be taken against the will of the government. The basic purpose of RTI law is to get information from the government to the citizens. Especially the information that the government wants to hide. If the Information Commission will not take any decision or take any decision against the will of the government, then the Information Commission will not be able to fulfill the basic purpose of the Right to Information Act. There is no meaning of having the Right to Information Act and Information Commission. In the last nearly 14 years, since the Right to Information Act has been implemented, about 40 to 60 lacs citizens have used it to protect their original rights or have received legitimate services for themselves from government establishments.
This is the first law after independence that has empowered ordinary citizens. By weakening it, the common citizens will be reduced in the country even further. Why is it that every government wants to change this law? There can be many answers to this question. First of all, it comes to mind that all governments want to keep their work secret. The reason for keeping the secret is mainly because of some wrongdoing done or the reasons for which the public can be implicated on the image of the government. Before answering this question, it is necessary to state that when this bill was presented in the Lok Sabha, then some political parties had opposed it first, but when voting was held during the partition of Lok Sabha, 224 MPs voted and only nine MPs voted against it. During this time, some opposition parties went out of the house. The protest of only nine MPs seems to indicate that there is some sympathy with this amendment proposal even in opposition parties. Why is that so? This question is answered in the Central Information Commission's June 3, 2013 judgment. In this decision, the full Bench of the Central Information Commission said that six national political parties are public authorities under the Right to Information Act. These include Bharatiya Janata Party, Indian National Congress, Bahujan Samaj Party, Nationalist Congress Party, CPI (M) and CPI It was meant to come under the ambit of RTI, that all these parties have to appoint their public information officers and the information sought under the Right to Information Act will be given. All six parties openly disregard this decision of the Central Information Commission. In order to avoid following this order, these political parties ignored the notices of the Central Information Commission. For this reason, the Central Information Commission said on March 16, 2015, that it is legally unable to implement its right decision. Now the matter is under consideration in the Supreme Court where the central government has stated in its affidavit that the Right to Information Act should not be applicable to political parties. It is difficult to understand why this should not apply?
The fact is that even if any political party is in power, the Right to Information Act will always be on the target of the governments, but it is the duty of the citizens to save and prevent it from being weak. The Right to Information Bill was introduced in the Rajya Sabha after passing from the Lok Sabha. There is a demand that it be sent to the Select Committee. See whether it can happen or not? It is also to see that if this amendment bill is sent to the Select Committee due to the demand of the opposition then does it work to save its original form or not? In any case, it is expected that the RTI activist community will certainly be successful in protecting this very important law. If not, the country's democracy will be a big loss.
Risk threat on RTI ACT due to the amendment billChief of Defence Staff to come under RTI Act
Minister of State (MoS) for Defence Shripad Naik on Monday said in the Rajya Sabha that the Chief of Defence Staff will come under the ambit of the Right to Information (RTI) Act 2005.
In the Independence Day address this year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the creation of Chief of Defence Staff, who will be above the chiefs of the three services, a long-pending demand to integrate the services.
The government is likely making an announcement within the next two weeks to appoint the CDS who will be the single-point military adviser to the government as suggested by the Kargil Review Committee in 1999, sources said.
The Union Minister said that the Implementation Committee has submitted its report in the matter.
The Committee was constituted to determine & finalise the exact responsibilities of the said post which also includes the framework & all other issues involved to ensure smooth operationalization of the Chief of Defence Staff.
The Chief of Defence Staff will act as the single-point military adviser to the government on military and strategic issues and oversee procurement, training and logistics.
As part of the military reforms, several committees have recommended the creation of the post.
Chief of Defence Staff to come under RTI ActThese nine chief ministers got bungalows in Lutyens Delhi, RTI reveals
Central government distributed 6.70 crore vaccines to 95 countries
Central government distributed 6.70 crore vaccines to 95 countries
Central government distributed more than 60 million vaccines to 95 countries, Congress spokesperson Abbas Hafeez disclosed from RTI. Referring to the RTI filed in the Ministry of External Affairs, Congress spokesperson Abbas Hafeez said that the Government of India distributed 6 crore 63 lakh 70 thousand doses to 95 countries in 3 months, in which 1 crore 7 lakh 15 thousand doses were free distributed.
