Supreme Court’s oldest, 36 and 25, keep two sects waiting

Indian Express,  22/April/2012, New Delhi

Of the 60,000 cases pending in the Supreme Court, the oldest one was filed nearly 36 years ago and is a standing example of justice delayed being justice denied. The original petitioner of the 1976 case is now dead and so is his son, while his grandson is said not to be interested in following it up as he is not actively involved with the Arya Samaj, subject of the case.

The next date of hearing has not been fixed. Nor has one been set for the second oldest pending case, filed in 1986, which is waiting for a decision on the size of a constitution bench that would take it up.

The Indian Express used the RTI Act to ask about probable dates for the listing of the two cases — Arya Samaj Education Trust versus Delhi’s Directorate of Education, 1976, and the Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community versus the State of Maharashtra, 1986. The CPIO of the Supreme Court responded that both being constitution bench matters, “it is beyond the jurisdiction and scope of the duties of CPIO to comment regarding the next date of hearing.”

The roots of the Arya Samaj case go back to 1973 when the Delhi School Education Act was enacted, under which educational institutions run by the Samaj, too, would have to follow government rules for admission and recruitment. The Arya Samaj approached the Delhi High Court for certain liberties, such as those enjoyed by minority institutions. The High Court delivered a split verdict on November 17, 1975, with one judge observing that “Arya Samaj is a reformed sect of Hinduism... and it is a part of Hinduism and not a separate religion in the UT of Delhi.”

Against the order, J P Gupta of the Arya Samaj moved the Supreme Court with civil appeal No. 687 in June 1976. The petitioner died in 1997, his son Dharm Chand Gupta died last year, and his grandson Pradeep Gupta, sources said, has not been following up the case. As per the Supreme Court website, it was last listed on April 19, 2005.

It was the same month the second oldest case was last listed. It relates to the Bombay Prevention of Excommunication Act, 1949, enacted on November 1, 1949. The Act was aimed at preventing members of the Dawoodi Bohra community from being excommunicated by the community’s Dai-ul-Mutlaq.

The constitutionality of the Act was challenged in the Bombay High Court by Sardar Sydena Tahar Saifuddin Saheb. On February 21, 1952, the High Court decided that the “Act is inconsistent with Article 26 of the Constitution of India”.

In 1962, following an appeal, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, too, struck down the Act in a majority judgment. As such, the Dai-ul-Mutlaq has the powers to excommunicate Dawoodi Bohras. Sydena Mohammed Burhanuddin is the present occupant of that post.

“The Dawoodi Bohras are a small, well-knit community in which baraat (excommunication or boycott) can be disastrous. It has ruined the lives of many people, and many families have disintegrated,” says community member Asghar Ali Engineer, now 73, who filed the case that is now pending.

Filed under the advice of late judge V M Tarkunde, his 1986 petition prayed that the Supreme Court “reconsider” the 1962 decision. On April 12, 2005, the day it was last listed, the question whether it should be heard by a bench of five or seven judges remained unresolved.

Age 35+

Case: Arya Samaj Education Trust versus Delhi Directorate of Education

Dispute started: 1973

Filed before SC: June 9, 1976

Present status

Pending, next date not fixed

Last listed on: April 19, 2005

Issue: Whether Arya Samaj Educational institutes should be treated as institutions run by minority community

Petitioner: Jyoti Prasad Gupta, died 1997

Age 26

Case: Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community versus State of Maharasthra

Dispute started: 1949

Filed before SC: 1986

Present status

Pending, next date not fixed

Last listed on: April 12, 2005

Issue: Whether head of the Dawoodi Bohra vommunity has right to excommunicate members

Petitioner: Asghar Ali

Engineer, now 73

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/supreme-courts-oldest-36-and-25-keep-two-sects-waiting/940090/0

Over 11,500 patients died at AIIMS in 3 years

Hindustan Times,  New Delhi 22/April/2012

Over 11,500 patients died at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences in the past three years while undergoing treatment, an RTI reply has revealed. Dr S Sathpathy, a professor with the department of hospital administration at AIIMS, said 11,566 patients died during their stay in the main hospital, the Cardio-Thoracic and Neuro-Sciences centre, R P Centre and the casualty in the past three years. Mumbai-resident Ajay Marathe had filed the RTI seeking information regarding the number of deaths in the hospital in the past three years. "So many deaths and still then organ donation has not taken up in the hospital. Nearly eight organs can be retrieved from one body. It's unfortunate that people are still reluctant to donate," Marathe said. Quoting the reply, he said, "Of the total 4,100 deaths reported in 2008-2009, 797 happened in the casualty, 2,380 in the main hospital and 923 in the C N Centre. In the following year, a total of 4,159 deaths took place including 431 in the casualty, 2700 in the Main hospital and 978 in the C N Centre.

