Sunday, July 3, 2011

Re: [HumJanenge] “Dear RTI Activist, please solve my problem for free”

Veteran Inderjit Singh Gill,

This group is not a paid service provider; but a group of dedicated
selfless RTI Activists. You are most welcome to join this group and
can clarify all your doubtson RTI from the learned and otherwise well
placed members of this group. I could not understand how your Industry
provide substantial amount to the local municipality voluntarily . You
cannot claim your payment by way taxes due as your contribution as
without paying such dues your Industry may not be eligible to earn its
lively-hood from the Muncicipal location.

On 04/07/2011, Inderjit Singh Gill <isgill48@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I am a veteran Defence Services officer, working in industry located at
> Pithampur in Dist DHAR, MP.
>
> The industries are paying a substantial amount to local muncipality by way
> of annual taxes, with no control
> on planning and execution of developmental / other projects in our area.
> Mind you, 'industrial units' are the
> major contributors of finances to this civic body.
>
> In case, some one has details of a RTI activist(s) in Indore / Dhar / Mhow
> etc, so that we can contact them
> for obtaining this information, it will help us to plan our future
> action(s). Or please guide how to search for one on net.
>
> Thanking you and looking forward to your inputs.
>
> Regards
>
> Col IS Gill, Veteran
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:02 AM, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Please use the attached format for filing the appeal/complaint
>> regards
>>
>> On 7/1/11, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I will be helping you file a complaint as well as second appeal.
>> > regards
>> > sandeep
>> >
>> > On 7/1/11, AVTAR SINGH <avtarsingh119@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Dear Sarabjit Roy,
>> >>
>> >> I am a rertired officer from defence.
>> >> I along with 200 officers have won our case regarding pension at three
>> >> different benches of AFT,
>> >> The plea has been identical and judgement similar. The judgement was
>> >> delivered on 16 Sep 2010,1 Nov 2011 and 25 Nov 2011.
>> >>
>> >> Though the stipulated period of three/four months has elapsed we have
>> not
>> >> got our dues.
>> >>
>> >> One of our fellow ranling officers who was not a petitioner have have
>> >> filed
>> >> two RTIS on 15 and a6 marcg 2011.
>> >>
>> >> The reminder for this was sent as first appeal to the appellate
>> authority
>> >> on
>> >> 15 may 2011 and 18 June 2011
>> >>
>> >> We now propose to file second appeal to CIC.
>> >>
>> >> Can you suggest some expert of RTI around Delhi who could assist us in
>> >> filing second appeal to CIC.
>> >>
>> >> regards
>> >>
>> >> Avtar Singh
>> >> 1-7-2011
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 07:03:48 +0530
>> >> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: [HumJanenge-YG] "Dear RTI Activist, please
>> >> solve
>> >> my problem for free"
>> >> From: sroy.mb@gmail.com
>> >> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>> >>
>> >> Dear Karira ("rtiwanted")
>> >>
>> >> Many thanks for finally getting Mr Krishnaraj Rao to openly admit that
>> he
>> >> is
>> >> in the business of filing RTI applications and negotiating deals to
>> >> "defend"
>> >> people's assets for a charge. The bonafides of his so-called RTI Users
>> >> Association are completely exposed by this statement.
>> >>
>> >> Secondly, if we recall his "hunger strike" at Anna's vilage of Ralegaon
>> >> Siddhi, it is quite obvious that he is only trying to replicate (in his
>> >> own
>> >> small way) Anna's own "business" model.
>> >>
>> >> Personally, I condemn such commercial minded people who are a blot on
>> the
>> >> RTI moivement, the less we interact with them the better. At
>> >> HumJanenge-Googlegroups we are trying to make this a group for selfless
>> >> people who freely asisst each other to further the RTI movement for
>> >> nation
>> >> building.
>> >>
>> >> Sarbajit
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Krishnaraj Rao
>> >> <sahasipadyatri@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Dear Jam,
>> >>
>> >> My conclusion is:
>> >>
>> >> 1) RTI activists/experts should reasonably charge private parties whose
>> >> assets they defend, provided the parties are capable of bearing the
>> >> charge.
>> >>
>> >> 2) In private matters where there is a very large element of public
>> >> interest, they may consider not charging.
>> >>
>> >> 3) They should not charge citizens who are working for public interest.
>> >> In
>> >> fact, for such citizens, they should go out of their way to help with
>> >> time
>> >> and monetary resources.
>> >>
>> >> 4) For ensuring the health of the RTI movement, they have a multiple
>> >> responsibility. They have to act in such a way that:
>> >> a) Public Interest is paramount in all that they do or say.
>> >> b) People who uphold public interest remain in good financial health.
>> >> c) Private parties get good quality service and growing numbers of
>> >> service-providers (paid) or guidance-providers (free) to choose from.
>> >> d) There is plenty of self-help knowledge available in the public
>> >> domain
>> >> so
>> >> that people take the paid services out of free choice, and not because
>> of
>> >> lack of access to information.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for your interest in this discussion.
>> >>
>> >> Warm Regards,
>> >> Krish
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:06 AM, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> **
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>> Krishnaraj,
>> >>>
>> >>> So, what is your conclusion ?
>> >>>
>> >>> Should RTI activists/helpers/consultants/experts/etc charge citizens
>> >>> or
>> >>> not
>> >>> ?
>> >>
>> >> __._,_.___
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a new
>> topic
>> >> Messages in this topic (5)
>> >>
>> >> Recent Activity:
>> >>
>> >> Visit Your Group
>> >> messages in archives can be accessed only by members, but all are
>> welcome
>> >> to
>> >> join hum janenge group. visit http://indiarti.blogspot.com to know
>> >> everything on rti.
>> >>
>> >> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> .
>> >>
>> >> __,_._,___
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> > 989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> > Phone: 91-99929-31181
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> 989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>
>

