SC grants right to see answerscripts.

Calcutta Telegraph:Pankaj Sarma:Friday , August 26 , 2011.

Guwahati, Aug. 25: The Assam Public Service Commission (APSC) will have to show evaluated answerscripts to examinees if they apply for it under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

An official source in the APSC said the commission was left with no other option as the apex court has upheld a 2009 Gauhati High Court order directing it to allow inspection of answerscripts by candidates.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the evaluated answersheets are covered under the definition of the “information” under the RTI Act.

The public service commission, which has been mired in controversy over alleged anomalies and manipulation during evaluation of answerscripts, had tried everything to prevent the order but nothing worked in its favour.

The APSC had expressed fears that this would open a floodgate of demands from dissatisfied candidates and allowing the inspection of evaluated answerscripts would lead to the collapse of the entire system.

The commission is of the view that if it was required to allow inspection of answerscripts or provide certified copies, it would interfere with its effective and efficient functioning, and would require additional staff and infrastructure.

According to a source, the Supreme Court passed the order on August 9, upholding the high court verdict directing the APSC to permit examinees to inspect their answersheets.

Gauhati High Court had passed the order on November 6, 2009, directing the APSC to furnish photocopies of answerscripts, ruling in favour of six candidates who had failed to clear the test.

The examinees had moved the court seeking a directive to the commission which had denied them photocopies of the answerscripts they had sought under the RTI Act.

The six had applied for answerscripts of the papers in which they were shown to have secured very low marks which they felt was the result of manipulation and foul play by the APSC during evaluation.

The petitioners had appeared in the Combined Competitive Examination, 2006, held by the APSC for recruitment to vacant posts in the Assam Civil Service, Class-I (junior grade) and allied services.

They had first approached the State Information Commission, Assam, which passed an order on July 3, 2009, asking the APSC to provide them with photocopies of the answerscripts.

The then State Information Commissioner, B.K. Gohain, had also laid down that the order would be applicable to all such cases where public examinations are conducted by the APSC or any other authority for selection of candidates for any posts and also in the case of the High School Leaving Certificate, the Higher Secondary School Leaving Certificate (HSSLC) and university examinations.

The candidates were forced to move the high court when the APSC refused to abide by the State Information Commission order.

Let’s agree to agree.

Hindustan Times:New Delhi:Thursday,August 25,2011.

As one who has long urged an end to public apathy about politics, I’m inspired by seeing the passion of Anna Hazare’s followers. I share their passion against corruption, and I have no doubt that he has touched a chord among millions.

But we must remember that the supporters of the Jan Lokpal Bill are not the only Indians who are disgusted by corruption. So are many who are not part of the movement. It is important for both sides to accept that there are patriotic and principled Indians amongst their critics, and that we must reach out to each other in good faith.

One may have legitimate disagreement with some aspects of the authorities’ handling of the issue, and in particular of the temporary arrest of Anna and his associates. Anna’s brief detention was unwise, which is why he was swiftly released. Our government does realise that ideas can’t be arrested.

A strong Lokpal is part of the answer. A suitable Lokpal Bill must be passed as a matter of urgent priority. It should create a strong anti-corruption ombudsman, with genuine autonomy and authority and substantial powers of action. That said, there is room for honest disagreement with the details of Anna’s proposals. In particular, some of the provisions insisted upon by Anna risk creating a large, omnipotent and unaccountable supra-institution that could not be challenged, reformed or removed. If the current governmental bodies tasked with investigation, vigilance, and audit are deemed to be insufficiently impervious to corruption, it is worth asking what guarantee there is that the new institution of Jan Lokpal could not be infected by the same virus and if so, what could be done about it, since it would literally be a law unto itself.

These are matters that merit serious debate in Parliament when the proposed legislation reaches the floor. I am sure the government’s bill can be improved, and that elements favoured by Anna could be considered. Everyone claims to be against corruption; the debate is on the means to be used to tackle it. For it would be dangerous to reduce the entire issue to a simplistic solution which won’t end corruption by itself. Inspectors and prosecutors can only catch some criminals; we need to change the system so that fewer crimes are committed.

The problem of corruption runs far broader and deeper than the headlines suggest. Every time a poor pregnant woman has to bribe to get a hospital bed to which she is entitled, or a widow the pension that should be hers by right and not by the favour of a clerk, or a son his own father's death certificate, we know our system has failed us. Corruption isn’t only high-level governmental malfeasance as typified by the 2G and Commonwealth Games scandals. Overcoming it requires nothing short of a change in our society’s mindset.

A number of related steps need to be taken to tackle corruption at its source. Campaign finance reform, simplification of laws and regulations, administrative transparency, and the reduction of discretionary powers enjoyed by officials and ministers, are all of the highest priority too. The Right to Information Act (RTI) enacted by the first UPA government was in fact the first step in this direction. A credible Lokpal will be another.

We must build in safeguards to ensure that a new institution of lokpal doesn’t itself fall prey to corruption. One way might well be to create a lokpal quickly, in response to the current public demand, but to limit its existence to, say, seven years, so that any flaws in its functioning can be examined in the cold light of experience before it is renewed by a fresh Act of Parliament.

As an elected politician, I am conscious that Anna’s campaign has ignited the imaginations and sparked the enthusiasm of many young people in our country, and in my constituency. That does not mean, however, that MPs should accept an all-or-nothing approach to the Lokpal Bill. There is room for discussion and some possibility of compromise, and I shall seek to work towards this on the floor of the House.

I look forward to Parliament debating all the options available. It is important that we must not betray public expectations, but nor must we act irresponsibly. We must do the right thing but we must do the thing right. With good faith and compromise, I am confident we can reach consensus.

Shashi Tharoor is a Lok Sabha MP(The views expressed by the author are personal)

DPS COVERED UNDER RTI ACT: CIC

GreaterKashmir.com: Thursday , August 25 , 2011.

New Delhi, Aug 24: Central Information Commission today declared that one of the schools of prestigious Delhi Public School comes under the ambit of RTI Act as it received substantial funding from the government in the form of subsidised land.
The transparency panel said that Delhi Public School, Rohini is a public authority within the ambit of the RTI Act as it is controlled by different agencies under the Delhi administration like DDA and Directorate of Education.
The case relates to an RTI applicant Mohit Goel who sought information from DPS, Rohini on admission procedures and admissions made under the policy framework specified by the Department of Education for 2010-11 for pre-school.
The school refused to give any information saying that the RTI Act is not applicable on it as it is a private unaided organisation and also cited clause of exemption of personal and private information.
Before the Commission, Goel challenged the reasons put forth by the school saying that over 10,000 sq m of land has been allotted to the school by the DDA at a nominal rent of Rs 10 per annum while another 6,000 sq m has been allotted at the concessional rate of Rs 65 lakh per acre.
He said the school is under indirect government control in as much as the regulating, governing and controlling of the school is as per provisions of Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973. Goel said two nominees from the Delhi Administration(Directorate of Education) hold important positions of control in the management committee and the Directorate of Education is also custodian of all information related to the school.
Information Commissioner Annpurna Dixit pointed out that the letter of grant of land says that "DDA reserves the right to alter any terms and conditions on its discretion thereby establishing its control over the way school uses this land given free to the school by the DDA in a prime area of the capital which at today's rate, is valued at several crores of rupees".
She directed the school to make arrangement for the processing of the RTI applications and pro-active disclosure as mandated under the section four of the transparency law.
"India is facing the difficult task of ensuring social justice and equity to all people and the model chosen by the government spreading welfare and its benefits through private schools, which are tasked and assisted for this purpose is commendable. The crucial role that information plays in achieving this objective cannot be understated," she said.
Dixit added that it is in this context that section 2(h) recognises that non-state actors may have responsibilities of disclosing information which would be "useful and necessary for the people they serve".