"In 2010-2011, 738 deaths were reported in the casualty, 2,586 in the main hospital and 853 in the C N Centre." "A total of nine deaths have happened in the past three years in the R P Centre at AIIMS," Marathe said. Besides this, 960 patients were declared brought dead in the past three years, Sathpathy said.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Over-11-500-patients-died-at-AIIMS-in-3-years/Article1-844395.aspx

Fighting corruption: To RTI or not to RTI, that is the question

By Malika Sarabhai

DNA, 22/April/2012

I recently wrote in this column about two cases where individual efforts to fight corruption and inefficient system brought results.

Alas, it is fraught with difficulties and sometimes danger.

Manjulaben Vaghela lives in Pardhol village in Dascroi taluka. She for past four years has been trying to get an electricity connection for her chhapra. Starting with the GEB, she has appealed to everyone concerned including the CM's secretariat. This has caused her loss of work and pay for many days. Exasperated but not defeated, she finally filed an RTI with TDO of Dascroi seeking information about total grants her village was eligible for and what had been spent and how. She also asked for information on government's directive to get a new list of BPL people in the village.

Manjulaben received no response and no information and thus she appealed. A few days after the appeal, Talati wrote a letter to her saying that she was living in a chhapra that was illegal and that she has to vacate it immediately. And that she must stop wasting their time by asking for information. She filed another complaint with RTI commissioner and awaits a judgement. This feisty and energetic lady then filed her papers for the Gram Panchayat elections. With no money and no support, she was defeated by a well-healed and well-connected person.

So what rights does Manjulaben as a citizen of India have? Can she be threatened into silence by the nexus between the rich and the politically connected? Given that laws are being broken, is there a system which can and should punish them?

Under section (4) 1c of the Right to Information (RTI) act, every gram panchayat is supposed to make public information of grants it receives and how that money is spent. How many do it? If you know of anyone, I would like to know about them. They deserve recognition and congratulations.

And now back to my brave friend Kirit Solanki. Another battle he has been fighting for a long time is with his 'un'cooperative housing society - yes, I purposefully call it that as there is no cooperation in that society. The promoters, who own several houses there, have been illegally expanding it for years. Then, they started encroaching on common grounds. If anyone dares to raise a voice against them, they are threatened with hockey-stick wielding men.

The promoters now have control of all common plots but they are not just encroaching, but building additional houses as well. Kirit took this matter up, first with them and then with the municipal commissioner. He was asked to wait for a month for AMC was looking into the matter. But, nothing happened. The building and digging continue.

Then AMC passed a rule for legalising illegal construction. The commissioner told Kirit that common plots do not fall in this category. He waited some more. Then he was told to go to the zonal office. Two days ago, the road upto the society was dug up making it dangerous for everyone. When he and his wife asked for it to be filled, they were told that the promoters had all the information about the complaints filed to AMC and that they would be beaten up by goondas if they didn't shut up. His wife too was threatened by the men who behaved aggressively with her.

Fearing for their own lives and that of their child, they have filed a police complaint. What happens next is worth watching for here is a perfect example of how all of us are constantly harassed and beaten into submission by goonda elements and people who break rules and laws with impunity. Let us wait and watch if AMC and the police do the right thing or whether the culture of bribing and political clout wins. Watch this space.
mallika@darpana.com

Malika Sarabhai, the writer is a noted danseuse and social activist

http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column_fighting-corruption-to-rti-or-not-to-rti-that-is-the-question_1679224

SC to form norms for appointing info bosses

HINDUSTAN TIMES, 20/APRIL/2012

New Delhi

Amid rising criticism over lack of transparency in the appointment of information commissioners in the central and state information commissions, the Supreme Court on Friday said it would examine the issue to lay down guidelines to ensure it did not become “property of a political 

set-up”.

A bench of justice GS Singhvi and justice SJ Mukopadhaya took strong exception to the manner in which candidates were being hand-picked by governments without making vacancies for appointment of information commissioners under the RTI Act known to the public.

The bench wondered if the selection or appointment of state information commissioners (SICs), without making the availability of vacancy known to those suitable for the post or the selection, would be treated as a private affair of a particular political set-up. “There is no half-way about it. We are going to lay down the law,” it said. 

The court also took a dig at retired bureaucrats and judges who espoused their cause in the “corridors of secretariat” for post-retirement jobs. As senior advocate P Narasimhan contented that the executive was empowered to make such appointments, the bench noted: “All appointments were subject to Article 14 (right to equality) under the constitution.” 

The bench observed that posts in various commissions and even universities had become a private property of the political party governing the state. “Whoever is appointed is at the mercy of chief ministers. Ordinarily he would not have the courage to act in a balanced way. After all, they are servants of the people,” the bench observed. 

The court’s severe comments came while it was hearing an appeal by those whose appointment as commissioners to the Tamil Nadu information commission was set aside by the state high court. 

Acting on a petition, the HC had on November 25, 2011, declared that the appointments of three information commissioners by the erstwhile DMK government were bad in law for lack of transparency. The court also took note of the fact that the then opposition leader Jayalalithaa wasn’t part of the decision making process.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/SC-to-form-norms-for-appointing-info-bosses/Article1-843720.aspx

‘Save Tawi’ campaign reaches CM’s cell

Activist seeks caution boards on bridges
warning against polluting river
Varun Suthra
Tribune News Services

Jammu, April 18

The “Save Tawi” campaign, a Jammu Tribune initiative to save the Tawi from further deterioration due to increasing pollution levels, has echoed the Chief Minister’s secretariat, with a volunteer registering a complaint with the CM’s Grievance Cell.