[HumJanenge] RTI activists force blood bank to remain functional

Dear All,

Kindly read the article published in The Statesman (04/07/2011).

Link: http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=375297&catid=73

 

RTI activists force blood bank to remain functional

 

3 July 2011   

Shiba Nanda Basu.


KOLKATA, 3 JULY: The authorities of Jawaharlal Nehru Memorial Hospital in Kalyani were forced to keep the blood bank open and supply blood to an octogenarian yesterday after some RTI activists in Nadia district sought reply from the higher authorities why the important unit of the hospital remains closed for eight hours everyday.  Patients visiting the hospital face tough time as the only blood bank remains closed for eight hours from 2 p.m. every day due to shortage of staff.
The matter came to light when Mr Dipayan Sarkar, who admitted his mother Ms Kalyani Sarkar (80), a cardiac patient, to the hospital on 1 July and went to the blood bank unit on 2 July only to return empty-handed as he found the blood bank closed after 2 pm. Mr Sarkar informed RTI activists who brought the matter to the notice of the director of blood safety saying that according to RTI Act an applicant should receive information within 48 hours if it related to "life or liberty" of a person. The activists also wanted to know those who are responsible and why no recruitment was made though there is a shortage of employees. Following the intimation, the deputy director of blood safety, Mr Nayan Chandra, informed the matter to the joint director, Mr Ratanlal Ganguly, to resolve the crisis. Later, the hospital authorities kept the blood bank open and supplied blood to the patient.
At present there are only two technicians operating the blood bank. This made the task difficult for the hospital authorities to provide blood round-the-clock. Even relatives of patients are asked to collect blood from outside. As a result, patients who visit between 2 pm and 10 pm everyday face difficulties to get blood from the hospital blood bank.  The superintendent of the hospital, Dr Nirupam Biswas, said the blood bank remains closed from 4 pm to 10 pm in weekdays, as there is a staff shortage. He said: "It is very difficult for us to run the blood bank with only two workers. We need at least three technicians to keep the blood bank going for 24 hours." A doctor said the same problem prevails in blood banks in the other state-run hospitals in the district. He said relatives of the patients have to rush to Manicktala blood bank during emergency. Dr Nayan Chandra, deputy director of blood safety, said there is a shortage of technicians in the blood banks in the districts which made the situation difficult

--
Anindya Kishor Das

[HumJanenge] “Dear RTI Activist, please solve my problem for free”

Dear All,
 
I am a veteran Defence Services officer, working in industry located at Pithampur in Dist DHAR, MP.
 