Snubbed RTI activist outs illegal taxi stand.

Mid-Day: Thursday , August 25 , 2011.

Refused twice by a so-called share taxi stand at Kurla, and asked for exorbitant fare, social worker sought RTI reply only to find that the stand was illegal.
After cabbies at a taxi stand in Kurla refused to ferry him, a social worker exposed the stand to be illegal using the RTI Act.
Last month, 45-year-old Vijay Manthena, a resident of Hariyanawala Mansion in Kurla (West) approached the taxi drivers on two occasions and asked to be taken to a Vakola hospital, to meet an ailing aunt.

Rudely dismissed both times, Manthena filed an application with the local RTO, only to find that the taxi stand was illegal. He has now sought action against the taxi drivers running the stand.
On the first occasion, he stopped a taxi near Sansar hotel, Kurla (West).
The driver refused, saying that he only plies for passengers on their way to Andheri, and only on a sharing basis. He added that for going to Vakola, Manthena should pay Rs 300, half of which would be return fare.
Manthena, then, caught a bus to Vakola. Three days later, he went to the same stand. This time, four taxi drivers refused to go to Vakola by the meter.
As Manthena argued with them, other taxi drivers gathered around him, and showed him a board on the roadside that proclaimed the stand as belonging to share taxis.
This time, Manthena approached the Kurla police. But a policeman told him that the taxi drivers were not in the wrong, as they had a board declaring them to be share taxis.
"Tumko board nahi dikhta kya? Agar Vakola jana hai to Rs 300 dena padega, Rs 150 jane ka aur Rs 150 return aane ka, wapas aao ya nahi," one of the drivers allegedly said to him.
Manthena then filed an RTI query to the RTO about the stand.
In its reply (copy available with MiD DAY), the RTO said it had not given any permission for a share taxi stand near Sansar hotel in Kurla.

It went on to say that it can take action against an illegal taxi stand under Section 22 (D) R /W 178 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Manthena has complained to the civic body, demanding action against the drivers under the MRTP Act. "The policemen take bribes from the taxi drivers. The RTO should take action against them as well," he said.
The Other Side:
MiD DAY tried to contact the taxi unions' leader, AL Quadros, but despite repeated attempts, he did not answer our call. A BMC officer said, "I am busy.
Call me another day." Said Transport Secretary SK Sharma, "For public convenience and to avoid traffic problems, the RTO has permitted some share taxi/auto stands in the city.
But I am unaware of their exact location. I am also unaware of the Kurla incident."

Yes, there is an alternative.

Indian Express: Wednesday, August 24, 2011.

There are two broad governance issues that concern every citizen in this country today: corruption at different levels in the government, and grievances arising from the government’s poor functioning. The last few months have seen an outpouring of emotions related to these issues. It is amply clear that the people of India want no one to be above the law; everyone, irrespective of the position they hold, should be accountable. Equally, citizens want their day-to-day grievances related to the government addressed in an effective, time-bound manner.

Recent events have undoubtedly put these two issues at the centre of public debate, and forced the political class to pay attention. Now, however, is the time for reasoned debate. A rational solution needs to be evolved to address these challenges.

As the Parliament debates the Lokpal bill, we very strongly believe that two principles must inform all discussions on the matter. First, too much power and responsibility must not be concentrated in any one institution power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The corruption we see today is a result of unaccountable and unchecked power. Therefore, the institution set up to tackle corruption must itself have a proper system of checks and balances, to ensure that it is accountable to the people of the country. Rather than setting up a single “super”-institution which deals with all problems corruption at high levels, corruption in the middle- and lower-level bureaucracy, judicial corruption and public grievances multiple institutions, adequately empowered, must be set up to look into each of these issues. Second, existing institutions and laws must be strengthened to enable them to tackle corruption effectively, and to protect those who blow the whistle on corrupt practices. If democratic institutions falter or weaken, there is no alternative to repairing and strengthening them. Failure to address the problems in existing structures will result in transferring the same problems into any new institution that may be set up.

In our view, an Anti-Corruption Lokpal, equipped and empowered to deal with big-ticket corruption at the state and the central level, covering all elected representatives (including the prime minister, but with certain safeguards), senior bureaucrats and all co-accused is critically required. This body would investigate and prosecute everyone involved in large scams like the 2G, CWG, Taj Corridor and Adarsh affairs that rocked the nation in recent times.

For mid-level and lower bureaucracy, the existing institution of the Central Vigilance Commission must be empowered to effectively deal with all cases of corruption. This would entail removing bottlenecks like the “single directive” and the lack of adequate resources which have so far impeded its effective functioning. Parallel state vigilance commissions at the state level would also have to be set up.

The judiciary must be made accountable to an independent, autonomous institution. The Constitution provides for the independence of the judiciary. What is needed, in our opinion, is an independent

National Judicial Commission to look into all cases of corruption and misconduct related to the judiciary at all levels from the lower judiciary to judges of the Supreme Court. The Judicial Accountability and Standards Bill, currently with the parliamentary standing committee, needs to be substantially amended and strengthened to ensure its effectiveness.

Whistleblowers must be offered protection under all these institutions through an effective Whistleblowers Protection bill. This can be achieved by suitably amending and strengthening the “public interest disclosure” bill currently before Parliament.

One issue that impacts every citizen of this country is the lack of an effective mechanism to deal with everyday grievances non-receipt of pensions, poor delivery of rations, broken roads, non-availability of adequate water, poor sanitation and drainage etc. Effective grievance redress requires a decentralised system, equipped to deal with grievances in a time-bound manner. There is an urgent need to draw on successful grievance redress mechanisms where they exist (like in NREGA) and evolve an appropriate legislation to set up an independent institution empowered to effectively redress public grievances.

India is a huge country, and the problems we seek to address are complex. No single quick-fix legislation, no single all-powerful institution is likely to deliver us the clean, vibrant, participatory democracy to which we aspire. A well-thought out, considered and informed solution, in line with the basic structure of our Constitution, will have to be evolved through a process of public consultation and debate.

Parliament too cannot take any shortcuts. It has to provide a genuine platform for discussion in line with its constitutional role. It has to invite comments from across the country before passing the legislation.

India Against Corruption’s lack of faith and belief in the parliamentary process may be an expression of angst against its ineffectiveness. But to bypass it would be self-defeating for the people of India. Our experience with the Right to Information and NREGA legislations shows that the standing committee can be an extremely useful platform, where the legislations can be discussed, debated and strengthened.

The RTI bill which was introduced in Parliament was an extremely watered-down and weak version of what civil society activists had drafted and proposed. However, groups from all over the country, including the NCPRI, petitioned the parliamentary standing committee, and debated the legislation clause by clause.

Eventually, Parliament took on board most of the suggestions of the standing committee and finally made 153 amendments to the bill, passing one of the most progressive right to information access legislations across the world. The movement which finally led to the passage of the RTI Act, provides an insightful example of how civil society can agitate and work towards a strong pro-people legislation. without compromising or demeaning parliamentary, democratic processes.

Roy and Bhardwaj are members of the National Campaign for Peoples’ Right to Information (NCPRI)

RTI activist attacked; politicians, officials on the run.

Express News Service: Wednesday, August 24, 2011.

