RTIUA

The Central Information Commission (CIC) in New Delhi has asked the Rajasthan High Court to revisit a number of provisions framed by it pertaining to the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The commission passed the order in response to an appeal by a Mumbai-based RTI activist, Sunil Ahya. Ahya sought to know the reasons why the Rajasthan HC framed certain rules under the Rajasthan Right to Information (High Court and Subordinate Courts) Rules, 2006, which he contended, were contrary to significant provisions of the original act. Significant regulations which were brought to light stipulate that the applicant has to attach a self-attested photograph to the application and has to make several declarations in his plea, including a statement that the “motive for obtaining such information is proper and legal.” Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra noted that these rules are “not in conformity with the provisions of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.”

Further, the rules of the Rajasthan HC in Section 5 (1) hold that “if the requested information does not fall within the jurisdiction of the authorised person, it shall be conveyed to the applicant in Form C as early as practicable.” The original rules, however, stipulate that if the information is not available with public information officer, he should transfer the application to the relevant public authority.

Goregaon resident Ahya approached the commission after he was denied information regarding the reasons for framing these rules. The panel noted, “Section 28 of the RTI Act vests the power to make rules in the competent authority in order to carry out the provisions of the Act; it does not give any power to the competent authority to frame rules to restrict the rights conferred by the Act.”
Source: Indian Express

In a landmark RTI victory in favour of the Caravan, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry has to make public the shareholding of Kalanidhi Maran in Sun Direct, a direct to home (DTH) service.

The Central Information Commission has directed the Information and Broadcasting Ministry to make public the stake of Kalanithi Maran, brother of former Telecom Minister Dayanidhi Maran, in Sun TV, on a case fought by Vinod K Jose, The Caravan magazine’s Deputy Editor. The CVC said that  such details cannot be held back citing commercial confidence and asserted that the information  is not seen as an invasion of privacy.

The information and broadcasting ministry had earlier refused to make the information public arguing that the information was commercial in nature.  After  Caravan’s Jose appealed to the  CIC, the later heard all three parties —I&B Ministry, Sun TV, and Vinod K Jose — and passed the order in favour of the applicant.

“List of members of a company, shares issued, etc are required to be furnished (usually by way of annual returns) to the Registrar of Companies in compliance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956.

“This information is available on the RoC website on payment of the prescribed fees. Therefore, such information cannot be treated as confidential, more so, because it is accessible to the public,” Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said.Vinod K Jose, the editor of the Caravan,  sought to know from the Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry the stockholding of Kalanithi Maran and others in Sun TV network.

The Ministry had refused to provide information citing objections raised by Sun TV Network through a letter. The Commission invited Sun TV representatives to present their case before the panel.

“It was claimed that information regarding shareholding pattern is in the nature of commercial confidence-protected under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act and disclosure of the same would harm the commercial interest of the Third Party (Sun TV),” Gandhi noted in his order.

Jose submitted that he required the information from an authentic source for the purposes of publication and that in itself qualified as being in public interest-under Section 8(2) of the RTI Act.

Gandhi said in the instant case the RTI applicant had sought to know details of the shareholding of Kalanithi Maran and other shareholders in Sun Direct TV (P) Ltd which is the third party in the case.

“In the opinion of this bench, the term ‘commercial confidence’ comprises commercial, business or financial information, which entities keep as confidential, or do not display or bring to the knowledge of the public, mostly with an intention to maintain an advantage over its competitors,” he said in the order.

Gandhi said he could not agree with the contention of Sun TV that details of shareholding pattern are in the nature of ‘commercial confidence’.

“This bench is of the view that disclosure of merely the shareholding pattern of Sun Direct TV (P) Ltd cannot put it at a disadvantage from its competitors. Therefore, the contention that the information sought was exempt under Section 8(1)(d) of the RTI Act is rejected,” he said.

Rejecting another objection of Sun TV that the information was personal in nature, Gandhi said details of shareholders of Sun TV may be ‘personal’ information to the extent it relates to an individual shareholder only.