The industries are paying a substantial amount to local muncipality by way of annual taxes, with no control
on planning and execution of developmental / other projects in our area. Mind you, 'industrial units' are the
major contributors of finances to this civic body.
 
In case, some one has details of a RTI activist(s) in Indore / Dhar / Mhow etc, so that we can contact them 
for obtaining this information, it will help us to plan our future action(s). Or please guide how to search for one on net.
 
Thanking you and looking forward to your inputs.
 
Regards
 
Col IS Gill, Veteran 
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:02 AM, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
Please use the attached format for filing the appeal/complaint
regards

On 7/1/11, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will be helping you file a complaint as well as second appeal.
> regards
> sandeep
>
> On 7/1/11, AVTAR SINGH <avtarsingh119@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Sarabjit Roy,
>>
>> I am a rertired officer from defence.
>> I along with 200 officers have won our case regarding pension at three
>> different benches of AFT,
>> The plea has been identical and judgement similar. The judgement was
>> delivered on 16 Sep 2010,1 Nov 2011 and 25 Nov 2011.
>>
>> Though the stipulated period of three/four months has elapsed we have not
>> got our dues.
>>
>> One of our fellow ranling officers who was not a petitioner have have
>> filed
>> two RTIS on 15 and a6 marcg 2011.
>>
>> The reminder for this was sent as first appeal to the appellate authority
>> on
>> 15 may 2011 and 18 June 2011
>>
>> We now propose to file second appeal to CIC.
>>
>> Can you suggest some expert of RTI around Delhi who could assist us in
>> filing second appeal to CIC.
>>
>> regards
>>
>> Avtar Singh
>> 1-7-2011
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 07:03:48 +0530
>> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: [HumJanenge-YG] "Dear RTI Activist, please
>> solve
>> my problem for free"
>> From: sroy.mb@gmail.com
>> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>>
>> Dear Karira ("rtiwanted")
>>
>> Many thanks for finally getting Mr Krishnaraj Rao to openly admit that he
>> is
>> in the business of filing RTI applications and negotiating deals to
>> "defend"
>> people's assets for a charge. The bonafides of his so-called RTI Users
>> Association are completely exposed by this statement.
>>
>> Secondly, if we recall his "hunger strike" at Anna's vilage of Ralegaon
>> Siddhi, it is quite obvious that he is only trying to replicate (in his
>> own
>> small way) Anna's own "business" model.
>>
>> Personally, I condemn such commercial minded people who are a blot on the
>> RTI moivement, the less we interact with them the better. At
>> HumJanenge-Googlegroups we are trying to make this a group for selfless
>> people who freely asisst each other to further the RTI movement for
>> nation
>> building.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Krishnaraj Rao
>> <sahasipadyatri@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Jam,
>>
>> My conclusion is:
>>
>> 1) RTI activists/experts should reasonably charge private parties whose
>> assets they defend, provided the parties are capable of bearing the
>> charge.
>>
>> 2) In private matters where there is a very large element of public
>> interest, they may consider not charging.
>>
>> 3) They should not charge citizens who are working for public interest.
>> In
>> fact, for such citizens, they should go out of their way to help with
>> time
>> and monetary resources.
>>
>> 4) For ensuring the health of the RTI movement, they have a multiple
>> responsibility. They have to act in such a way that:
>> a) Public Interest is paramount in all that they do or say.
>> b) People who uphold public interest remain in good financial health.
>> c) Private parties get good quality service and growing numbers of
>> service-providers (paid) or guidance-providers (free) to choose from.
>> d) There is plenty of self-help knowledge available in the public domain
>> so
>> that people take the paid services out of free choice, and not because of
>> lack of access to information.
>>
>> Thanks for your interest in this discussion.
>>
>> Warm Regards,
>> Krish
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:06 AM, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> **
>>>
>>>
>>
>>> Krishnaraj,
>>>
>>> So, what is your conclusion ?
>>>
>>> Should RTI activists/helpers/consultants/experts/etc charge citizens or
>>> not
>>> ?
>>
>> __._,_.___
>>
>>
>> Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a new topic
>> Messages in this topic (5)
>>
>> Recent Activity:
>>
>> Visit Your Group
>> messages in archives can be accessed only by members, but all are welcome
>> to
>> join hum janenge group. visit http://indiarti.blogspot.com to know
>> everything on rti.
>>
>> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
>>
>>
>> .
>>
>> __,_._,___
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>