Rajkot : An RTI activist from Union Territory of Diu who had sought information in connection with the construction of an allegedly illegal restaurant and bogus licence issued by Road Transport Office to bike vendors has been allegedly attacked by top local politicians and government officers.

Jaisukh Bambhania (39), who is president of Diu auto-rickshaw drivers association, was attacked with sharp weapons like swords and pipes followed by an acid attack on Sunday night.

Bambhania has registered a complaint against Diu Nagarpalika vice-president Shamji Premji Solanki, who is from the Congress, mamlatdar Haresh Jethava, Diu RTO Vinod Solanki, RTO head clerk Vashram Bhima, Nagarpalika engineer Nanji Makwana and four other unidentified persons in connection with the attack on him.

The Una police in Junagadh district, where the incident took place, have registered a complaint of assault and attack under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.

“The accused have gone missing. The police are on their trail,” said the Una police.

According to preliminary investigation, Bambhania was attack while on his way to nearby town of Una. His auto-rickshaw was reportedly intercepted by accused, who first tied him down with auto-rickshaw and then attacked him with swords and pipes.

“Accused then allegedly threw acid at him and fled when they saw some vehicles coming towards them,” the police said. “We have also interrogated two eye-witnesses in this connection,” they added.

Bambhania allegedly wanted to expose the racket involved in issuing unauthorised licence to bike vendors who give two-wheelers on rent to tourists and the construction of a restaurant on the government land.

“He has sought details on the construction of Panchmahurti Bar and Restaurant, which has been constructed on government land by nagarpalika vice-president with the help of mamlatdar,” said Bipin, victim’s brother.

“Besides, as auto-rickshaw drivers association president, my brother has filed a plea in Diu court against the RTO for issuing bogus licences to bike vendors. Top officials of RTO are involved in the scam,” Bipin said, adding his severely injured brother has been shifted to a private hospital in Rajkot with multiple wounds.

Past Attacks on RTI activists in state:

Amit Jethava was shot dead in Ahmedabad on July 20, 2010, allegedly at the behest of Pratap Solanki, nephew of Junagadh MP Dinu Solanki, after he exposed nexus between politicians and mining mafias.

Bhagu Devani, a Porbandar-based lawyer, was attacked in June last, allegedly by a hotelier connected with former BJP minister Babu Bokhiria, for exposing how coastal regulatory zone rules were being bent for construction of a three-star hotel at Porbandar beach.

RIGHT TO INFORMATION : Correcting a practice.

Frontline:Prakash SinghSoma Banerjee:Wednesday, 24 August 2011.

The apex court upholds an order allowing students to inspect their answer sheets but makes discomfiting observations on the scope of the RTI Act.

CBSE students in Delhi checking their examination results in May. The Supreme Court held that an evaluated answer book was a record containing the ”opinion” of the examiner and, therefore, it was “information” under the Right to Information Act.

IN 2008, the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) rejected an application filed by a candidate under the Right to Information Act for the inspection and re-evaluation of his Secondary School Examination answer books. The reason cited was that the CBSE shared a fiduciary relationship with its evaluators and maintained confidentiality of the manner and method of evaluation.

Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act exempts a public authority from disclosing information if it is held in a fiduciary relationship unless the authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants such disclosure. Further, the CBSE claimed that its examination bye-laws barred re-evaluation, disclosure or inspection of answer books, and what was permissible was only a verification of marks.

The CBSE submitted that the procedure evolved and adopted by it in the evaluation of answer books ensured fairness and accuracy and made the entire process as foolproof as possible. Further, it claimed that if candidates were to be permitted to seek the re-evaluation of answer books, it would create confusion and chaos, subjecting its elaborate system of examinations to delay and disarray apart from necessitating huge additional staff and infrastructure.

The Calcutta High Court, which first heard the candidate's challenge against the CBSE's rejection of his application, directed the CBSE to permit the candidate to inspect his answer books even while denying the candidate any right to seek its re-evaluation under the RTI Act. The CBSE appealed against this direction in the Supreme Court. In its detailed judgment delivered on August 9, the Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices R.V. Raveendran and A.K. Patnaik held that the definition of “information” under the Act referred, among other things, to documents, and that the answer book, submitted by a candidate to the examining body for evaluation and declaration of the result, was a document or record. The evaluated answer book becomes a record containing the “opinion” of the examiner and, therefore, it was “information” under the Act, the Bench observed.

The Supreme Court Bench concurred with the High Court that the provisions of the RTI Act would prevail over the bye-laws/rules of the examining bodies with regard to examinations if they were inconsistent with each other. Section 22 of the RTI Act specifically provides for this overriding effect of the Act over other provisions which appear inconsistent. Therefore, the CBSE's claim that it had to comply with its bye-laws that barred the inspection of answer books by candidates, rather than with the RTI Act, was untenable.

Disclosure of information:

The Bench then held that the Act exempted the disclosure of information if held in a fiduciary relationship only to third parties. There is no question of the fiduciary withholding information relating to the beneficiary from the beneficiary himself. Therefore, it held that the examining body, if it is in a fiduciary relationship with an examinee, would be liable to make a full disclosure of the evaluated answer books to the examinee. At the same time, the court observed, it owed a duty to the examinee not to disclose the answer books to anyone else.

The CBSE then claimed that there was a fiduciary relationship between it and the examiner who evaluated the answer books. The Bench disagreed with this view and held that once the examiner had evaluated the answer books, he ceased to have any interest in the evaluation done by him. The examiner does not have any copyright, proprietary right or confidentiality right in regard to the evaluation, it said.

On the contrary, it is the examiner who is in the position of a fiduciary with reference to the examining body, and he is barred from disclosing the contents of the answer book or the result of evaluation of the answer book to anyone other than the examining body, the Bench observed.

Exemption:

The Bench, however, made it clear that if the examinees were to be given access to evaluated answer books either by permitting inspection or by granting certified copies, such access would have to be given only to that part of the answer book which does not contain any information or signature of the examiners/coordinators/scrutinisers/head examiners, and this could be exempted from disclosure under the Act. This part of the information about the examiners must be removed, covered or severed from the non-exempted part of the answer books, the Bench ruled. The Bench also added that the right to access information about answer books did not extend beyond the period during which the examining body is expected to retain the answer books. The CBSE maintains the answer books for a period of three months, after which it is liable to dispose of or destroy them.

Information-seekers have generally welcomed the Bench's directions in the case. However, some of the Bench's observations on the scope of the RTI Act and the conditions subject to which “information” should be furnished have been of concern to them. They feel it is surprising that the Bench made these observations even though they were not at all relevant to the case before it.

The Bench observed that a public authority was not required to collect or collate non-available information and then furnish it to an applicant. A public authority, the Bench held, was also not required to furnish information which required the drawing of inferences and/or the making of assumptions.

The Bench added that indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under the RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counterproductive as it would adversely affect the efficiency of administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the non-productive work of collecting and furnishing information.

Information-seekers are concerned that the authorities may take refuge under these observations of the Bench and deny them information. They are disappointed that the Bench described the work of “collecting and furnishing information” as non-productive work. In most cases before the Information Commissions, the authorities are called upon to collect and collate information which may not be readily available but which could be gathered with some effort. The Bench's observations, it is feared, will come in the way of Central and State Information Commissions seeking to achieve the objectives of the Act.

More important, under the Act, the authorities are not expected to question the objectives of the information-seekers. Therefore, the Bench's observation that demands for information must be “related to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption” may unnecessarily endow the authorities with unnecessary discretion in examining the motives of the information-seekers.