According to the official website of the cell, RTI activist Raman Sharma registered a complaint (No. 30795) on April 12 though an email.

The complainant brought the issue to the notice of the Chief Minister through a letter and sought directives to the municipal corporation to put up caution boards on all bridges over the river, prohibiting people from throw garbage and polythene into the river.

The letter addressed to the Chief Minister read: “The lifeline of Jammu, the Tawi, has been polluted by the people by throwing garbage into the holy river. Unfortunately, no one is taking care of this river.

“It hurts to see people throw garbage into the river from the bridges joining the Jammu city with Bikram Chowk. The municipal corporation has not put up any caution board to warn people against throwing garbage into the river. “Kindly direct the Jammu municipal corporation to put up caution boards, asking people not to throw garbage into the river. These boards may be put on either side of the two bridges over the river (Bikram Chowk to Jewel).

“Also, caution boards may also be erected on the Sher-e-Kashmir bridge and Gujjar Nagar to Jammu University Gate bridge,” the letter stated.

The website revealed that the complaint had been forwarded to the State Pollution Control Board after the MC had stated that the issue pertained to the pollution board.

Talking to The Tribune, Sharma said: “My only concern is to bring the issue to the notice of the Chief Minister, as his intervention is crucial at this juncture. The origin and existence of Jammu are linked to the river. The government should dedicate a project to save the river on the lines of the Rs 300-crore Mubarak Mandi heritage project.”

“The MC should come forward and play a proactive role. The authorities and officials concerned need to execute the requisite plans,” he added.

Without adhering 'Section 4' RTI act remains an Illusion

EARLY TIMES, JAMMU. APRIL 18, 2012

http://earlytimesnews.com/newsdet.aspx?q=92229

Without adhering 'Section 4' RTI act remains an Illusion

RAMAN SHARMA                                                                                                                               Three years later, when we make a critical analysis of

the implementation of Right to Information Act in Jammu
and Kashmir, may be on a cursory look, we find many reasons to appreciate the state legislature, government, bureaucrats, State Information Commission and of course the dedicated RTI volunteers and the RTI applicants for their contribution to strengthen this act in the state because now almost each day we find one or two major news items related to RTI activities in the Newspapers and every time the Chief Minister and his colleagues patting their back for implementing this act. But if this scribe who is also an RTI volunteer is given an opportunity to evaluate the state government's seriousness in implementing the RTI act in letter and spirit, then honestly he may not be able to give more than 3 out of 10 points to the state government.
As per latest data posted on Jammu and Kashmir State Information Commission's Website (www.jksic.in), it is more shocking to see that even today (after more than 3 years since RTI) only 12 departments out of more than 150 Public Authorities are fully adhering the act in toto and yet many Public Authorities and highest offices like Chief Minister's Office, Raj Bhawan, Jammu and Kashmir High Court, J and K's Chief Electoral's Office, State Home Department, State Human Rights Commission, State Accountability Commission, State Planning Department, Office of Divisional Commissioner Kashmir/Jammu and all the deputy commissioner's offices of the state are amongst the top defaulters that are not adhering and honoring all the provisions of the transparency law, i.e. Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act 2009. However, the above said offices and Public Authorities are somehow providing information to the RTI applicants only when requested but it is worth to mention here that RTI is not all to demand and then provide information. There is a provision in RTI Act which bounds the government departments to disseminate much information pro-actively. They should publicly disclose the powers and functions of any officer in a government office, a directory of officers and employees, the manner of execution of subsidy programs, amount allocated and the name of each beneficiary of a scheme. The government departments are also bound to provide reason for administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons, the provisions of the act also say that the government departments must also make voluntary disclosure of monthly remuneration received by its officers and employees and the budget allocated to it and so on.
Jammu based renowned legal expert advocate, Shiekh Shakeel Ahmad while interpreting Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act termed 'Section 4' as the Crux of the whole act, he informed that there are total 28 sections in the JK RTI Act and the most important or we must say the soul of the act is section 4 which necessitates every Public Authority to maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates Right to Information under the act and it also calls for ensuing computerization of all records within a reasonable time. Showing grave disappointment over the casual approach of the government in implementation of the act, Shiekh Shakeel, said "Without adhering 'Section 4' RTI Act will remain an Illusion".
Another RTI activist and Convener Sangarsh RTI Movement Sardar Balvinder Singh when asked to share his experiences with regard to implementation of the act during past 3 years, he also stressed for proper implementation of Section 4, he informed that all Public Authorities were under legal obligation to implement this section within 120 days from the day when this act came into existence (counting from 20th March/2009). He complained and argued that if only section 4 of the act is properly implemented in the state then more than 80 percent RTI applications will be reduced. He said that the state government should see the model of Gujarat and Rajasthan states where the Public Authorities have voluntarily disclosed most of the information on walls, notice boards and Websites in local languages.
Let all the stakeholders realize the fact that it is collective responsibility of all of us to strengthen the regime of transparency as the preamble of the act itself says that Constitution of India has established democratic Republic and democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information is vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed and revelation of information in actual practice is likely to conflict with other public interests including efficient operations of the Governments. So the government departments/institutions/commission and Public Authorities that have not been able to fully implement and honour all the provisions of this law yet, must preserve the paramountcy of the democratic ideal and make arrangements for proper implementation of all the sections and sub sections of the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act 2009, because we are living in a country where rule of law prevails and we cannot afford to defy the laws made by none other than our own institutions i.e. legislatures.
In conclusion, let us hope that within limited available resources, the concerned Public Authorities do the needful and the people of the state will witness a strong and sustainable regime of transparency and accountability.
Raman Sharma an RTI activist can be reached [@] JKRTIACT@GMAIL.COM   