“Given that such information is already in public domain, disclosure of the same by the Respondent- public authority cannot be considered as an unwarranted invasion on the privacy of individual shareholders or the third party itself,” he said directing the Ministry to disclose the information by February 25.

Source: First Post

The reply to a Right To Information (RTI) application filed by Abhay Kolarkar has revealed that around 25% saplings planted along the roads by Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC) have died. Out of the 2,070 saplings planted in the last two years, 576 are dead, says the RTI reply.

"During my regular walks around the area I noticed many plants were damaged or dead. That is when I decided to file an RTI to take stock of the situation," said Kolarkar, a Deendayal Nagar resident. The reply stated that the saplings are planted without any tree guards and is not very clear about the expenses incurred in the plantation process.

NB Shrikhande, superintendent of NMC's garden department, said not putting a tree guard was an experiment by the municipal corporation. "The saplings planted by us are more than 10ft high and hence don't need protection. The cost of a tree guard ranges from Rs 700 to 1,400 depending on whether it is made of bamboo or steel. This money can be used instead to buy more saplings," he said.

"They are saying that the plants are big enough to survive without any guards, but the plants they have planted are of low quality," said Kolarkar.

Kaustav Chatterjee of Green Vigil, an environmental NGO, said that a sapling had very thin chance of surviving without protection. "It is useless. There are a number of grazing cattle in the city and I am sure that the mortality of the saplings is much more than the 25% they are reporting," he said.

According to Shrikhande the main reason for such high number of failed plantings was not grazing but the theft of bamboo sticks used to support the saplings. "People steal these sticks and the plants become limp and eventually die," he said.

He also said that as this experiment to save money was not yielding expected results, they are now planning to undertake plantation drives on play grounds and approach the locals to help take care of the plants.

NMC is also yet to issue work orders to start work for freeing the roots of trees which are choked due to cementing or tarring around the trunk. The issue is pending for months with TOI having reported on it twice in the past. Standing committee chairman Sandeep Joshi had said that he had already allotted money for the work.

"There are some technical difficulties in the proposal to be passed. We will do the work, but it will take some time," is all that Shrikhande says.

Source: Times of India

In a GO dated September 30, 2008, the state government notified the formation of Tamil Nadu Biodiversity Board. But a recent Right To Information (RTI) application has revealed that barely four years later, the board is nearly defunct after having just identified one biodiversity heritage site, Senthiraikillai in Cuddalore district.

The RTI application, according to K Mohan Raj, who filed it, also found that the biodiversity board "does not exist and hence is non-functional". The fund allocations are also meagre and the commitment to establish a fully functional State Biodiversity Board is missing. The RTI applicant also said that the state should appoint a full time chairman and secretary as per the Biological Diversity Act, 2002.

Every local body including 12,620 village panchayats in Tamil Nadu should establish biodiversity management committees (BMC), but only six BMCs are functional. These are Vadamadurai in Theni district, Thiruvaiyaru in Thanjavur, Thiruvarankulam in Pudukottai, Athoor in Dindugul, Kolli hills in Namakkal and Mandapam - Ramanathapuram.

Source: Times of India

A man from Vasna who had filed an application under the Right to Information Act seeking to know why police stations in the city did not display essential information for the benefit of RTI applicants has alleged police are using intimidatory tactics, summoning him for hearings at short notices and making him sit with criminals.

Manish Benani, who owns a small printing press, had requested former police commissioner of Ahmedabad Sudhir Sinha in September last year to take appropriate action about non-implementation of mandatory display of general information regarding RTI queries, such as names and contact details of public information officers, the appellate authority and the like.

Sinha, who has since retired, ordered all the 37 police stations in the city to follow the mandatory practice under the RTI Act, but to no avail. Benani filed another application on November 24, 2011, seeking to know the status of implementation of the commissioner’s order of September 5.

“In response, police stations and other offices sent me a one-page letter saying they have prepared a booklet of information. But boards displaying these information are mandatory as per the RTI Act,” he said.

On January 29 this year, some officials from the Ahmedabad police Crime Branch landed at Benani’s home. Since he was not there, they asked his family members to send him to the crime branch office immediately.