Clearly, many feel, these observations are against the spirit of the RTI Act, and it would be in the Act's interest if they were considered obiter dicta rather than binding on the authorities and the Information Commissions.

M J Antony: Excess of sunlight- The Supreme Court warns against the overuse of RTI.

Business StandardSoma Banerjee:Wednesday, 24 August 2011.

Ardent admirers of the Supreme Court will credit it with starting three revolutions in the past three decades. In the 1980s the public interest litigation (PIL) movement opened the doors of the court to every citizen, especially those who could not reach it due to poverty, illiteracy or backwardness.

Around the same time, the court sowed the seeds of citizens’ right to know in a few judgments, asserting that sunlight is the best disinfectant. This led to the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The third wave, the creation of an anti-corruption mechanism, also germinated in the court room, when the hawala cases, the 2G scam and other mega swindles led to momentous orders.

Like all revolutions, they have a tendency to overshoot themselves and lead to unintended results. PIL has grown into a wild bush and the courts are now trimming its branches and punishing interlopers and frivolous petitioners. Last week, the Supreme Court found that the right to information was also going too far. In a judgment, Central Board vs Aditya, the court stated that “this cherished right is intended to be a formidable tool in the hands of responsible citizens to fight corruption and to bring in transparency and accountability.”

However, it warned that indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counter-productive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive getting bogged down with the non-productive work of collecting and furnishing information. The Act should not be allowed to be misused or abused, to become a tool to obstruct national development and integration, or to destroy the peace, tranquillity and harmony among its citizens. Nor should it be converted into a tool of oppression or intimidation of honest officials striving to do their duty.

“The nation does not want a scenario where 75 per cent of the staff of public authorities spends 75 per cent of their time in collecting and furnishing information to applicants instead of discharging their regular duties. The threat of penalties under the RTI Act and the pressure of the authorities under the RTI Act should not lead to employees of public authorities prioritising ‘information furnishing’, at the cost of their normal and regular duties,” the court said

Last year, the court dismissed an appeal in which a litigant who lost his property suit in all courts below wanted information as to why and for what reasons the judges had come to their decision against him. “A judge is not bound to explain later on for what reasons he had come to such a conclusion,” the judgment in Khanapuram vs Admn Officer said.

Some high courts also receive petitions that seek irrelevant information or to settle scores against public officials. One case was decided by the Delhi High Court recently in which the judgment opened with a lament on the “maladroit manner in which a beneficial legislation and judge-made law” was used to mortify a deputy commissioner of the municipal corporation. In this case, Paardarshita Public Welfare Foundation vs Union of India, a non-government organisation sought information on the official’s alleged sexual disorders, DNA test, hospital records on alleged piles and sterilisation surgery. This was only half of its litany of demands.

The high court dismissed its application with costs, which will go to the benefit of the Blind Relief Association. The judgment stated that the petition was “beyond the perception of decency and in fact invasion of privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. It is a reflection of extreme vengeance proclivity and is in bad taste and definitely would not come within the realm of the RTI Act.”

The Supreme Court judgment last week dealt with the right of examinees to access their evaluated answer-sheets. The court held that students have a right to see their answer sheets because it is “information”. It is not in the protected category listed in the Act. The Calcutta High Court had also taken the same view before in this appeal case.

However, the Jharkhand High Court has a different take on this. In its recent judgment, Jharkhand PSC vs State of Jharkhand, it ruled that it was dangerous to disclose evaluated answer-sheets. The information will reveal the names of the examiners, supervisors and others associated with the process of the examination. It will “endanger the life and physical safety of such persons.”

The Chhattisgarh High Court also upheld the decision of the information officer not to supply answer sheets of police constables participating in departmental promotion. The high court stated that the disclosure would be harmful to the competitive position of other candidates. The Patna High Court in another recent case stated that the names of members of the interview board to recruit police lab assistants could be disclosed, but their photographs or residential addresses should not be disclosed. The high court judges seem to know the ground situation in their territory better than the Supreme Court brethren, who have their heads apparently in the clouds.

Interim relief to Co-op Societies from RTI Act.

Law et al. News:R.S.AgrawalSoma Banerjee:Wednesday, 24 August 2011.

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has ordered notice to various respondents in LPA’s filed by labour co-operative societies challenging a judgment of a single judge of the court directing the appellant societies to disclose information under the RTI Act.

Hearing the appeals Justice Sharad Bobde and Justice MN Gilani in an interim relief directed that the societies need not disclose information beyond balance-sheets and Profit and Loss Accounts under the RTI Act.

Earlier the single judge had dismissed a writ petition against the orders passed by authorities below directing these societies to provide information under the RTI Act. According to the appellant-societies, they do not come under the purview of the RTI Act and also contended that do not fall under the scope of section 2(h) of the Act.

It may be noted that earlier too on 17 February 2009 a division bench of the High Court through Justices Nishita Mhatre and Bhushan Gavai had passed an order at Aurangabad directing that co-operative societies and urban banks are not bound to disclose any information other than balance sheet and Profit and Loss Account to the general public under the RTI Act.

Advocate Purushottam Patil appeared for the appellants. Additional GP Bharati Dangre waived notice for the state.

Rs 25000 penalty on SKUAST-K PIO for ‘disregarding RTI’.

GreaterKashmir.com:Faheem AslamSoma Banerjee:Wednesday, 24 August 2011.