JKNEWSPOINT, 18/APRIL/2012
http://www.jknewspoint.com/index.php/forum/41516-without-adhering-section-4-rti-act-remains-an-illusion 

Disqus

DAILY EXCELSIOR, 03/JUNE/2012.

Implement section 4 of RTI Act

Raman Sharma

Three years later, when we make a critical analysis of the implementation of Right to Information Act in Jammu and Kashmir, may be on a cursory look, we find many reasons to appreciate the State Legislature, Government, Bureaucrats, State Information Commission and of course the dedicated RTI volunteers and the RTI applicants for their contribution to strengthen this act in the state because now almost each day we find one or two major news items related to RTI activities in the newspapers and every time the Chief Minister and his colleagues patting their back for implementing this act. However there are certain areas which need to be addressed at the earliest to make it more effective.
As per latest Data posted on Jammu and Kashmir State Information Commission's Website (www.jksic.in), it is more shocking to see that even today (after more than 3 years since RTI) only 12 departments, out of more than 150 Public authorities are fully adhering to the act in toto and yet many Public Authorities and highest offices like Chief Minister's Office, Raj Bhawan, Jammu and Kashmir High Court, J and K's Chief Electoral Office, State Home Department, State Human Rights Commission, State Accountability Commission, State Planning Department, Office of Divisional Commissioner Kashmir/Jammu and all the Deputy Commissioner's offices of the state are amongst the top defaulters that are not adhering to and honouring all the provisions of the transparency law, i.e Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act 2009.
However, the above said offices and Public Authorities are somehow providing information to the RTI applicants only when requested but it is worth to mention here that RTI is not all to demand and then provide information. There is a provision in RTI Act which binds the government departments to disseminate much information pro-actively. They should publicly disclose the powers and functions of any officer in a Government office, a directory of officers and employees, the manner of execution of subsidy programmes, amount allocated and the name of each beneficiary of a scheme. The Government departments are also bound to provide reason for administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons. The provisions of the act also say that the Government departments must also make voluntary disclosure of monthly remuneration received by its officers and employees and the budget allocated to it and so on.
Jammu based renowned legal expert Advocate Shiekh Shakeel Ahmad while interpreting Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act termed 'Section 4' as the Crux of the whole act. He informed that there are total 28 sections in the JK RTI Act and the most important or we must say the soul of the Act is section 4 which necessitates every Public Authority to maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates Right to Information under the Act and it also calls for ensuing computerization of all records within a reasonable time. Showing grave disappointment over the casual approach of the Government in implementation of the Act, Shiekh Shakeel said "Without adhering 'Section 4' RTI Act will remain an illusion.''
Another RTI activist and Convener Sangarsh RTI Movement Sardar Balvinder Singh when asked to share his experience with regard to implementation of the act during past 3 years, he also stressed for proper implementation of Section 4, he informed that all Public Authorities were under legal obligation to implement this section within 120 days from the day when this Act came into existence (counting from 20th March, 2009). He complained and argued that if only section 4 of the act is properly implemented in the state then more than 80 percent RTI applications will be reduced. He said that the State Government should see the model of Gujarat and Rajasthan states where the Public Authorities have voluntarily disclosed most of the information on walls, notice boards and website in local language.
Let all the stakeholders realize the fact that it is collective responsibility of all of us to strengthen the regime of transparency as the preamble of the act itself says that Constitution of India has established democratic Republic and democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information is vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed and revelation of information in actual practice is likely to conflict with other public interests including efficient operations of the Governments.
So the Government departments/ institutions/commission and Public Authorities that have not been able to fully implement and honour all the provisions of this law yet, must preserve the paramountcy of the democratic ideal and make arrangements for proper implementation of all the sections and sub sections of the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act 2009, because we are living in a country where rule of law prevails and we cannot afford to defy the laws made by none other than our own institutions i.e legislatures.
In conclusion, let us hope that within limited available resources, the concerned Public Authorities do the needful and the people of the state will witness a strong and sustainable regime of transparency and accountability.
(The author is an RTI activist)

WHAT MEDIA SAYS ABOUT THIS BLOG

KATHUA  KESARI, 

WWW.KATHUAKESARI.COM

http://www.kathuakesari.com/archive.aspx?date1=04%2F06%2F2012

Implementing Section 4

                                  
MOST OF THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES/ GOVERNMENT OFFICES IN JAMMU AND KASHMIR HAVE NOT IMPLEMENTED SECTION 4 OF THE RTI ACT, SECTION 4 IS SEEN AS SOUL OF THE ACT.

