Saturday, October 27, 2012
Info panel spares govt officers the rod
Info panel spares govt officers the rod
Times Region [Next]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Info panel spares govt officers the rod
Staff Crunch Delays Reply To RTI Queries
http://mobilepaper.timesofindia.com/mobile.aspx?article=yes&pageid=12§id=edid=&edlabel=TOICH&mydateHid=22-10-2012&pubname=Times+of+India+-+Chennai&edname=&articleid=Ar01200&publabel=TOI
C D S Mani TNN
Chennai: Tamil Nadu chief information commissioner K S Sripathi believes in giving a long rope to public information officers (PIOs).He told TOI that the state information commission (SIC) does not believe in punishing PIOs,who are dependent on various departments to collect information and reply to applications under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.We cant bow to pressure of RTI activists to take action against a PIO without examining all the issues involved, he said adding,the demoralizing effect on that the officers concerned has to be to considered.
He attributes the delay in replying to RTI queries to manpower constraints and process.The SIC,which had just one chief information commissioner and one information commissioner since its inception,has inducted five more information commissioners this September,he pointed out.Lack of trained staff who are computer savvy and can handle the inflow of around 56,000 papers received by the commission in a calendar year,slows down the process of sifting through the petitions,appeals and references from various departments,he explained.
However,RTI activist C Selvaraj demurs saying,the replies to queries have to be given within 30 days as mandated by the Act and the commission should work intelligently by prioritizing the petitions instead of attempting to respond to all the representations if there is a manpower shortage.V Gopalakrishnan,who has filed a legion of RTI applications,has problems with lack of sincerity of PIOs in doing their constitutional job and does not buy the official line regarding manpower constraints.
Expressing inability to reveal the number of RTI applications received in a calendar year,Sripathi explains that the SIC only receives second appeals after applicants have made the first appeal to the concerned department from which information has been sought.Out of 12,000 to 13,000 second appeals received in a calendar year,the SIC disposes of moer than 8,000 plus appeals which makes TN one of the leading states in this regard.The commission receives only second appeals on alleged denials of information or delays in getting replies to RTI queries.
On an average,about 100 show cause notices are issued in a calendar year to PIOs in Tamil Nadu and fines are imposed only after malafide intention is established.Usually the complaints are against departments like police and revenue with which the people tend to have more interaction, he said.
Section 20 of the RTI Act empowers the commission to impose a penalty of Rs 250 per person per day of delay subject to a maximum of Rs 25,000 while deciding an appeal complaint.It can recommend disciplinary action against any erring PIO.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Article 124 (7) and article 220 (7) of the Constitution of India.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Ministry of law and justice, New Delhi
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request for furnishing information and attested
Photo copy.- regarding.
--------
1. kindly supply copy of information about Retired judges of supreme courts can apply/appointed for any job in central or state government or public authority or any other court within the territory of India.".
2. kindly supply copy of information about Retired judges of high court can apply/appointed for any job, shall plead or act in any court or ." in central or state government before any authority in India except the Supreme Court and the other High Courts.".
3. kindly supply copy of information about Retired judges of supreme courts should not apply/appointed for any job in central or state government or public authority or any other court within the territory of India.".
4. kindly supply copy of information about Retired judges of high court should not apply/appointed for any job, shall plead or act in any court or ." in central or state government before any authority in India except the Supreme Court and the other High Courts.".
5. kindly supply copy of information about Retired chief judges of supreme courts can apply/appointed for any job in central or state government or public authority or any other court/commission within the territory of India.".
6. kindly supply copy of information about Retired chief judges of supreme courts should not apply/appointed for any job in central or state government or public authority or any other court/commission within the territory of India.".
7. kindly supply copy of Article 124 (7) and article 220 (7) of the Constitution of India.
8. kindly inform name of officer, destignation, office adress (other than court of law) to make complaint for any action taken by central/state governments in violation to any article of the Constitution of India.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Tamil Nadu State Information Commission members use red beacon lights illegally’
CHENNAI: Are state information commissioners entitled to red beacon light on their cars? No, say RTI activists in the city and allege that members of the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission (SIC) are flouting this rule.
Activists say only 19 categories of dignitaries can use red beacons and SIC members is not in the list. V Gopalakrishnan, a city based RTI activist, said: "I brought this issue to the traffic police but no action has been taken. It is clear that the SIC members are not following the orders of Madras high court and state government. Then how can they impose a penalty on other public information officers?"
Countering this, state chief information commissioner K S Sripati said: "According to the RTI act, the post of information commissioner is equal to that of chief secretary who is eligible to use a red beacon on his car. So there is nothing wrong in information commissioners using red beacon on their cars."