Srinagar, Aug 23: In a first judgment of its kind, the State Information Commission has slapped a penalty of Rs 25000 against the Public Information Officer of the SK University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology-Kashmir (SKUAST-K) after holding him “guilty of showing total disregard” to the J&K Right to Information Act of 2009.
Disposing off a complaint in the case of Syed Nasrullah Shah, Sampat Prakash, others versus SKUAST-K, the Chief Information Commissioner GR Sufi has ruled: “Having found no reason not to provide information from 1st October 2010 till date, I hereby hold the PIO Abdul Karim Najar who is Assistant Registrar (L) in SKUAST-K to be in default in terms of Section 17 of the RTI Act, 2009.”
The CIC said “it has been one of the rare cases where PIO has not provided information even after Commission was seized with the matter.”
“The PIO is thus guilty of showing scant respect and total disregard to the provision of the Act which is mandated for bringing transparency in the system and society. If erring and defaulting officers are not brought under the net of RTI Act provisions, the undersigned would be failing in his duty to uphold and safeguard the mandate of the state legislature and ensure that the writ of law is established,” the CIC ruled. “Accordingly, excluding the period from 01-07-2010 to 30th September 2010, which is considered as disturbance period in Kashmir Valley, a penalty of Rs. 25000 is imposed on the PIO.”
The CIC has made the calculation on the basis of number of days in default from 01-10-2010 to 19-08-2011 (323 days). The penalty for each day of delay is Rs 250 and maximum of Rs 25,000. “The imposition of penalty is restricted to 100 days only which means Rs 25000,” Sufi ruled.
The CIC has asked the “Drawing and Disbursing Officer of SKUAST-K to ensure deduction of this amount from the salary of Abdul Karim Najar and remit it to Government Account with an intimation to this Commission. In case of any default by DDO, he will be personally liable for making the payment. This order has to be complied within 15 days,” the CIC ruled on Tuesday.
The complainants have also claimed compensation under the Act. The CIC has however ruled that they are required to prove how delay in furnishing information has caused any loss to them.
“The public authority, the Vice-Chancellor of SKUAST (K) is also required to explain why compensation may not be awarded,” the CIC has ruled.
THE CASE:
The complainants Nasrullah Shah, Sampat Prakash and others had filed a complaint before the SIC against the SKUAST PIO, complaining therein that they had filed an RTI application on 28 May 2010 which was received in the office of Registrar, SKUAST (K) on 31 May 2010.
The Registrar being the First Appellate Authority himself had forwarded the application to the PIO.
THE PROCEEDINGS:
Though during the proceedings before the Commission on 13-05-2011, the PIO initially did not confirm the actual date of receipt but the complainants produced evidence confirming the date.
“The PIO did confirm that the information was to be provided or denied to the applicants by 30-06-2010 which the PIO claims to have been given on 10th of May 2011, thus causing the inordinate delay in passing an order u/s 7 of the Act,” the CIC ruled. “Therefore penalty proceedings were initiated and the PIO was given reasonable opportunity to explain why penalty many not be imposed for delaying the information.”
The PIO, SKUAST vide his communication on 26-05-2011 submitted that the Information Seeker had submitted application to Registrar, SKUAST (K) on 28-05-2010 instead of addressing the same to the PIO.
The PIO submitted that immediately after submission of application, the valley faced turmoil for about 4 months w.e.f. June 2, 2010 and that information for about 9 years was to be retrieved from various stations/Units of the University. “The SKUAST-K is a multi-campus university with stations/units at far flung areas like Gurez, Kargil, Leh Pombay Kulgam, Kupwara, Bandipora, Balpora Shopian, Khudwani Anantnag, Wadoora Sopore and Mansbal. Therefore, the information was to be retrieved by the University from these units and then compiled. Kargil, Leh, Gurez units remain cut off during winter months, the information could not be received, as no fax facilities was available at these offices,” the PIO claimed. “In the meanwhile, the information which became available was sent to the applicants on 10-05-2011.” The information was, however, only partial.
The PIO submitted that “efforts were made by to retrieve the remaining information from these units and accordingly rest of the information after its receipt from the units was sent to the applicant through speed post.”
Regarding another communication on 22-02-2011 addressed to the PIO, the PIO claimed: “The information was to be collected from the Shalimar Campus of the University and as such I got the information obtained from the Comptroller and Head, Library Services of the University and sent the same to the applicants vbide No. Au/Adm./RTI-459/7076-78 dated: 17-03-2011.”
The SIC later addressed another communication to the PIO asking him “to substantiate his assertions that information was to be collated and collected from associate concerns.” In response, the PIO submitted that information was collected from various stations/units/Divisions on different dates from time to time and after sorting out and compiling/consolidating the same was sent to the concerned information seekers.
“The information which was received from other sections suffered with certain discrepancies, therefore, was returned back for rechecking the same,” he submitted.
THE RULLING:
“I have gone through relevant papers as attached by the PIO with his explanation. I could not find any Annexure B as referred by the PIO. The letters which are being produced as a proof to show that the PIO made an effort to collect the information from other associated concerns does not bear the signature of the PIO,” the CIC ruled.
He said: “The second reminder is being sent not by the PIO but by his Assistants after a gap of 8 to 9 months. Similarly the plea that some information was to be collected from Kargil, Gurez and other snow bound areas hence delay, even this plea is devoid of merit. The Information Seeker had sought information in the month of May, 2010. This is the period when these areas are cleared from snow and communication is restored. The Information is given in May 2011 that is after a year and that also when the Commission takes cognizance of the complaint. Hence this explanation is nothing but an attempt to obfuscate the failure or the PIO to comply with the statutory duties cast on him under the State Right to Information Act, 2009.”
The applicants later filed a complaint before the SIC.
“During hearing the PIO confirmed that information was to be provided to the information seeker by 30-06-2010 which was not given on that date,” the CIC ruled. “The Commission was informed that the information was given on 10-05-2011 which the complainant contested. The PIO was directed to furnish evidence in support of his claim that information was given on 10-05-2011. It was revealed on the date of hearing that obviously the information was not provided even when the Commission had sought the comments of the PIO. During the hearing it was admitted that only 40% information was complete which was handed over to the information seekers. It is seen that the complainants had again filed another application dated 22-02-2011. Again, the PIO failed to provide any evidence that information even on subsequent application referred above was given within the maximum period of 30 days as required under the Act. Accordingly the Commission initiated penalty proceedings as provided under Section 17 of the Act.”

Hold PM responsible only for direct involvement: Aruna Roy

Economic Times:Soma BanerjeeSoma Banerjee:Wednesday,24August 2011.

Aruna Roy, member of the National Advisory Council and member of the National Campaign for People's Right to Information, speaks to ET on the current debate over Lokpal and the need for pre-legislative process.
On the inclusion of the Prime Minister:
We are saying that the corruption cases should be looked into against the PM as well but with certain safeguards as we do feel the office of the PM needs to be protected. So we are saying that a reference is made to the Chief Justice of India, who can get the full bench of Supreme Court to deliberate. If there is prima facie ground for investigation then the lokpal can go into it. Anyone can move the petition against the PM to the Lokpal. But we believe that the PM cannot be held responsible for things he is not directly responsible. No vicarious responsibility. Only if there is a direct case of direct involvement can there be a case.
On the PM's role in the 2G scam:
The supreme court will have to decide whether it was vicarious. If the PM has called for a file and has signed it, it is clear that there is direct knowledge. If there is a noting then the court will ascertain if the PM was involved.
On fixing public grievances:
We have suggested a separate law and body to deal with it. The people who are investigating high-value scams, where there is no direct evidence of money transfer or favours being done, need a special skill set. They would be different from the people who would take up an issue like how corruption takes place in filling potholes or fixing a road. We are suggesting a very decentralized, close-to-people mechanism of redressing grievances. So it would be there at every ward. If it is not addressed it can be taken up at the district, and then at the state level. They will have the powers to penalise and prosecute. The structure will be similar to RTI-state information commissions and the central commission.
Civil society as part of the legislative process:
There is a pre-legislative process where the civil society or other stakeholders should play a very important role. We have been working on this since last year. We have been struggling to establish with the government that the pre-legislative process should be broad-based with transparency and accountability. This should be established as a process. Before the government actually starts making the law it must put it all out in the public domain where people's views can be sought. Once the comments come in, the government has the liberty and responsibility and the right to then formulate a law. Then it goes out of the public domain to the cabinet and then into Parliament. So public inputs are taken before the process of law making begins. Once it is introduced in Parliament you have the standing committee where you can depose with your suggestions.
NCPRI vs Team Anna:
We had a problem that instead of demanding a discussion with whole of India (In NAC we have been fighting for people's participation in the process), here the struggle was to get five cabinet ministers into the process so that the cabinet could be by-passed. We did not want that to happen as we believe that the cabinet has been entrusted with a job to frame people-friendly laws. We cannot take away the framework of the constitution. Any one dominant group, whether it is us or IAC, cannot decide the future of the country. For that we need a more broad-based set of consultations which can be done through the standing committee. We have seen huge changes in both the RTI Act and NREGA. We have now applied and we want to depose. The joint committee did not call us though we wrote to them and were assured by both Shanti Bhushan and Pranab Mukherjee. There is a need for a pre-legislative and a legislative process.

Interest in RTI dying out in state, says research body.

Times of India: Kochi:Wednesday, 24 August 2011.