A big disclosure has been made in the RTI filed regarding corona vaccination. Many important information has come to the fore in the RTI filed by Madhya Pradesh Congress spokesperson Abbas Hafeez. Referring to the RTI filed in the Ministry of External Affairs, Abbas Hafeez said that the Government of India distributed 6 crore 63 lakh 70 thousand doses to 95 countries in 3 months, in which 1 crore 7 lakh 15 thousand doses were distributed free.
Congress spokesperson Abbas Hafeez had sought the details of the corona vaccine sent abroad by the central government from the Government of India through RTI. According to the information given by the Ministry of External Affairs in response, India has sent Covaccine and Kovishield Vaccine to 95 countries from 22 January to 16 April. Abbas Hafeez says that the Ministry of External Affairs has said in RTI that the government has given free vaccine to 1 crore 7 lakh 15 thousand different countries.
Bangladesh has been given the maximum vaccine, in which 33 lakh doses have been sold for free and 7 million doses. Myanmar was sold 1.7 million doses free and 2 million. 11 lakh free and 10 lakh vaccine doses were sold to Nepal. 45 lakh doses were sold to Saudi Arabia. 9 lakh 68 thousand doses were given to Afghanistan, in which 5 lakh doses were given free. 12 lakh 64 thousand doses have been given to Sri Lanka.The government bought the vaccine for Rs 300, then how did it decide Rs 1400? Congress spokesperson Abbas Hafeez, while making a scathing attack on the Modi government in the matter of giving vaccines to foreign countries, said that people in India were troubled by the lack of vaccines and the Modi government remained a donor abroad.
Referring to the RTI report, Hafeez said that the Modi government has admitted that the government has bought the dose of Covaccine for Rs 300, then how has it been fixed for the public at Rs 1400. Congress spokesperson has demanded that after arranging 7 crore vaccines from other countries immediately, it should be distributed to many states of India. Its rate should be reduced and the GST imposed on it should be removed immediately.
Central government distributed 6.70 crore vaccines to 95 countriesGovt released ?8k cr for jabs: RTI response
Govt released ?8k cr for jabs: RTI response
New Delhi: A little over ?8,000 crore has been released by the government from the Covid-19 vaccination budget of ?35,000 crore so far, the government’s response to a Right To Information (RTI) application has revealed.
This includes ?4,488.75 crore on 285 million doses (210 million of Covishield, the Indian version of the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine made by Serum Institute of India; and 75 million of Covaxin, made by Bharat Biotech), at ?157.5 a dose. It also includes an advance of 30%, or ?2,079 crore, on the further purchase of 440 million doses (250 million of Covishield and 190 million of Covaxin).
Finally, it includes an advance of ?1,500 crore on the purchase of 300 million doses of a vaccine being developed (it is currently in Phase 3 trials) by Biological E.That’s aggregates to ?8,067.75 crore for 1.025 billion vaccines.In addition, the government has already disclosed that India’s vaccine drive kicked off with a ?1,485.5 crore spend from the PM Cares Fund on 56 million Covishield doses (at ?210 each) and 10 million Covaxin doses (at ?309.75 each). All told, then, India has spent ?9,553.25 crore so far, on 1.091 billion vaccine doses. The RTI was filed by transparency activist Commodore Lokesh Batra (retd).“The Union Budget 2021-22 provides for ?35,000 crores for Covid-19 Vaccination out of this Rs. 8m067.75 crore has been released to the HLL Lifecare Limited (Procurement Agency for MoHFW) (in this amount ?2,079 crores is 30% advance payment, not the full payment) till date towards procurement of Covid-19 vaccine(s) Covishield (46 crore or 460 million doses ) manufactured by M/s Serum Institute of India and Covaxin (26.5 crore or 265 million doses) manufactured by M/s Bharat Biotech International Limited at the unit cost of Rs. 157.5 including taxes (Rs. 150 + 5% GST),” according to the RTI response from the Covid-19 vaccine administration cell under the health ministry.The Supreme Court, on June 2, termed the government’s vaccine policy “arbitrary” and asked for documents and data establishing the logic behind it.
