Exceeding the mandate of rti

Complainant or aggrieved person under prevention of corruption act ...
browse.feedreader.com/c/Law_Web/63367549‎


Aug 17, 2012 - Complainant or a person who is aggrieved on account of act or omission of public servant would fall within the definition of words "Any Victim".

perhaps you could put facts in understandable manner so that one could help you to fight corruption.

Government officials riding high on hopes that privacy concerns could blunt the right to information are in for disappointment.

An expert panel set up to build a framework for a privacy regulation in India has brushed aside suggestions that the information law was trampling upon privacy of public servants or individuals in public life.

The Justice (retd) Ajit Prakash Shah panel has told the government that privacy was only a "narrow exception" to the citizens' right of information.


And when someone claimed exemption from providing information on grounds of privacy, the Information Commissioners used the public interest test to determine whether "the individual's right to privacy should be trumped by the public's right to information", the Shah panel said.

The panel's recommendations come weeks after Prime Minister Manmohan Singh spoke about concerns regarding possible infringement of personal privacy while providing information under the Right to Information Act.

Singh had gone a step further to stress that "citizens' right to know should definitely be circumscribed if disclosure of information encroaches upon someone's personal privacy. But where to draw the line is a complicated question".

The Shah panel - that had only three civil society members, NDTV's Barkha Dutt, researcher Dr Usha Ramanathan and Pranesh Prakash of advocacy group, Centre for Internet & Society - has indicated there was no need for concern.

"The (proposed) Privacy Act should not circumscribe the Right to Information Act," the Shah panel said, pointing that there were more than 400 cases where the Central Information Commissioner had pronounced decisions on the balance between privacy and transparency.

Singh's remarks at the convention to mark the seventh anniversary of the RTI Act - that reflected the discomfort within sections of the government at the use of the transparency law - had come in for severe criticism from RTI activists.

Instead, the panel listed out nearly six dozen laws or those in the pipeline that contained provisions impacting privacy.

Government officials said many of these laws or their rules would need to be fine-tuned in line with privacy principles, particularly those relating to the financial sector and the two big databases of residents being created by the home ministry's National Population Register and the Unique Identification Authority of India's Aadhaar.

source URL:https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/newdelhi/rti-doesn-t-trample-upon-privacy-expert-panel/article1-951471.aspx

 

It is nothing but a fallacy that merely because an honest and responsibile citizen of India has invoked RTI act hundred or two hundred times his application is liable to be dismissed.

Let's quotes the Prime Minister’s Statement:
"I want every citizen to make full use of this act to ensure that government functions properly and honestly."

New Delhi, Aug 15 (2007) : Prime Minister Manmohan Singh Wednesday urged Indians to make full use of the Right to Information(RTI) Act to ensure that the government "functions properly and honestly".
 Speaking at the Red Fort on the 60th anniversary of India's independence, the prime minister said the act was enacted to make the government, at all levels, "more accountable and more transparent, and to fight the cancer of corruption.

attribution https://www.citehr.com/333880-inaction-corrupt-victimization-honest.html#ixzz2k14Fajyx

perhaps you could put facts in understandable manner so that one could help you to fight corruption.

All that matters is that the one stood against many.

A company of several greedy officers  can in the short term succeed in throwing mud at an honest citizen of India,it can also find

supporters of the status quo.

perhaps you could put facts in understandable manner so that one could help you to fight corruption.

you are able to convey nothing.

All one can gather is that you are wasting your precious time and energy on petty corruption and using this energy (in right direction) you could bust larger isues.