KOCHI: After the huge response the Right to Information Act (RTI) generated among the citizen, the enthusiasm seems to be on the wane. Or that's what Kochi-based Centre for Public Policy Research (CPPR) has experienced with their Digital RTI Mission that aimed at bringing more information to the public domain.
"Kerala is currently ranked 34th in the list of those states using the tool effectively. This is surprising considering the level of public awareness and literacy rate. While citizens in districts like Alappuzha and Pathanamthitta still file a lot of queries, in places like Kochi the enthusiasm is dying out. The state government is short of funds and personnel to handle the situation, and has done little to improve the situation. The attitude of the state and district information officers have also become detrimental to public coming forward," says P Dhanuraj, chairman, CPPR.
To top it, most of the queries are private and frivolous in nature and mainly aimed at creating controversies rather than for public good. The response for CPPR's digital RTI mission, which was launched in 2010, has also been disheartening. "We have to deal with RTI activists who are illiterate when it comes to harnessing the power of the web, and need to be educated in even in basic applications. There are then problems of language and even of legitimacy which we have tried to overcome by publishing original documents. But there is no proper RTI depository and other than an organisation like the Kerala RTI Federation, there are very few organisations pursuing RTI seriously. And surprisingly, many activists are not even willing to share information," he says.
CPPR, though, has not abandoned the project, and is already experimenting with the beat of the third version of the module. "This would focus on issues of public interest like how much the government spends on various projects. We are planning to have an India Update site that will cover all state governments," he says.
The Kochi Corporation, meanwhile, says that it is doing its best for the citizen. "We are one organisation facing a major onslaught from RTI. This is certainly a good sign. We are doing our level best to answer all queries. We also have a Rs 8 crore project in e-governance under the JNNURM scheme to have all information related to various departments in the public domain so as to decrease the pressure from RTI queries," says Patel Ajit Bhagwat Rao, corporation secretary.
The corporation, which received about 2,500 to 2,600 queires in 2010, has disposed of about 90 per cent of them, according to Baby Antony, additional secretary, Kochi Corporation.
"We receive queries on public works, administration, engineering, town planning and health issues. We have a 34-member staff handling RTI queries, and this year we expect a 10 per cent increase in the number of RTI queries," he said. Probably, a sign that things are after all well with RTI.

BCCI may come under RTI Act.

Hindustan Times:New Delhi:Wednesday, 24 August 2011.

The Central Information Commission may reconsider its previous decision of exempting the Indian cricket board from the ambit of the RTI Act as it indicated that a larger bench may be constituted to decide on the “complex” issue of bringing BCCI under the transparency law.

The CIC in a previous order has declared that the BCCI is not a public authority covered under the RTI Act. However, Information Commissioner ML Sharma during a hearing on Tuesday said since it is a “complex” matter, if need arises, a larger bench may be considered for a decision.

The case relates to RTI applications seeking details of working of the BCCI. In its reply, the cricket body said it does not come under RTI Act as it is not financed by the govt.

Kerala Police switch to online mode.

IBNLive.com:Tuesday, August 23, 2011.

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: In order to give a fillip to transparency, Kerala Police have switched to the online mode to accept queries based on Right to Information (RTI) Act, thereby becoming one of the first departments in the state to do so. With this facility, the citizens can now submit their RTI applications through email without going to the police stations.
State Director General of Police Jacob Punoose told Express that the decision was taken to make the process of using the RTI Act hassle-free for the citizens. “The application form can be downloaded from the website and the query based on the RTI Act can be send via email. The requisite fees can be send to the police official concerned through a money order,” he said.
He said since the practice of accepting the fees for the RTI application online has not started so far, it would have to be submitted either through post or money order. “The circular regarding this has been sent to all police stations a month ago,” he said.
The application form can be downloaded from the site in both English and Malayalam. All information regarding the appellate authority and the state information officers are updated on the site to aid the public.
M K Manoj, an RTI activist said that the online mode for accepting the RTI application is innovative and also would help the public immensely. “One of the main reasons as to why the RTI Act has not been properly utilised is because of lack of awareness. Also people don’t want to spend their valuable time visiting the offices or by using ordinary mail. This step by the state police department will help in bringing more transparency and will also save a lot of time,” he said.
He said with the advent of technology, online mode of cash transactions is picking up particularly amongst the youngsters. “It is high time that the government departments introduced a system to collect the RTI fees online as well. This will prompt more citizens to participate in the RTI movement. Participation of the people in availing information will also improve the governance,” he said.
As per the new system, after receiving the formal application via email, the state public information officials concerned will furnish the information after scrutiny.

'Make Whistle Blower's Harassment Documents Public'

Outlook:Tuesday, August 23, 2011.

The Central Information Commission has directed the Environment Ministry to make public documents related to the alleged harassment of an IFS officer by senior Haryana government officials, for exposing several graft cases in the state.
Hearing the petition of a journalist Sumant Bhattacharya, the transparency panel directed the ministry to make public its communication with the Central Vigilance Commission on the issue of alleged harassment of IFS officer Sajiv Chaturvedi.
The panel also ordered the ministry to give details of action taken against the persons found guilty of corruption in the enquiry, regarding financial irregularities in centrally sponsored NAEB/JICA schemes; violation of wildlife laws and orders of Supreme Court; fabrication in the charge sheet of Sanjiv Chaturvedi and his illegal suspension.
Chaturvedi had exposed several cases of graft in the management of forest and wildlife in Haryana. He brought out alleged cases of misappropriation of funds, construction of a canal through wildlife sanctuary and diversion of public funds for private purposes among other.
Due to his persistent efforts in exposing corruption, Chaturvedi was transferred 11 times in four years of his service. But he continued to use the Right to Information to bring out graft details and violations of statutory provisions in the management of forests in Haryana.
Former Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh had constituted a two-member committee to probe the alleged harassment.
Bhattacharya, through his RTI application, wanted to know whether the recommendations of this committee have been accepted and action taken against corrupt officials who tried to harass Chaturvedi and were allegedly involved in graft.
Following the RTI application, the Environment Ministry demanded Rs 1,000 as photocopying charges to furnish the information sought by Bhattacharya but even after payment of the fee the details were not provided to him.
"The PIO states that on April 21, the file had been sent to Central Empowered Committee as per the direction of the minister. Since the file was not with him he has been unable to give the information. From the CEC the file was sent to CVC and now it has been received back from CVC. Hence he states that he was not able to provide the information," Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi pointed out.
Directing the ministry to provide entire information sought by Bhattacharya, Gandhi directed it to refund Rs 1,000 charged for photocopying charges and compensate him with another Rs 1,000.
"The Right to Information is a fundamental right to citizens and a PIO must ensure that information is provided within the time stipulated under the RTI Act," he said in the order.

Police provide protection to Jesuit priest.

Daily Bhaskar:Tuesday, August 23, 2011.

Pune: The Cantonment police have provided protection to the 74-year-old Jesuit priest, Father Walter Albert Saldhana, following the ransacking of his office on Sunday evening.

Senior inspector Sushma Chavan said the move was taken to prevent any further attacks. On Sunday evening, a group ransacked the office of the priest, who is director of Stephen Nivas, a hostel for college students on St Vincent's Street in Camp area.

They thought the priest was responsible for the sudden snapping of connection of a water pipeline by the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC), following which the local mosque stopped getting water.

The misunderstanding cropped up due to an application filed under the Right To Information (RTI) Act, 2005, by resident, Rashad Shaikh, on the issue. Shaikh, who had good relations with the priest, wanted details about the water supply in the area since he was receiving heavy water bills.