On June 7, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced free vaccination for all, and also stated that the Union government would take charge of procuring vaccines and allocating them to states. The following day, the government announced a deal it signed a day before to buy 440 million doses from SII and Bharat Biotech, to be delivered between August and December. A 30% advance has been made towards this. After the initial order from PM Cares Fund, the government placed two subsequent orders (one in mid-April and another on April 22) for the supply of a total of 210 million doses of Covishield and 75 million doses of Covaxin according to publicly available information.
According to the response provided in the RTI, the next order was to Biological E for 300 million doses. This order, according to the RTI, was placed on June 6. “For this purpose, the Union Ministry of Health would be making an advance payment of ?1,500 crore to M/s Biological-E. (for more detail you may visit Press Information Bureau, Government of India’s website www.pib.gov.in then go to Home All Press Release then Select Ministry (Ministry of Health & Family Welfare) select Date, Month, Year for date wise release/information. (03.06.2021),” the response stated. On the same day, an advance payment of ?2,079 crore was also released to HLL Lifecare to procure 250 million more doses of Covishield and 190 million more doses of Covaxin. “Rs. 2,079 crore (was paid) as 30% advance payment to the HLL Lifecare Limited (Procurement Agency for MoHFW) for procuring the Covid-19 vaccines (Covishield 25 crore (250 million) doses and Covaxin19 crore (190 million) doses) at the unit cost of ?157.50/- including taxes (Rs. 150 + 5% GST),” the response added.
Govt released ?8k cr for jabs: RTI responseNot in Public Interest- BHEL Denies RTI on Covid-19 Deaths
Not in Public Interest- BHEL Denies RTI on Covid-19 Deaths
Not in Public Interest: BHEL Denies Bhopal RTI Activist Info on Covid-19 Deaths Representative photo. The section cited by BHEL for denial is often widely misused by PIOs, said MP Information Commissioner.
Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (BHEL) Bhopal has reportedly denied sharing information o an RTI query on the numbers of death of company employees due to Covid-19. Bhopal-based RTI activist Ajay Patidar had filed an RTI application with the public sector undertaking seeking to know how many employees it had lost due to the pandemic till May 25.
The Central Public Information Officer of the PSU has declined the details under section 8 (1) (j) calling it a query from a third party ‘not in public interest’. Patidar, who has now appealed the matter, told News18.com that the matter pertains to public interest as it deals with the wider issue of health.
Opposing the denial of information, Patidar claimed that if remaining employees have this information, they can take measures for their safety on the campus and also ‘it (casualty figures) will reflect the efficiency of the industrial unit in safeguarding the workers’.
Deaths: Govt Information Commissioner of the MP State Information Commission, Rahul Singh told News18.com that the denial of information in this matter is unjust. The PSU could have sought objections from the kin concerned under section 11 of the RTI Act before sharing the information ‘which does not seem the case going by the reply’. “How come the deaths due to a pandemic be called in public or personal interest, it’s a gross misuse of section 8 (1) (j), claimed the information commissioner adding schemes are linked to casualties so hiding this is not proper. The only information which can’t be provided to parliament or assembly could be denied under the Act," said Singh, adding that the section concerned is widely misused by PIOs for denying information under the RTI act. Queries like information on salary, transfer-posting, vehicle log book are often denied under section 8 (1) (j) ostensibly over privacy which is wrong, said the information commissioner. The officer cited an example of then Rewa Collector OP Shrivastava who had denied information under the RTI Act under section 8 (1) (j). The information commissioner had not only rejected the order of the collector but had issued him a show-cause notice. “I have reversed several orders of PIOs who had denied sharing information on mark sheets and caste certificates," said Singh. Ashish Chaturvedi, an RTI activist known for his RTI act exploits in the Vyapam scam in Madhya Pradesh, too agreed that section 8 (1) (j) is widely misused by government officers to suppress information. Even if the information is drawn later through appeals, the initial denial delays the entire process unnecessarily, he claimed. He alleged that Central Information Commission and SICs remain lenient and don’t levy penalties in such cases.