“They came around 11.15 am and told my family I should reach the crime branch office by 12 noon the same day. I visited their office the next day to meet ACP Mayur Chavda, but I was not allowed to meet him. I insisted on meeting police station officer to give my submission but they instead asked me to sit and wait at a place where chained criminals were sitting,” Benani said.

“When I insisted on giving a written submission, they said they were not bound to take my application and instead asked my caste, business and purpose for seeking information. They even refused to give me an acknowledgment that my application had been received,” he said.

When contacted, Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime Branch) Mohan Jha said he was not aware of the case details.

The new RTI rules framed and implemented by the Chhattisgarh government is a clear attempt and snatching a citizen’s fundamental right of access to information and strangulating the RTI Act. Citizens are requested to sent protest letters in large numbers

The Right to Information Act (RTI) is being clipped by several state governments in an attempt to discourage/refuse rightful information to the citizens. Instead of furthering transparency, which is the primary objective of the sunshine law, politicians are finding brazen means and ways to keep away information from the public and perhaps rewind  back to the outdated era of official secrecy, where they were well-protected from the eye of the public.

Recently, the Karnataka government brought in an amendment, by which a citizen can ask only one query in a RTI application and restrict it to 150 words.  Worse still, Chhattisgarh has recently implemented the absurd rule of charging Rs500 as RTI fee per application; Rs15 for photocopy of per page and worse; asking the applicant to give reasons for the information he is seeking. Allegations are flying high that this attempt of the Chhattisgarh government is to conceal irregularities in the paddy procurement scam for which the state government has come under fire since the last few months and for which RTI queries were being filed.

Every state government has the right to make laws regarding the cost of fees for RTI application but the fees have to be “reasonable” says the RTI Act. Is Rs500 per application affordable to the common man? Is it affordable to pay Rs15 per Photostat copy? So, isn’t this move an attempt to discourage people from seeking information and snatch away their fundamental right?  Prateek Pandey, leading RTI activist and member of the Chhattisgarh Citizen Initiative, is spearheading a campaign to undo the amendment of the Chhattisgarh government. He states, “A massive citizen pressure group is required to stall this injustice towards the common man for whom the RTI Act has come as a means to participate in governance. We are meeting the state chief information commissioner and the speaker of the assembly and submitting a written petition to withdraw the amendment. If that does not work, we will challenge it legally.”

Right to Information is a fundamental right of citizens and Section 7(5) of the Act states that, “Where access to information is to be provided in the printed or in any electronic format, the applicant shall, subject to the provisions sub-section (6), pay such fee as may be prescribed:

“Provided that the fee prescribed under sub-section (1) of section 6 and sub-section (1) and (5) of section 7 shall be reasonable and no such fee shall be charged from the persons who are of below poverty line as may be determined by the appropriate government.”

Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi has already dashed off a letter to Chhattisgarh chief minister Raman Singh. He states in the letter, “All over the country all public authorities have kept a fee of Rs10 as application fee and Rs2 per page for providing information…”

Mr Gandhi further writes that, “It has clearly been mentioned in the law that the application fee as well as the additional fee for providing information would be reasonable. Almost all public authorities in the country have in the right spirit of the Act and recognizing that information should be available to citizens since they are the owners of the information, kept Rs10 as application fee and Rs2 per page as additional fee for providing the information. In this background the Chhattisgarh Legislative Assembly’s decision to start charging Rs500 as application and Rs15 per page as additional fee goes against the spirit and purpose of the RTI Act and would be unwarranted discrimination against citizens who seek information from the legislative assembly. This would give rise to suspicion and speculation that the legislative assembly wishes to discourage citizens from exercising their fundamental right. I am sure the Chhattisgarh assembly will set a good example to promote citizen’s fundamental rights and reduce the application fee and the additional fee to Rs10 and Rs2 respectively at the earliest.”

Another argument against this outrageous fee hike is that, the RTI Act has a powerful Section 4 wherein it is binding on every government department to pro-actively disclose information on most of its functioning. What is pro-active disclosure? It means suo moto disclosure or dissemination of information, documents and files in possession of “public authority”.