After the application was filed, some PMC officials visited the spot 15 days ago and cut the water supply as the connections were illegal. They were unaware that the supply from the pipe went to the mosque.

On Monday, Shaikh withdrew his RTI application and filed two written complaints: one to the PMC's superintendent of water supply and the other to the Cantonment police to ascertain the PMC officers responsible for divulging his name for filing the application. The incident took place when he and Shaikh were having a meeting at his hostel office.

Aruna Roy: Jan Lokpal Bill impractical, undemocratic.

The Economic Times:Monday, August 22, 2011.

NEW DELHI: Terming Anna Hazare's Jan Lokpal Bill "impractical and complicated", noted social activist and National Advisory Council ( NAC) member Aruna Roy said that giving widespread powers to an unelected body is a "threat to democracy".
"Jan Lokpal is a bill impossible to implement. Also, it derails the checks and balances between the judiciary, executive and other organs of the democratic structure," Roy, 65, who pioneered the right to information (RTI) movement in the country, told IANS in an interview here.
"Not that we agree with the government Lokpal Bill. The Lokpal legislation should be thoroughly deliberated again by activists, lawmakers and all other stakeholders.
"We of course support the democratic right of Hazare to hold demonstrations and fast against the government. That is why we condemned the arrest of Hazare," she said.
"But we have no meeting point with them, though we keep meeting each other at functions and meetings of common interest," she added.
Asked about the huge public support Hazare has drawn, Roy said: "There have been huge gatherings in support of NGO-sponsored agitations, like the Narmada Bachao movement. It might not have got similar publicity, as live TV was not there then."
Roy and her fellow activists in the National Campaign for People's Right to Information (NCPRI) have prepared an alternate version of the Lokpal bill, which will be presented to parliament's standing committee.
Roy, a Magsaysay award winner, said the Jan Lokpal bill is a "giant, complicated exercise" as it tried to extend from the prime minister to a peon.
"It wants to bring the higher judiciary into its ambit, which otherwise should have been under the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010," she said.
She felt that the suggestion of dual duties -- curbing corruption and redressing grievances -- under the Jan Lokpal was not feasible.
"The Jan Lokpal is a threat to democracy as a powerful, non-elected agency can lead to abuse of power and abuse of authority. Power corrupts and absolutely power corrupts absolutely," she quipped.
"Grievance redressal should not be the role of the Lokpal; it should be the work of the executive.
"See, wages of lakhs of workers in the NREGA (Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act) in Rajasthan have not been paid. But that is because the shortage of bank staff and other bureaucratic delays," she said.
The massive organisational setup suggested in the Jan Lokpal will lead to corruption and inefficiency, she cautioned.
"You may be able to find 11 Lokpal members of integrity, but it is difficult to create a clean set-up of thousands of staffers and hold them accountable," Roy said.
The government-drafted Lokpal is also deficient on several fronts, she added. Since it excludes cases under the state governments, there can be no probe against cases like the Adarsh housing society scandal, the Commonwealth Games scam and illegal mining in Karnataka.
She said excluding the prime minister and the higher judiciary was wrong. "This is a wrong practice. Nobody should be above the law," she said, adding that there should be certain safeguards. "Like both the Lokpal and the Supreme Court should agree on a probe against the prime minister."
Roy also suggested that the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill should be revised to facilitate effective action against the higher judiciary while the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) should be strengthened to probe junior officials.
The whistleblowers' protection bill too should be revised to deal with the increasing attacks and threats against RTI activists, she suggested.
"The Lokpal bill should not become an issue of adamant stances, political rivalries and personality-driven agitations. What we need is a sincere, detailed debate for legislation of immense social significance and public concern," she said.
Roy, an Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer from 1968 to 1974, resigned from the government as the clouds of Emergency were gathering. She took to social work in the Social Work Research Centre in Tilonia in Rajasthan, founded by her husband Sanjit 'Bunker' Roy, another Magsaysay award winner.
However, she professionally disassociated from her husband in 1983, reportedly for ideological reasons, and founded the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathana (Workers and Peasants Strength Union) in 1990 in Devdoongri in Rajsamand district of Rajasthan.
Roy's campaign for right to information led to the enactment of the RTI Act - in Rajasthan in 2000 and five years later at the national level.

Silent invasion of India; Illegal immigration from Pakistan and Bangladesh poses a serious threat to our internal security. Thanks to vote-bank politics, our politicians are indifferent.

Daily Pioneer:Joginder Singh:Monday, August 22, 2011.

Our international border is around 15,318 km long, of which our boundary with Bangladesh is 4,000 km long, running along West Bengal, Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram and Tripura. It is the Government of India’s responsibility to guard the country’s international border and prevent foreigners from entering our territory illegally as well as control the entry of those travelling with valid documents. This is a responsibility that the Government has clearly failed to fulfil as was evident from a statement by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs: “As per information available, 1,283 Pakistani nationals (who presumably entered India legally) remain untraced/missing as of June 30, 2011.”
A month earlier, while replying to a query under the RTI Act in July, the Government had said: “It is not possible to estimate the total number of such foreign nationals, including Pakistani and Bangladeshi nationals, who have entered into the country without valid travel documents and are staying in the country since entry of such foreign nationals into the country is clandestine and surreptitious.” The response also added that over 73,000 people from various countries have stayed on even after their visas expired; nearly 50 per cent of these people were from Bangladesh and about 10 per cent were from Pakistan, according to data available as of December 31, 2009. In 1996, the then Union Minister for Home Affairs, Indrajit Gupta, had informed Parliament that over 25 million Bangladeshis were illegally living in India.
The fact remains that despite the threat of cross-border terrorism faced by the country from illegal immigrants, the Ministry of Affairs does not maintain a centralised source of information on people crossing the border to enter India from Pakistan and Bangladesh without valid documents. Except where it suits its own concerns, the Union Government refuses to act even in the face of judicial pronouncement. The Supreme Court held in 2005 that provisions of the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act of 1983 were ultra vires to the Constitution and were accordingly struck down. The Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Rules, 1984, were also determined to be ultra vires and hence were struck down.
The issue of illegal immigration has and continues to figure in high-level meetings related to internal security. It has figured prominently at the Chief Ministers’ Conference on Internal Security and Law and Order held in New Delhi . At this conference serious differences emerged among the north-eastern States on the issue of illegal immigration — some States openly accused Assam of contributing to the mounting problem of illegal immigration in the region.
The then Chief Minister of Nagaland virtually charged Assam with not taking any steps to check illegal immigration from Bangladesh. He said, “Assam has almost become a breeding ground for illegal immigrants as they are procuring documents like ration cards in that State and then coming to the hills. This is very dangerous.” He also claimed that such immigrants were being settled in areas that were under dispute between Assam and several other States. He even urged Assam to settle its decades-long boundary disputes with Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Manipur in an accommodative spirit as it was the largest State in the region.
According to a former Governor of Assam, “57 of Assam’s 126 constituencies were found to have more than a 20 per cent increase in the number of voters between 1994 and 1997, whereas the all-India average was just 7.4 per cent.” This dramatic increase indicated the addition of a large number of voters who were really illegal immigrants from Bangladesh. He added that a revision of electoral rolls in Mongoldoi parliamentary constituency in Assam in 1979 detected the names of thousands of Bangladeshi nationals and the entire population of Assam revolted against this development.
The former Governor also felt that without knowing the long-term effects of the issue, Indian Muslims by and large were sympathetic to Bangladeshi immigrants. Thus, the illegal immigrants now have a much larger say in the political affairs of the country. For instance, when the Government of Maharashtra tried to deport a few hundred illegal Bangladeshi immigrants, several parties started a chorus of protests that were politically motivated.
There is a direct relationship between the voting patterns of illegal immigrants and the freebies given by political parties to win their votes in elections. This unholy nexus creates roadblocks at different levels, especially when it comes to checking the continued problem of illegal immigration which also gives rise to the possibility that such elements could possibly become sleeper cells of terrorist organisations and help them launch terror attacks within India.
The truth is that even though all politicians realise the enormity of this problem, their craving for electoral gains and desperation to secure the votes of illegal immigrants make them ignore the imminent dangers of the problem. Politics in our country has become hostage to political expediency which is often disguised as ‘principles’. These ‘principles’ are frequently tailored to suit the occasion.
The trouble is that politicians world over are essentially the same. Most will say anything to get themselves elected to office. Later, they hope that they can escape scrutiny on account of the fact that the people have a short memory and tend to forget pre-election promises. Thus, all of us who participate in the electoral process (as well as those who don’t come out to vote on polling day) are responsible for the rise of bad politicians to power. The time has come to tell people who don’t vote that they can’t complain about the quality of politicians who are elected to office.
A senior politician who has served as the Speaker of the Lok Sabha once pleaded for identity cards to be given to all people in the North-East, including illegal immigrants from Bangladesh living in Assam. A former Governor of Arunachal Pradesh and West Bengal holds that at least five million Bangladeshis who entered India illegally have settled in Assam. They constitute a fourth of the State’s population of 22 million people. According to estimates prepared by the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Intelligence Bureau, Assam’s alien population from Bangladesh stands at about four million.
These statistical details not only indicate the magnitude of the problem of illegal immigration but also reflect the enormity of the security threat that the country is facing on account of this. This is apart from the fact that illegal immigration deprives Indian citizens of employment opportunities. All countries, including Western nations, especially the US, ensure and protect their citizens’ job opportunities and, unlike our Government, are not apologetic about doing so .
Machiavelli, Hobbes and others have defined man as a lump of matter whose most politically relevant attribute is a form of energy called “self-interestedness.” In this context, it means that the issue is simply not one of changing religious demographics or illegal immigration; it is not about being remorseful or repentant for taking a stand wherein we do not protect our own self-interests. As the former Australian Prime Minister, Mr Gough Whitlam, once said: “The punters know that the horse named Morality rarely gets past the winning post, whereas the horse named Self-Interest always runs a good race.” The Government should know one horse from another!