   So, it is suggested  to everyone that in order to help to bring the RTI regime in the state, Citizens should file the sample RTI application with the Public Authority to make them to implement section 4 of the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act 2009.

Sample Application.


Here is a sample RTI application,asking a public authority on the progress of his/her institution on Section 4.


To

The Public Information Officer,
________________________
________________________

Sub: Application under Jammu and Kashmir  Right to Information Act 2009

Dear Sir/Madam,

Please provide the following information under Jammu and Kashmir  Right to Information act 2009, I am a resident of the state and initial fees of Rs. 10 is enclosed here with as IPO/Treasury Voucher/Non Judicial Stamp Paper/Demand Draft or Banker’s Cheque vide no…………………

1.     Under Section 4 (1) (a) of the Right to Information act 2005, all public authorities are suppose to maintain all their records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner that facilitates the Right to Information. In this regard, what steps have been taken by the your office to meets its obligation under Section 4(1) (a). Please provide details of steps, mechanisms, process and/or systems adopted by the your office to fulfill this responsibility.

2.     Please provide certified copies of the instructions/ orders etc. received from superior authorities with respect to implementation of the Right to Information act 2005.

1. Under Section 4(2) of the Right to Information act 2005, all public authorities have to *suo motu* disclose information pertaining to their functioning as per the 17 points listed under Section 4(1) (b). In this regard please provide the following information:-

1. Has the your office/department *suo motu* made public, information falling under all the 17 points listed under section 4(1) (b)?

2. If yes, please provide information regarding the medium and format in which the information has been displayed.

3. Is this information easily accessible? Please list the options available to the public to access this information. 

4. What steps has your office taken to provide as much information as possible *suo motu* to the public so that they do not have to apply under section 4 (2) of the RTI Act 2005? Please provide details of steps taken.

5. What steps have been taken by your office to disseminate widely the information w.r.t section 4 (1), in a manner easily accessible to the public? Please provide details of the steps taken for dissemination.

6. Has your office updated the information listed in the 17 points under section 4(1) (b)? If yes, then please provide the dates on which the information was updated, the process undertaken to update the information, the officer(s) in-charge of ensuring that the information is updated and made available under section 4(1) (b).

7. Has your office put up notice boards under section 4 (4) (ref. to explanations), giving the details about the CPIO etc.: in its office, subordinate offices. If yes, then please provide certified copies of office orders sent to the concerned offices and action taken report received from them.

1. Has your office published all relevant facts while formulating policies or announcing decisions that affect the public as required under Section 4(1) (c)? 

1. If yes, then please provide certified copies of notifications, orders, government resolutions, circulars and any other means of communication or documents, files including file notings through which the same was carried out.

1. What steps have been undertaken by your office to ensure that it provides reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons? Please provide details of the process, mechanism and/or systems that are in place to meet this obligation under Section 4(1) (d).

1. With respect to point 3 (g) above, I would like to inspect the said work under section 2 (j) subsection (i) of the RTI act 2005. Please let me know the date, time and venue for the inspection.

The above requested information maybe kindly furnished within the time period of 30 days as provided in section 7. I am depositing Rs. 10 as application fees.
Please do not use any acronym/abbreviations in the reply. The reply should be English under section 7(9) of the RTI act 2005.

If you do not directly deal with this application or a part thereof, kindly forward it to the right PIO under section 6(3) of RTI Act with intimation to me. You are required to do so within 5 days of receipt of this application, as per section 6(3) of the Act.