Section 4 (1)(a) states: “Every public authority shall maintain all its records duly catalogued and indexed in a manner and the form which facilitates the right to information under this Act and ensure that all records that are appropriate to be computerized are, within a reasonable time and subject to availability of resources, computerized and connected through a network all over the country on different systems so that access to such records is facilitated.” The government department is required to update the information from time to time. Hence, the citizen has the right to Free access to information, a large part of it, at the just the click of the mouse. Doesn’t the steep fee of Rs.500 for the RTI application nullify this right? States Vijay Kumbhar, a leading RTI activist from Pune, “A reasonable fee has been kept so that citizens take their RTI application seriously and there’s some discipline that comes in with the mandatory reasonable fee. However, Rs.500 as fee is a clear signal that the government wants to strangulate the RTI Act and retain its power over hiding it wrong doings with public money.”

RTI activists see such attempts as threats to the very existence of the RTI Act. They believe that if citizens in large numbers do not raise their voices against such amendments, the RTI Act will loose all its teeth in a couple of years.

Mr Pandey has appealed to all citizens to send a letter of protest to the chief minister, opposition leader and speaker of Chhattisgarh’s legislative assembly in order to compel it to withdraw it.  

Source: www.moneylife.in

Opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) today accused the Jammu and Kashmir government of institutional incompetence which is slowly rendering the Right to Information Act a "toothless tiger" in the state.
"The manner in which hurdles are deliberately being created to avoid effective RTI implementation apparently points to only conclusion that the government and its administration are hell bent on avoiding answers as it fears that Genie may come out of the bottle," the PDP general secretary Muhammad Dilawar Mir said in a statement here.
He alleged the National Conference-led coalition government has even found innovative ways and ideas to circumvent the Act, by either making absurd excuses or make its process tedious.
Mir claimed that right from the beginning, the Act and its process has been subjected to brazen commercialization and despite Chief Information Commissioner's recommendation and Chief Minister Omar Abdullah's hollow assurance vis-a-vis slashing of RTI application fee and photostat charges, nothing has been done so far.
"Creating bottlenecks in RTI process underlines determination of the government to ensure that no institution comes to fore which has the potential to eliminate corruption, irregularities and unaccountability in the government," the PDP leader said.
Dilawar said the people are losing faith in the present government vis-a-vis RTI, and they want results rather than being bombarded with rhetoric all the time.
"Disregarding the Act by not furnishing the requisite information and failure to evoke any response to letters of SIC, is a glaring example of how the government is pushing the Act to a permanent impotency," he alleged.

The Public Information Officer of the Kerala State Council for Science, Technology and Environment (KSCSTE), Thiruvananthapuram, has rejected a petition filed under the RTI Act for information on the soil samples collected from the district to analyse endosulfan residues. The Public Information Officer gave a terse reply to S Ganesan, an RTI activist from Secundarabad, who wanted to know the scientific parameters used in analysing the endosulfan residues in the soil collected from the areas where the pesticide was sprayed.

The reply to the RTI query was: “I am to inform you that the information requested by you is not available in the office”. The information sought under the RTI Act included details of confirmatory test, details of residue analysis and information regarding the chromatograms. Though 15 questions were asked, the PIO replied that no information was available at his office. The RTI activist said in his appeal to K Thulaseedharan Nair, the appellate authority, that the reply was perfunctory and violated the provisions of the RTI Act. A copy of the letter was also sent to Dr V N Rajasekharan Pillai, executive vice-president of the KSCSTE. “The very purpose of the RTI Act is to enable a citizen to have access to information under the control of the public authority. According to the RTI Act, the information meant any material stored in any form including the data stored in electronic equipment. The state government had given `10 lakh to the KSCSTE to conduct the study,” he said.

He said in his appeal that the Centre for Water Resources Development and Management is one of the seven Research and Development Centres of the KSCSTE. The residue analysis of endosulfan was carried out by the CWRDM. The Public Information Officer of the KSCSTE should have collected the information from the CWRDM, he said. The activist also questioned the identification of samples which was done with the help of NGOs, panchayat officials and Health officials. He said it was not a standard practice since the help of soil experts was not sought by the KSCSTE.� The RTI activist also complained that the website of the KSCSTE does not carry any information under section 4 of RTI Act.