Minister orders probe into RTI revelations.

GreaterKashmir.com: Monday, August 22, 2011.

Srinagar, Aug 21: Minister for Agriculture Ghulam Hassan Mir has ordered probe into the revelations of alleged fake signatures and thumb impressions being used against the “beneficiaries” of seeds and plants distributed by the Agriculture Department.
The revelations under the Right to Information Act were Saturday reported by this newspaper.
“The alleged fake signatures and thumb impressions in Branwar, Jabad and Neegu villages would definitely be investigated and appropriate action taken,” a spokesman of the Agriculture Department said in a statement. “Under National Watershed Development Programme for rain-fed sreas, Watershed for Branwar is being implemented from 2005-06 and the total cost of project as per Government of India norms is Rs. 30.00 lacs only. Out of this total expenditure of Rs.7.86 lacs has been incurred up to ending March 2010 and this includes Agro Forestry and Horticulture Plantation component of Rs. 66666.00 during 2008-09. No matter the magnitude of expenditure under the relevant head being very less, it will be ensured that the matter is investigated and action under law taken.”
DEPARTMENT: CLARIFIES
In a clarification to the Saturday’s news item in this newspaper, the Agriculture Department claimed that material referring to information revealed in response to an RTI application filed by Dr. Raja Muzaffar Bhat has been wrongly reflected in the news item. “The fact of the matter is that during the period 2007-08 to 2010-11 a total expenditure of Rs. 9.44 crores has been incurred on the purchase of different kind of seeds by the department and the said amount has almost fully been remitted into the Treasury after sale of the procured seeds among the farmers,” the spokesman said.
He claimed that the figures mentioned in the news item that potato seed worth 60 crores, paddy 100 cores, Peas 25 crores and Oats 63 crores are grossly incorrect. “The department has procured/purchased 6200 quintals of Potato, 18845 quintals of Paddy, 2614 quintals of Peas and 6341 quintals of Oats besides other seeds during these four years involving a total expenditure of less than Rs.10 crores in total,” he said.
This newspaper had however quoted the figures (put in lakhs) by the Directorate in response to Bhat’s RTI application.
“While the Department is making every effort to make quality seeds available to the farmers this is being mainly done through the Departmental Seed Multiplication Farms and Seed Village programmes where from certified seed is procured. Only the quantity that is not available from the above sources is purchased from State/Central Seed Corporations or from the registered companies through State Level Rate Contract Finalization Committee,” the spokesman said.

Divulge info about JK projects: Power Ministry tells NHPC.

GreaterKashmir.com: UMER MAQBOOL:Monday, August 22, 2011.

Srinagar, Aug 21: Union Power Ministry has asked the National Hydroelectric Power Corporation (NHPC) to provide information regarding power projects of Jammu and Kashmir to the Kashmir-based civil society group, which had filed an application under Right to Information Act for the same two weeks back.
In response to the RTI application, Under Secretary at the Ministry of Power, Kamal Bose has asked Chief Engineer and Public Information Officer of the NHPC to provide the desired information regarding Salal Hydel Project and other issues to the group.
Following the J&K High Court direction on July 28 , the group had filed an application before the Union Power Ministry and NHPC asking them why 790-MW Salal and 480-MW Uri-I power projects have not been returned to J&K as “investment incurred on them has come down to zero depreciated value.”.
The PIL was filed by Syed Shakeel Qalander (former president FCIK), Ghulam Nabi Khayal, Bashir Assad, Qurat-ul-ain, Ghulam Nabi Naik, Qasim Sajad, Khurshid Alam, Khalid Hussain, Jagmohan Singh Raina and Zahoor Ahmad Bhat.
In a letter the Ministry has requested NHPC “to provide the requisite information to the applicant on point I, II, IV & V of para 5 of the RTI application related to copies of documentary proof in support of MOU/Agreement entered into between State Government and GOI/NHPC in regard to construction of Salal Hydel Project and other issues.”

“The matter on which information has been sought by the applicant is in the domain of NHPC Ltd. which is a separate public authority in terms of section 6(3) (ii) of the Act,” the letter reads.
Besides, the group has also been informed that their application was being transferred to the Power Ministry.
“A copy of your RTI application dated 1st August, 2011 is being transferred to NHPC in terms of section 6(3) (ii) of the RTI Act, 2005 with the request to provide the requisite information as relevant to NHPC to the applicant,” the officer states.
It had also asked them to divulge details about the quantity of electric energy generated at Salal hydel project since its commissioning in 1987 and the amount generated thereby by the NHPC/ Government of India and the quantity of such electric energy shared with the Jammu and Kashmir in accordance with MOU signed.
As per the cabinet order of 1975 pertaining to setting up of Salal, Jammu and Kashmir was entitled to 50 percent of power generated from the project besides 50 percent share on the returns over selling of remaining power by NHPC. The ownership of the project was to be reverted to the state government after a suitable period on payment of depreciated cost. However the order was never implemented.
Besides, they have also raised query about the cost of investment incurred by NHPC on the construction of these projects and their depreciated value as on date.