Thanking You,
Yours Faithfully,

Consumer forum tells PFC to compensate RTI applicant

Rajni Shaleen Chopra,

Chandigarh 73-year-old from Kotkapura complained that Punjab Financial Corp gave him wrong info, gets Rs 50,000 reliefAn RTI applicant who suffered loss due to wrong information given by Punjab Financial Corporation (PFC) has been awarded Rs 50,000 compensation by Chandigarh Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. Forum President P D Goel and Member Dr Madanjit Kaur Sahota have also directed the PFC assistant public information officer to pay Rs 5,000 to Balraj Kalra, a 73-year-old resident of Kotkapura, Punjab.
In his complaint, Kalra had stated that in June 2011, he applied to the Corporation for some information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. He stated that by giving wrong information, PFC played a fraud with his wife Parkash Kumari “by selling land which was not owned by it”. Kalra added that on account of the wrong information, his wife had to pay the cost of land plus other expenses amounting to Rs 2.8 lakh to the Corporation. He added that PFC was deficient in service towards him and also guilty of unfair trade practice.
In its reply, PFC stated that Kalra could not be regarded as a consumer of the Corporation. It denied that “wrong or irrelevant/ incomplete information” was supplied to him. PFC denied that any fraud had been played with Kalra’s wife by selling the land of which the corporation was not the owner.
PFC highlighted that the property sold to Kalra’s wife was on lease with Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation (PSIEC). PFC said that it had only sold the leasehold rights of the property concerned, which is permissible under law.
After considering the case, the Forum observed that going by the statutes of the Consumer Protection Act, Kalra was a consumer of the Corporation. The Forum stated that when PFC sold the land to Kalra’s wife, it was the “lawful duty” of the Corporation to supply information regarding the land as demanded by him.
The Forum noted that instead, PFC supplied him incomplete and jumbled information and he was aggrieved by this action. The Forum held that, hence, PFC had been “grossly deficient in rendering proper services” to the complainant and had indulged in unfair trade practice. In this right, the Forum directed the Corporation to compensate the complainant accordingly.
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/consumer-forum-tells-pfc-to-compensate-rti-applicant/935671/

SIC imposes Rs 12,750 fine on Tehsildar

Daily excelsior, 12/April/12

SRINAGAR, Apr 11: The State Information Commission (SIC) today penalized Tehsildar Udhampur (the then Tehsildar Jammu) and imposed a fine of Rs. 12,750 on him as he failed to provide information to an Right to Information (RTI) applicant regarding encroachment/sale of public land of Shishu Samadian situated at Rehari (Pacca Talab), Jammu.

In his decision under decision number SIC-J/Comp-13 Nov/2011-J/65, State Information Commissioner, Dr. S. K Sharma said that Subash Singh Chib, then Tehsildar Jammu has resorted to unreasonable period of default of 51 days and has not provided details to the information seeker. The Information Commissioner said that the penalty should be calculated at the rate of Rs. 250 per day for 51 adding that the amount leads to Rs. 12,750.

"The Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO) of the office of Tehsildar, Udhampur will ensure deduction of Rs. 12,750 from the salary of Subash Singh Chib, Tehsildar Udhampur in three equal instalments as provided in Rule 36 (3) of Jammu and Kashmir State Rules, 2010 and remit to the Government account with an intimation to this commission," said the State Information Commissioner in the order.

The Information Commissioner said that in case of any default committed by the DDO in this regard, he (DDO) will be personally liable for making the payment towards the government account. He said that the order has to be complied within 15 days from the date of receipt of the order.

On September 19, 2011, Dineshwar Singh Jamwal had moved an application seeking information about the action taken report by Deputy Commissioner, Jammu against the order issued by the DC Jammu office number DCJ/SQ/07-03/01-03 dated December 28, 2007 against the encroachment/sale of public land of Shishu Samadian situated at Rehari (Pacca Talab), Jammu.

As per the mandate of the Act, the order on the application of the information seeker was to be passed within a maximum period of 30 days by the Public Information Officer. This was not done and the information seeker filed complaint before SIC on November 11, 2011 against the PIO for not providing the information.

The Registry of the SIC issued issued seven days notice to the PIO vide number SIC/J/Comp/13 Nov 2011/1035 dated December 19, 2011. Despite lapse of seven days there was no response from the PIO of the Deputy Commissioner Jammu’s office. After this the case was listed for hearing on February 1, 2012 and hearing notice was issued vide number SIC/J/Comp/13 Nov 2011/354-55 dated January 24, 2012 and served upon the PIO with a copy to the complainant.

In response to the hearing notice the PIO/Assistant Commissioner (Revenue) Jammu submitted in writing vide his office number DCJ/SQ/2011-12/8249 dated January 31, 2012 that the application was transferred to the concerned quarters (Tehsildar, Jammu) for providing the information as it pertained to his jurisdiction.

Following this a complaint was filed and it was heard on February 1, 2012. The PIO/Assistant Commissioner (R), Jammu submitted that he will provide the information relating to the eviction proceedings within 10 days from the date of hearing. However, the PIO did not share the information upto April 9 and the information has been accessed by the SIC.

The information commissioner observed that since there has been a delay of 51 days the present Tehsildar Udhampur (then Tehsildar Jammu) should be penalized and a fine of Rs. 12,750 should be imposed on him.

http://www.dailyexcelsior.com/http://www.dailyexcelsior.com/

J K Right to Information Act: Some Important Tips for PIO’s 

For sincere and prompt delivery of the RTI applications,  the Public Information Officers can  follow the below written 25 instructions/tips  given along with  the relevant provisions and clauses of the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act 2009 and JK RTI Rule 2010.

1.     The Right to information Act is given to the citizen by Jammu and Kashmir State legislature (vide Act No. VIII of 2009 dated 20^th March 2009).