--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Disposal of cases by Orissa Information Commission still low

Dear friends,

In the Month of May, 2011, Mr. Prahallad Padhi, RTI Activist  of Bolangir district, Orissa had submitted RTI Application seeking information about the number of cases  ( both Complaints and 2nd Appeals) heard  and disposed of  by the Orissa Chief Information Commissioner and two Orissa  Information Commissioners during January to March, 2011. The information supplied by the PIO on 8.6.2011 is as follows.

 

Month/

Year-2011

T.K.Mishra (OCIC)

Mr.Jagadanand (SIC)

Mr.P.K.Mohanty (SIC)

No. of total cases heard

No. of cases disposed of

No. of total cases heard

No. of cases disposed

No. of total cases heard

No. of cases disposed

Jan

167

89

157

81

134

51

Feb.

111

47

158

70

49

31

March

111

45

110

64

45

32

Total

389

181

425

215

228

114

 

From an analysis of the above table it is evident that-

a. Within 3 months, total no. of cases  disposed  by 3-Member Orissa Information Commission = 510

b. Average per month disposal of cases by the whole Commission =       170

c. Average number of cases dis[osed by each Information Commissioner per month =   56

d. Average no. of cases heard by each Commissioner is not taken into account for the purpose of analysis,  because hearing itself is not directly related to the interest of the applicants/ citizens.

 

Earlier in 2010, we had made an analysis  from which it was found that the average number of disposals by each Information Commissioner per month was  only 37. It was then repeatedly pointed out  that because of their inefficiency coupled engagement in extra-statutory activities like orgaising and addressing workshop and seminars, the Information Commissioners of the State could dispose only a small number of cases. Whereas the Information Commissioners of other states like Gujurat, Maharastra and Rajasthan have been disposing by far larger number of cases per month.

 Further, it is worthwhile to mention that the current rate of disposal of the cases i.e. 56 per month  by each  Information  Commissioner may appear a visible improvement and enhanced efficiency of the Commission, but this perception is wrong.

 

Within  these 3 months, the Commissioners of Orissa  have illegally  and arbitrarily disposed  and closed a large number of cases (for example, Complaint Case No.- 1195/10 disposed on 24.2.2011, CC No- 1368/10 disposed on 23.3.2011 and CC. No-1347/2010 disposed on 18.3.2011) without hearing  them  and by simply remanding them  to the 1st appellate authority  with a direction to  provide the required information to the concerned Complainants.

 The practice of disposing and closing the cases by the Commissioners unilaterally without giving the opportunity of hearing to the complainants is not only illegal but against the spirit of RTI Act. Now, as if adding salt to the injury, the 1st Appellate Authorities are neither hearing the cases nor providing the information to the concerned complainants despite the direction from the Commission to do so. The Commissioners also bother little about whether the 1st Appellate Authorities did act as per the direction from the Commission or not.  Besides the Commission's  further order of making a 2nd appeal afresh  in case of the failure of the complainant to get the information is not only cumbersome but also costly and time consuming. Strange it might seem, the hearing of Complaint cases filed in the office of the Commission  back in 2008 is being started now i.e. after a lapse of 3 years.  

 

Thus the rate of disposal of  cases  i.e 56 per month by each commissioner would come down if we  deduct the number of arbitrarily  disposed cases  from the purview of analysis. Thus we don't see any improvement  in the efficiency  of the Information Commission in respect of their principal obligation i.e. adjudication of complaints and 2nd appeals in comparison to its past record.