Complaint Registration   Inbox 
  portal-cvc@nic.in  <portal-cvc@nic.in>   Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:35 PM
 To: revribhav@gmail.com
Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Delete | Show original
Dear Sir/Madam,

Your complaint dated 12/11/2013 has been registered with us, with reference No. 29831/2013/Vigilance 3

appeal RTI -ebezzlement of public money:16.08.13   Inbox 
  Revribhav  <revribhav@gmail.com>   Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:30 AM
 To: "pranabkumar.sahu" <pranabkumar.sahu@newindia.co.in>, "renjit.gangadharan" <renjit.gangadharan@newindia.co.in>, "renjeet.gangadharan" <renjeet.gangadharan@newindia.co.in>, gsrinivasan <gsrinivasan@newindia.co.in>
 Cc: vigilance <vigilance@nic.in>, arsekar <arsekar@newindia.co.in>, "segar.sampath" <segar.sampath@newindia.co.in> 

 First Appellate Authority                               11 November 2013
 New India Assurance Co. Ltd,(NIACL)
 87,M.G. Road, Fort,Mumbai-400001

         Re: Appeal under the Right to Information Act-2005
 application dated                                      16 August
 2013*  CPIO reply *CPI Cell/HO 2013-14/255

    The CPIO,P.K. Sahu vide  reply* dated 23.10.2013 denied  all
 information pertaining to systematic  abuse of authority including
 that  of  appointment of public servants,e.g. Chief Vigilance Officer,
 to cover up the deliberate acts of public servants causing gross
 financial loss of public money ,i.e.  embezzlement in collusion &
 denial of   Fundamental Right(s)  without reading  any content of RTI,
 hence the appeal in public interests for full disclosure of  pointwise
 information.
 e.g. (point no.6) A list of insurance company executives who enjoyed
 air travel on 15.07.2013 while the mandate/ notice  of CIC was to
 attend video conference .
 S. No.     Appeal/decision ref. Name of Insurance executive     Enjoyed
 Tour /Air travel from
    Wastage of public money
 1.CIC/DS/A/2012/002690  J.K. Lakhaniya  Yes   from    Indore  /Bhopal
 2.CIC/DS/A/2012/002364  A.L. Madan,     Yes   from Chandigarh
 3.CIC/DS/A/2012/002272  Vinay Batra,    Yes  from   Mumbai
 4. CIC/DS/A/2012/002457 S. K. Dash      Yes   from  Mumbai

 Estimated loss of public money  Rs. 80,000 on account of tour

 

  Appellant:  Shri Gopal Soni,
                                      C231, Panchsheel Nagar,
 Ajmer-305004         tel.01452644106
 *scanned copy enclosed.

 CC: E-mail: Ministry of Finance,Deptt of Financial Services,Jeevan
 Deep,II Floor, Sansad Marg,New Delhi-110001.
            ( Ministry ref. 25/33/2013 –Vig  dated 16.09.2013).

 CC: for information :CMD/ GM &.or  TRANSPARENCY OFFICER,New India
 Assurance Co. Ltd,(NIACL)
 87,M.G. Road, Fort,Mumbai-400001
 URL:https://newindia.co.in/Content.aspx?pageid=1038
https://twitter.com/revribhav

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Exceeding-the-mandate-of-rti-86598.asp#.UoGPj70jChl
  set appeal RTI 16.08.13 vitt vig NIACL.pdf
1451K

 

perhaps you could put facts in understandable manner so that one could help you to fight corruption.

Information of Second Appeal under RTI act:lack of transparency in CIC  
  rev ribhav2  <revribhav2@gmail.com>   Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 9:28 AM
 To: "tk.mohapatra" <tk.mohapatra@nic.in>
 Cc: "ak.dash" <ak.dash@nic.in> 

 Central Information Commission,
 II,Floor,August Kranti bhavan, Bhikaji Kama Place
 New Delhi- 110 066.

 Madam/Sir,
 Re: Second Appeal under Sec 19(3) of  the Right to Information Act-2005

 Name and address of the appellant:      ShriGopal Soni,   (revribhav@gmail.com)
  (Tel.01452644106)                                  C231,PanchSheel
 Nagar,Ajmer-305 004.