2.     Never treat and make the citizen submitting RTI request to feel that you are annoyed instead render all reasonable assistance to the applicant. (Section 6 (1) )

3.     Every person residing in the state has the right to information. ( Section 3)

4.     Never reject an RTI application without citing the valid exemption clauses and that too the rejection order is to be given in writing. ( Section 7(1))

5.     An RTI applicant can submit his application through post/self or even via electronic mean. (section 6(1))

6.     An RTI applicant can be in English, Urdu or Hindi Language, it can be typed/handwritten. (section 6(1))

7.     Accept RTI application even if it is not related to your department. (Section 6(3) )

8.     Never ask the applicant any personal question, like his intention or motive for seeking information, his job, family etc. (Section 6(2) )

9.     Go through the content of the application at an earliest.

10.  And if it does not pertain to your department then transfer it to the concerned department within 5 days. (Section 6(3) )

11. Accept the initial RTI fees of Rs. 50/- in shape of Indian Postal Order, Demand Draft, Bankers Cheque, Non Judicial Stamp paper, Cash receipt or treasure voucher. ( Rule 4 of J & K RTI Rules 2010)

12. No fees to be charged from the person belonging to BPL category.  ( Section 7(5))

13. Intimate the applicant for additional fees for supplying the information along with the calculations, his right to review decision and particulars of the appellate authority. ( section 7,3(a,b)).

14. Provide Information within 30 days but related to life and liberty within 48 hours. (section, 7(1) )

15. No fees can be charged from the applicant where the information is not provided within 30 days. (section 7(6))

16. Provide the Information to the applicant in the format in which it is sought. (section 7(9) )

17. The Information which cannot be denied to the Parliament or the State Legislature shall not be denied to any person. (section, 8(i) )

18. Failure in providing or silence on any RTI application more than 30 days shall be deemed as refusal (section 7(2) ).

19. RTI extends to the whole of Jammu and Kashmir and it has come into force at once. (section 1(2,3)

20. An RTI applicant has the right to inspection of work, documents, records, he can take notes, extracts or certified copies of documents, can also take certified samples. (section 2,  i(I,II,III) )

21. RTI applicants obtain information in the form of diskettes, floppies, tapes, videos cassettes or in any other electronic or through printout. (section 2, i(IV))

22. The PIO may seek assistance of any other officers, if he considers it necessary for furnishing the Information. ( Section 5(4) )

23. The officer, who assistance is sought by the PIO is under obligation to render assistance and he shall also be treated as PIO ( Section 5(5) )

24. Never provide incorrect, incomplete and misleading information. Else you may attract penalty up to Rs. 25000/- besides disciplinary action under service rules. (Section 17(1))

25. RTI Act have overriding effect, the provisions of the Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the State Official Secrets Act, Samvat 1977. (Section 19)

About Author: Raman Sharma is an RTI activist and can be reached [@] JKRTIACT@GMAIL.COM,  mob: 9796811012

Registration for Online Certificate Course In RTI!!!

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

For registration and further details visit.


http://rtiocc.cgg.gov.in/login.do;jsessionid=3A158814606553D28624C563B53786B8

IRC Public authority under RTI: SIC


Greater Kashmir, 08/April/2012

UMER MAQBOOL

Srinagar, Apr 7: In a landmark judgment, the State Information Commission has ruled that Indian Red Cross Society J&K Branch is a Public Authority under Right to Information (RTI) Act -2009
 “Having considered all the facts and evidence brought on record, the Commission hereby declares the Indian Red Cross Society J&K Branch as a Public Authority in terms of Section 2 (f) of the State Right to Information Act, 2009,” the double bench comprising Chief Information Commissioner Ghulam Rasool Sofi and State Information Commissioner Nazir Ahmed said in an order today.
 The order directed the Public Authority of J&K Branch of Indian Red Cross Society to designate PIOs/APIOs and 1st Appellate Authority for their offices at Srinagar and Jammu within 30 days.
 Pertinently, Ghulam Rasool Shah had filed an application under Section 6 of the State RTI Act before Hon’y General Secretary, Indian Red Cross Society, J&K Branch, Srinagar for obtaining the information.
 “The Post of Programme Manager is fully sponsored by International Red Cross Society, therefore, it does not fall within the purview of RTI Act of the State,” the Honorary Secretary ruled in his order.
 After failing to get requisite information, Shah filed a complaint before the Commission in December last year.
 After preliminary hearing, the SIC recommended for constitution of a larger/ double Bench which was approved by the Chief Information Commissioner of, in accordance with State Right to Information Rules, 2010.
 During the hearings, the Commission perused the records and evidences provided by both sides in support of their arguments.   The Commission in its order said: “It is an admitted fact that the building of Red Cross Society Kashmir Branch has been constructed out of Government funds. Secretary of the Society, though Honorary, is appointed and nominated by the Government. The Red Cross Society Kashmir Branch is covered under an Act ‘XV of  1920 as  amended  by Act  22 of  1956 and  the  adaptation  of  Laws (4) order 1957’. The President and Vice-President of Red Cross Society State Branch respectively are Governor of Jammu and Kashmir State and Chief Minister of the State.”
 “These facts do strongly suggest that the Indian Red Cross Society is a Public Authority,” the order reads.
 The judgment said that national headquarter of Indian Red Cross Society is covered under (Central) RTI Act, 2005. “The issue whether Central Indian Red Cross Society falls under the ambit of Central RTI Act, 2005 has been replied in affirmative by the Central Information Commission vide their order dated 31-08-2008 passed in the case titled Sunil Yadav V/S Indian Red Cross Society. It was also noted by the Central Information Commission in the above order that National HQ of IRCS is covered under (Central) RTI Act, 2005 and the IRCS NHQ has its own PIO under the RTI Act and all state branches are expected to be also similarly covered,” the order states.