Not in Public Interest- BHEL Denies RTI on Covid-19 DeathsActivist files appeals for RTI queries in Hindi
Activist files appeals for RTI queries in Hindi
Three railway divisions in North India have replied to an RTI activist from Tamil Nadu in Hindi for the queries he raised in English. The activist, R Pandiaraja, asked four questions pertaining to elephant deaths on railway tracks and the efforts taken by the railways to bring them to an end. Citing the Official Language Rules, he has sought replies in English.
The RTI petition by the activist to the railways was a follow up of the petition he filed with the ministry of environment, forest and climate change on this issue, for which he got replies that 186 elephants were knocked down dead by trains on the tracks across the country during the last ten years. “I asked for the year-wise data, state-wise and zone-wise data of elephants killed by trains between 2009 and 2020. I also asked whether any initiative was taken to shift those troublesome lines from the reserve forest to outside the forest area to save elephants and the details of the projects in the pipeline,” said the petitioner.
He sent his queries to different railway zones and divisional offices, to which he received replies from the South Western Railway and the Thiruvananthapuram and Trichy divisions in English. “But the replies from Varanasi, Bilaspur and Delhi were in Hindi from top to bottom,” he said. He expressed shock over the replies in Hindi to the queries asked in English. He said that he has received replies for 240 RTI petitions from the Union government’s ministries including the health, railways, highways and forest in the last 18 months. This is the first time that he is receiving replies in Hindi and it is against the Official Language Rules, 1976, he said.
In his appeal against the replies, he has said that according to the Official Language Rules, all communication from the centre to the states and union territories falling under Region C (like Tamil Nadu) or individuals from those states should be in English.
Activist files appeals for RTI queries in HindiRTI to implement live-streaming of proceedings of Madras High Court
RTI to implement live-streaming of proceedings of Madras High Court
[caption id="attachment_626" align="alignnone" width="800"] rti-madras-chennai-high-court[/caption]In response to a Right to Information (RTI) application, the Madras High Court has revealed that it has not taken any steps to implement the Supreme Court's directions on live-streaming of court proceedings.
Saurav Das, an independent journalist, had filed an RTI application seeking details on the execution of live streaming of court proceedings in accordance with the judgment by the Supreme Court in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India. The High Court's reply also stated that a policy decision had not been taken to provide a public viewing of all court proceedings.
In an evasive response to a query regarding the continuation of virtual hearings after the COVID-19 situation subsides, the Court repeated that no policy decision had been taken with respect to the same. The judgement in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India was delivered on September 26, 2018 by a Bench of former Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud. The judgment came in a batch of petitions, one of which was filed by Swapnil Tripathi, and another by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising.
The Court had mooted the idea of live-streaming cases of constitutional importance on a pilot basis. Attorney General of India KK Venugopal had also submitted a set of guidelines for implementing the pilot project in the Chief Justice’s Court. He stated that this exercise could be implemented in other courtrooms based on the success of the pilot project. While hearing this matter, the Bench had observed that a step like live streaming “was the need of the hour” not only for decongesting the courtrooms, but also to fully implement the idea of an “open court”.
The High Courts of Gujarat and Karnataka have recently taken to live-streaming proceedings before the their respective Chief Justices Benches.
RTI to implement live-streaming of proceedings of Madras High CourtRTI on live-streaming of proceedings of Madras High Court
RTI on live-streaming of proceedings of Madras High Court
In response to a Right to Information (RTI) application, the Madras High Court has revealed that it has not taken any steps to implement the Supreme Court's directions on live-streaming of court proceedings. Saurav Das, an independent journalist, had filed an RTI application seeking details on the execution of live streaming of court proceedings in accordance with the judgment by the Supreme Court in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India. The High Court's reply also stated that a policy decision had not been taken to provide a public viewing of all court proceedings. In an evasive response to a query regarding the continuation of virtual hearings after the COVID-19 situation subsides, the Court repeated that no policy decision had been taken with respect to the same. The judgement in Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India was delivered on September 26, 2018 by a Bench of former Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud. The judgment came in a batch of petitions, one of which was filed by Swapnil Tripathi, and another by Senior Advocate Indira Jaising. The Court had mooted the idea of live-streaming cases of constitutional importance on a pilot basis. Attorney General of India KK Venugopal had also submitted a set of guidelines for implementing the pilot project in the Chief Justice’s Court. He stated that this exercise could be implemented in other courtrooms based on the success of the pilot project. While hearing this matter, the Bench had observed that a step like live streaming “was the need of the hour” not only for decongesting the courtrooms, but also to fully implement the idea of an “open court”. The High Courts of Gujarat and Karnataka have recently taken to live-streaming proceedings before the their respective Chief Justices Benches.