 Name and address of the CPIO:  T. K. Mohapatra, Dy Secretary & CPIO,
 Central Information Commission,II,Floor,August Kranti bhavan, Bhikaji
 Kama Place,New Delhi- 110 066
 E-mail: <tk.mohapatra@nic.in>

 Name and address of the Central Public Authority against the order of
 whom the  appeal is preferred:  A. K. Dash, Additional Secretary &
 FAA, as above. E-mail: <ak.dash@nic.in>

 Particulars of the order against which the appeal is preferred:
 CIC/AA/A/2013/433    dated 27th November 2013
                  ( annexure A4   )

 Compensation Sought: The appellant prays for compensation as per
 clause in Sec 19(8)* of the RTI Act for denial of   information that
 is not denied of being available.

 Brief facts leading to the appeal:
         The appellant ,a whisle blower who exposes abuse of public
 money sought information under RTI dated 27/08/2013 ( A1) pertaining
 to  dates  when the CPIO/ Appellate Authority of  the Respondents: New
 India Assurance Co. Ltd (NIACL) were called upon to comply  a  written
 “Notice  for Hearing” by CIC to appear through video conference in
 para 1 and in person in Para 2.    The  CPIO submitted a rhetorically
 drafted reply suppressing the desired information. The appellant, vide
 appeal dt. 12.10.2013 requested  disclosure of  information to FAA
 that the  information desired is in utmost public interests ,it is
 directly related to abuse of public money.                    The FAA
 ,however, defended the  denial of information on the pretext that it
 would divert the resources of Central Information Commision.

 Prayer or Relief sought: 1.  The information pertains to habitual
 ,deliberate and prolonged abuse of public money by a Public Sector
 Insurance Company Executives, who prefer flight instead of mandate of
 CIC to attend video conference (unwilling RTI disclosure P5  attached
 on  page 2 of FAA reply). kindly order for immediate disclosure of
 information.

 Compensation Sought: The appellant prays for compensation as per
 clause in Sec 19(8)* of the RTI Act related to the detriment suffered
 since long denial of information.

 Grounds for the Prayer or Relief: Neither the CPIO nor the FAA enjoy
 immunity from the Vigilance pledge,that  states:   “  WE, THE PUBLIC
 SERVANTS OF INDIA, DO HEREBY SOLEMNLY PLEDGE THAT WE SHALL
 CONTINUOUSLY STRIVE TO BRING ABOUT INTEGRITY AND TRANSPARENCY …without
 fear or favour ”.

 Whether 2 sets of appeal attached:Yes
 Whether self -attested all documents:Yes
 Page numbering (bottom to top):
 A1: Application  under RTI act.dt..27.08.13    A2: Reply of CPIO
 dt.3.10.2013    A3. First Appeal  dt.12.10.13.    A4. Order of FAA dt.
 27.11.13  A5. Unwilling admitted fact of insurance company executives
 opting flight to enjoy in person visit to CIC  violating mandate of
 video conference.   .
                                                              .
                                                                   I
 verify that the facts mentioned above are true and correct to the best
 of my knowledge and belief,the matters under appeal have not
 previously been filed,or pending with any court or tribunal or with
 any other authority.
 Yours Sincerely,
              (ShriGopal Soni),Appellant..

                                     Dt. 11-12-2013
 N.B. 1.  E-mail copy of this second appeal is being sent to CPIO and
 FAA of CIC.                                      .         2. The
 appellant requests  video conference hearing from Ajmer..
  set 27.08.13 II appeal CIC vc NIACL abuse HQ.pdf
1011K

perhaps you could put facts in understandable manner so that one could help you to fight corruption.

you are able to convey nothing.

All one can gather is that you are wasting your precious time and energy on petty corruption and using this energy (in right direction) you could bust larger isues.

perhaps you could put facts in understandable manner so that one could help you to fight corruption. you are able to convey nothing. All one can gather is that you are wasting your precious time and energy on petty corruption and using this energy (in right direction) you could bust larger isues.