http://www.greaterkashmir.com/news/2012/Apr/8/irc-public-authority-under-rti-sic-64.asp

Exempt RTI fees for disabled applicants

Activists demand Act and Rules copies in Braile Script

05/April/2012:

Jammu: The Right to Information Activists and Volunteers  across Jammu and Kashmir State have urged the State Government to Exempt RTI fees for disabled applicants seeking information under RTI act and also bring copies of Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009 and RTI Rules in Braile Script for visually impaired citizens. A joint appeal by  prominent RTI activists  including, Dr. Muzaffar Bhat of  JK RTI Movement, Narotam Sharma of Kshitij RTI Foundation, noted activist Raman Sharma, well known  Advocate Shiekh Shakeel Ahmed, Advocate Vilakshan Singh, , Advocate Nadeem Qadri from Srinagar, Advocate Dewakar Sharma, activist Deepak Sharma, Dr. Shiekh Ghulam Rasool of Badgam and Sardar Balvinder Singh along with Darvinder Singh (Sangarsh RTI Movement), have urged the state government and Chief Minister to exempt RTI fees for physically challenged peoples on the pattern of BPL category people, at present only a person falling in the BPL category is exempted from any kind of RTI fees. The activists in their joint appeal to the Chief Minister Omar Abdullah have argued that it would help the most deserving people of the society and take the transparency law to the reach of every citizen. They have also urged the state government to consider their appeal for bringing the copies of RTI Act and Rules in Braile script. In their joint plea the activists have also requested the General Administration Department to issue a formal order with regard to implementation of interim order of Jammu and Kashmir High Court, where the Court has slashed the RTI fees to Rs. 10/application and Rs. 2/page instead of Rs. 50/application and Rs. 10/page respectively. In absence of a formal notification most of the departments are even today demanding Rs. 50/application causing lot of humiliation to the RTI users.




JK NEWS POINT.. 06/April/2012

Exempt RTI fees for disabled applicants

Jammu Tawi, April 5 Right to Information Activists and Volunteers  across Jammu and Kashmir State have urged the State Government to exempt RTI fees for disabled applicants seeking information under RTI Act and also bring copies of Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009 and RTI Rules in Braile Script for visually impaired citizens. In a joint appeal prominent RTI activists  including, Dr. Muzaffar Bhat of  JK RTI Movement, Narotam Sharma of Kshitij RTI Foundation, noted activist Raman Sharma, well known  Advocate Shiekh Shakeel Ahmed, Advocate Vilakshan Singh, Advocate Nadeem Qadri from Srinagar, Advocate Dewakar Sharma, activist Deepak Sharma, Dr. Shiekh Ghulam Rasool of Budgam and Sardar Balvinder Singh along with Darvinder Singh (Sangarsh RTI Movement), have urged the state government and Chief Minister to exempt RTI fees for physically challenged people on the pattern of BPL category people who are exempted from any kind of RTI fees. The activists in their joint appeal to the Chief Minister Omar Abdullah have argued that it would help the most deserving people of the             society and take the transparency law to the reach of every citizen. They have also urged the state government to consider their appeal for bringing the copies of RTI Act and Rules in Braile script.  They have also requested the General Administration Department to issue a formal order with regard to implementation of interim order of Jammu and Kashmir High Court, wherein the Court has slashed the RTI fees to Rs 10 per application and Rs. 2                  per page. In absence of a formal notification most of the departments are even today demanding Rs 50 per application causing lot of humiliation to the RTI users.

http://www.jknewspoint.com/index.php/j-a-k-news/41032-exempt-rti-fees-for-disabled-applicants






GREATER KASHMIR... 06/April/2012


‘Exempt RTI fees for physically challenged applicants’


Jammu, Apr 5: Many RTI activists and volunteers of Jammu and Kashmir have urged the Government to exempt RTI fees for physically challenged applicants seeking information under the Act.
 They also demanded that copies of the Jammu and Kashmir Right to Information Act, 2009 and RTI Rules should be prepared in Braille script for visually impaired citizens.
 A joint appeal in this regard has been made by prominent RTI activists including Dr Muzaffar Bhat of JK RTI Movement, Narotam Sharma of Kshitij RTI Foundation, Darvinder Singh (Sangarsh RTI Movement), Raman Sharma, Advocates Shiekh Shakeel Ahmed, Vilakshan Singh, Nadeem Qadri, Dewakar Sharma, Deepak Sharma, Dr Shiekh Ghulam Rasool and Sardar Balvinder Singh.  


http://www.greaterkashmir.com/news/2012/Apr/6/-exempt-rti-fees-for-physically-challenged-applicants--57.asp