RTI on live-streaming of proceedings of Madras High CourtBad roads - Man takes samples for tests under RTI Act
Bad roads - Man takes samples for tests under RTI Act
Why did a newly laid road near your society crack and turn into rubble? Just ahead of monsoons an RTI applicant from Kalupur wanted to know how roadworks in the central zone are being undertaken and whether proper quality parameters are met or not. Kalupur resident Pankaj Bhatt was allowed by the Gujarat Information Commission to take road samples almost a month ago. But he finally got a chance on Monday night to inspect a fresh batch of materials used in an ongoing road construction project in Shahibaug under the RTI Act. Bhatt examined whether the temperature of the asphalt is maintained, whether the mettle used was being weighed before being used for roadwork. Bhatt pulled out the road construction manual and pointed out that the weighing machine was not calibrated and also suggested a few more tips from the manual to ensure quality work. Bhatt even took samples of the material and have given them to be tested at a government lab. “We prepared three small sacks of the road sample, one of which stays with the applicant, one with the contractor and the third is given to government accredited lab which is appointed for inspection of road material for tests,” says Bhatt. The AMC ward official had remained present during the entire process and has said that Bhtt will be provided with a test certificate of the samples under RTI Act. It was in early April that state information commissioner Subhash Soni ordered the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) to provide a citizen samples from the fresh batch of materials used in an ongoing road construction project under the RTI Act within 15 days. Bhatt took advantage of the very first section of the RTI Act, which defines “Right to Information” as the right to “inspection of work, documents, records; taking notes, extracts or certified copies of documents or records and even taking certified samples of material. The commission had also went a step further and asked the AMC to provide the RTI applicant a copy of ‘test certificate’ against the material whose sample was provided to the citizen within 15 days. “Though ‘seeking samples, copy of test reports of civic works or inspection of on-site civic works’ comes under them purview of the RTI Act, not many citizens have exercised this right,” says Bhatt.
Bad roads - Man takes samples for tests under RTI ActAES files appeal over ruling that it is under RTI purview
AES files appeal over ruling that it is under RTI purview
The Ahmedabad Education Society (AES) has filed an appeal in the Gujarat high court against a single-judge bench’s decision that the trust falls under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act because it gets government grants for some of its institutions.
AES is one of the oldest and the largest education trusts of the city and runs education institutes as well as a private varsity, Ahmedabad University.
On May 22, a single-judge bench turned down AES’s petition against the state information commission’s order that its institute, LD Museum of Indology, is liable to part with information under RTI laws because it is a public authority. The issue arose as soon as the RTI Act came into being in 2005. A year later, AES challenged in the high court its status as a trust falling under the purview of RTI laws.
After a 15-year legal battle, a single-judge bench turned down AES’s petition holding that since its institutions receive 100% government grants from the state government, the institute and trust will be covered under the definition of public authority under Section 2(h)(d)(i) of the Act.
AES challenged the order before the division bench and senior advocate Devan Parikh submitted that only seven of its many education institutes receive government grants. These seven institutes have appointed public information officers, but the other institutes are self-financed. These few institutes are not substantially financed. Merely because a few institutes of the trust are run on public money, the entire society cannot be treated as a public authority and the liability of the RTI laws can be thrust upon it.
The HC issued notice to the state government, admitted the appeal and ordered that the effect of the single judge’s order as well as the state information commission’s order remain stayed. The court said that since the information commission’s order has been stayed since 2006, the arrangement may continue.
AES files appeal over ruling that it is under RTI purviewA unit of Online Info Services arrow_circle_upTop