Source: IBN Live

Two Vadodara-based RTI activists, Rohit Prajapati and Trupti Shah, have filed an appeal before the Chief Information Commissioner against the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) in connection with their RTI application demanding details related to the expenses incurred on the Narendra Modi’s Sadbhavana fast programme from September 17-19.

In their appeal moved before the RTI Commissioner, the two have demanded that a fine of Rs 25,000 be imposed on the CMO for failing to provide the information and a direction to it to provide the same for free.

In their RTI application dated September 17, 2011, Prajapati and Shah had demanded a number of details relating to the expenditure incurred during Modi’s Sadbhavana fast programme. According to Shah, the CMO transferred the RTI application to the home department, which disposed of the application after providing partial information, saying other details would be available with other departments of the government and so it should be sought from the concerned departments.
Shah has said the CMO must know as to which details are available with which department and they ought to have either collected those details from those departments and given to them or could have directed them to specific departments.

Source: Indian Express

It has come to light that the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) went ahead with the Rs 6.48-crore cycling track project at BKC -- which turned out to be a whopping failure --without doing its homework. A Right To Information (RTI) application filed by a Mumbai-based NGO has revealed that the authority wasted public money on the cycling track without even doing a feasibility study or survey.

Chairman of NGO Athak Seva Sangh, Anil Galgali, had filed the application with the MMRDA, asking whether the track, inaugurated by Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan in April last year, was backed by any survey on its possible and practical uses. "In response to my query, the MMRDA stated that no survey was done regarding the project or the number of people deemed likely to use it. This shows how some clever officers are going ahead and wasting public money without taking other officials into confidence."

Graft allegation
In the RTI response, the MMRDA also stated that it has paid the entire project cost to the contractor, as the work done on the cycling track was up to the mark. However, one glance at the track would reveal how shoddily the work was done.

Galgali said, "How can MMRDA be satisfied with the project work? Any layman who goes and inspects the track will come to know what the reality is. The condition of the track is pathetic even though it was inaugurated barely 8-9 months ago. Hardly anyone uses it. Bicycle riders prefer driving on the road as the uneven patches on the track surface can cause skids and accidents. This proves that the project fell victim to massive corruption, and that it was a plan to pocket money by awarding tenders to contractors.

Soon after the track's inauguration, MiD DAY had reported ('Mr CM, see what you inaugurated!') how the MMRDA had got the CM to inaugurate a track before it was even completed. Even at the time of the function, the track was rugged and bumpy at many spots. In fact, many times, four-wheelers are parked on the unused track.

'Take action'
The activist has now written (copy of letter with MiD DAY) to Chavan, who is also MMRDA chairman, and to Rahul Asthana, MMRDA commissioner asking for immediate action against the officer responsible for planning the project. The letter states that the loss of Rs 6.48 crore, which indirectly accrues to the exchequer, should be recovered from the salary of the officers who implemented the project.

"It is my request to the CM and the MMRDA commissioner that they should recover the money wasted on the project from the salary of Additional Metropolitan Commissioner S V R Srinivas, as I have heard that the project was his brainwave," Galgali said.

Did you know?
MMRDA started work on the 13-km cycling track project at G Block in BKC on October 19, 2010 and the track was inaugurated on April 23, 2011 by CM Prithviraj Chavan.

The other side
Additional Metropolitan Commissioner S V R Srinivas said, "We came up with this project to promote cycling and we are confident that people will start using the track soon. They are not using it because there are no cycles available. Soon we will have a tie-up with a company that will provide cycles on rent." Will MMRDA act against the contractor? "The project is in the defect liability so we will ask the contractor to maintain the cycling track," he said.

Officer pulled up
Highly-placed sources in the authority told this newspaper that after the RTI was filed, a very senior MMRDA official immediately called on the officer who had planned the project and asked him to give a clarification. "The senior officer told him (officer in-charge of the project) that due to lack of planning on his part, the authority had to face criticism from the public and the media due to the failure of the cycling track project," said the source from MMRDA, requesting anonymity.

Source: Mid-Day