The attached Transparency pledge applicable to each and every public servant of  public sector insurance company as well as to Central Information Commission does not distingish between grave or petty corruption.

 

URL:cvc.gov.in/pledge.pdf‎

Second appeal in the matter of systematic abuse of public money (evidence as per attachment) by an insurance company's RTI officials who habitually enjoy air travel at the cost of public money,instead of doing duty of supplying information to an honest citizen of india or following  the prescribed mode of attending video conference is attached.

The e-mail sent to concerned officials is the following:-

 

 

RTI 16.08.13:Information of Second Appeal under the Right to Information Act-2005  
  rev ribhav2  <revribhav2@gmail.com>   Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 2:51 PM
 To: renjit.gangadharan@newindia.co.in, "pranabkumar.sahu" <pranabkumar.sahu@newindia.co.in>, "rti.ho" <rti.ho@newindia.co.in>
 Cc: "segar.sampath" <segar.sampath@newindia.co.in>, vigilance <vigilance@nic.in> 

 A 6-7

 Email: to    <pranabkumar.sahu@newindia.co.in>
 Pranab Kumar Sahu,,Chief MANAGER & CPIO,New India Assurance Co Ltd,(
 NIACL),87,M.G.Road,Fort ,Mumbai-400001
 Madam/Sir,Re: Information of Second Appeal under the Right to
 Information Act-2005       With reference to My application under the
 R.T.I.Act16.08.2013 reply by you  CPI/Ho/2013-14/255 suppressing  the
 informationthe applicant herewith files  second appeal*  against
 denial ofinformation by  you as the CPIO  and  against the decision
 ofappellate authority under Appeal No.241/2013  .Kindly be informed as
 above.
 Shri Gopal Soni,C231,Panch Sheel Nagar,Ajmer
 -305004.(appellant)Enclosed: as above *
  Dt.7-02-2014

 

 Email: to    renjit.gangadharan@newindia.co.in
 Renjit Gangadharan,Dy General Manager,New India Assurance Co Ltd, (
 NIACL),87,M.G.Road,Fort ,Mumbai-400001
 Dear Sir,Re: Information of Second Appeal under the Right to
 Information Act-2005With reference to RTI application dt.16.08.2013
 Appeal to youdt.11.11.2013  the applicant herewith files  second
 appeal* againstdenial of  information by  the CPIO  and your
 mechanical reply,asappellate authority under Appeal No.241/2013 .
 Kindly be informed.

 Shri Gopal Soni,C231,Panch Sheel Nagar,Ajmer
 -305004.(appellant)Enclosed: as above *
  Dt. 7-02-2014

 A 5

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION      CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7631 OF 2002
  Dev Dutt .. Appellant
  -vs-
  Union of India & Ors. ..
 Respondents                                        JUDGMENT
 (relevant Quote )19. In our opinion, every entry in the A.C.R. of a
 public servant must be
  communicated to him within a reasonable period.
  45. In our opinion, non-communication of entries in the Annual
 Confidential Report of a public servant, whether he is in civil,
 judicial, police or any other service (other than the military),
 certainly has civil  consequences...

<revribhav@gmail.com>   Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 9:27 AM
 To: jsba-dfs <jsba-dfs@nic.in>
Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Delete | Show original
 Kind attention:-
 Shri Anup Wadhawan
  Joint Secretary(BA & P&I) Ministry of Finance
  Department of Financial Services
  Jeevan Deep Building
  Parliament Street
  New Delhi - 110 001
  Tel. No. 011-24462349/Fax. 011-23367702
  Email: jsba-dfs[at]nic[dot]in

 The RTI application was addressed to and forwarded by the
 Ministry,please be informed and take decivie action to stop further
 abuse of public money by RTI officials of insurance company.
 regards,
 Shri Gopal Soni,C231,Panch Sheel Nagar,Ajmer
   -305004.

 

7.02.14 set 16.08.13 second appeal NIACL.pdf
702K View as HTML Scan and download