 

Pradip Pradhan

M-99378-43482

Date-5.7.2011

 

Re: [HumJanenge] CIC says Govt. notification on CBI exemption not in consonance with RTI

Can you e-mail a copy of the order to me?
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 3:56 PM, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

Dear Sarab, ,

 

How u have concluded that this order was first reserved as there is no such indication that the order was reserved?  However, if it was reserved, the same make sense as a detailed and speaking order running into 11 pages cannot the dictated instantly on the same day leaving all other cases.

 

It has nowhere mentioned in the decision whether the complainant or respondent were present or not during the hearing. Even if the they are not present, CIC has to take decision on the basis on the material available before him.

 

Section 18 (1) says, " Subject to the provision of this Act, it shall be duty of the Central Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may be, to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person, ---

 

(d) who believes that he or she has been given incomplete, misleading or false information under this Act;"

 

As per order, complaint was filed on 5.2.2011, it was not the second appeal.  This has come for hearing within 4 months while it takes much more time with some other ICs.

 

Every accused has a right to fair trial and the RTI Act is applicable to him also.  There are enough safeguards in RTI Act against its misuse in section 8, 9 and 24. 

 

Executive cannot outdo an Act duly passed by the Parliament of India by just issuing an executive order (notification) exempting the Public Authorities without valid ground.  CBI is not an intelligence or security agency but an investigative agency. 



--- On Sat, 2/7/11, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CIC says Govt. notification on CBI exemption not in consonance with RTI
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 2 July, 2011, 9:09 AM

Dear Karira

1) almost all the rti_india yahoogroup members are on HumJanenge, so no need to post such messages there.

2) With my long experience of how CIC "reserved" orders are drafted, I can say with considerable force that the reason the Complainant was not present, was because there was "hanky panky" in the final order in favour of a retired judge who is accused in Ghaziabad judges PF scam. Anybody who tracks Shailesh Gandhi's usual orders will vouch for this. What is especially curious in the present case is that the CIC treated a "2nd Appeal" (w/o 1st appeal on record) as Complaint (and thereby invoked its enquiry powers to cut-n-paste from various websites).

3) I think it is high time that this practice of "reserved" orders at CIC be stopped.

Sarbajit

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:33 PM, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
Today (01 July 2011), CIC has passed an order while hearing a Complaint from an accused in the Ghaziabad PF scam.

In a very long order, CIC has ruled that:

1. The Govt. order on exemption of CBI from RTI is not in consonance with the basic provisions of the RTI Act
2. CIC can hear direct Complaints and there is no need to exhaust 19(1) before approaching the commission
3. The gazette notification on CBIs exemption has only a prospective effect - ie cannot be applied to applications/appeals/complaints already in process.

Full order is attached to this post.

RTIwanted




--
use ubuntu.com instead of microsoft windows and remain FREE from viruses and trojans
www.openoffice.org
http://www.janhitmanch.org/judicialdelayssolutions.pdf Reforms for the Indian justice system

Saturday, July 2, 2011

Re: [HumJanenge] Let's demand some 'account of the money' that banks are forced to spend on ill-conceived giveaways like MGNREGA.


RTI is there.But govy.is yet to develop adequate infrastrucure to produce all the required documents n demend.particularly,the state of West bengal is lagging far behind.the various departments of bengal are yet to devise their website too.
In this regard,we are also at the backfoot.hence,nothing to sat for and against your demend.
On Fri, 01 Jul 2011 22:23:22 +0530 wrote
>Friends,

Isn't time we demand some 'account of the money' that banks are
forced to spend on ill-conceived giveaways like MGNREGA.
Unfortunately it's not a one time affair - mushrooming ideas before each poll....!

Added to this States likeTamil Nadu embarking on such vote catching gimmics
and coming to centre for help financing such schemes ...!
Let there be a debate - right now.
How RTI could take advantage- guidance needed.

Regards
--
SHS
===





Treat yourself at a restaurant, spa, resort and much more with Rediff Deal ho jaye!

[HumJanenge] CIC: New Allocation Orders.

In a new move "Chief Information Commissioner has decided to adopt rotation policy, wherein a Public Authority/Department/Ministry completing 2 years of its allocation with an IC would be considered for reallocation."

Check link for full draft of the order

http://cic.gov.in/CIC_Circulars/Circular-30062011.pdf

Wishes

Manoj