Gopalakrishnan, however, said: "As long as the rule does not permit it, information commissioners cannot use red beacon on cars."
A source in the Central Information Commission said chief information central commissioner Satyananda Mishra didn't use a red beacon on his car. "He is entitled to it but refused," said the source.
According to the rules, red beacon lights on cars are to be used by the Governor, chief minister, deputy chief minister, high court chief justice, high court judges, legislative assembly speaker, cabinet ministers, leader of the opposition, state ministers, advocate-general, chief secretary, director-general of police, chairman of the legislative council, state election commissioner, lok ayukta, chairman of the advisory board constituted under the NSA and under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 (Goondas Act), the Nawab of Arcot and pilot and escort vehicles.
But many in the state, including IAS officers, politicians and university vice-chancellors, flout this rule with impunity. A RTI filed by TOI revealed no action has been taken against such persons in the last ten years.
In March, the Madras high court directed police to seize vehicles using red beacons without authorization on the basis of a public interest litigation petition filed by a Coimbatore-based advocate.
Friday, September 28, 2012
ordererly abolished in earlier year. but still continue
missue of police offical by the Higher ups, Rtd IPS. i enclosed a sample
Friday, September 14, 2012
Missue of red light color beacon revolving lights by the information commissioner.
Missue of red light color beacon revolving lights by the information commissioner.
Missue of red light color beacon revolving lights by the information commissioner. Tamilnadu information commissioner violating Government order and Chennai high court order using red color beacon lights on the CAR. (see photo). information commissioner itself missusing, not obeying G.O. , High court order.Then how information commissioner going to impose penality on PIO.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/tamil-nadu/article1547770.ece
Monday, September 10, 2012
orderlies was abolished in year 1979, Government Order no. 2231 issued by home (police-7) department dated 05.09.1979. i enclosed PIO reply for orderlies and list RTD DGP,ADGP and IGPs.
orderlies was abolished in year 1979, Government Order no. 2231 issued by home (police-7) department dated 05.09.1979. i enclosed PIO reply for orderlies and list RTD DGP,ADGP and IGPs.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
ALL INFORMATION REGARDING JUDGES, STAFF OF COURTS ARE PERSONAL AS PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERR AND APPELATE AUTHORITY.
FORM 16 OF CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, TAMILNADU INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, fORMER TAMILNADU CHIEF MININSTER Mr.KARUNDHI AND DY CM STALIN WERE SUPPLIED BY THE PIO AND APPEALLATE AUTHORITY, WHEVER SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND HIGH COURT OF CHENNAI REFUSING TO SUPPLY COPY OF FORM 16 OF JUDGES. BOTH COURT DOES NOT WANT TRANSPARENCY AND THEY DONOT WANT GIVE INFORMATION TO COMMON PUBLIC. BECAUSE THEY TOP MOST PERSON IN INDIA. INDIA WAS FULL OF CORRUPT JUDGES, POLITICAN AND BURECRAFIT. TANSPARENCY IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND CHENNAI HIGH COURT IS ZERO. ALL INFORMATION REGARDING JUDGES, STAFF OF COURTS ARE PERSONAL AS PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICERR AND APPELATE AUTHORITY. NO INFORMATION WAS AVAILABLE REGARDING pERSONAL INFORMATION IN THE SUPREME COURT AND CHENNAI HIGH COURT INFORMED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION. BUT NOW CLAIMING PERSONAL..
Monday, July 30, 2012
RTI Application for your complaint letter to know status
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From 13/06/2012
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, PAMMAL NALLA THAMBI Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and
attested photo copy.- regarding.
Ref: my complaint letter dated.........
--------
1. Kindly supply signed and stamped copy of all correspondence till
date in the matter of my complaint letter dated ……………, including
memos, note file, emails, covering letters for forwarding your
complaint etc.
2.Kindly supply signed and stamped copy of logbook or any other book
where details of my complaint letter dated ……………, are entered, marked
to specific officers for their investigation and action.
3.Kindly supply signed and stamped copy of all their remarks,
feedback, reports etc for my complaint letter dated ……………,.
4.Kindly supply signed and stamped copy of the closing remarks of
the officer concerned, if the case on my complaint letter dated
……………, was closed.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
Tamilnadu speaker, Deputy speaker and environment minister only receiving HRA
speaker, Deputy speaker and environment minister only receiving HRA at the rate of Rs.20,000/- fro 16/6/2011 to june 2012. PIO supplied incomplete information.
PAN NO OF CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMMISSIONER
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From 14/11/2011
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
C.R. BUILDING, I. P. ESTATE,
NEW DELHI-110002.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request for furnish information and attested photo
copy.- regarding.
--------
1. Kindly inform total income informed by the below assessee and supply copy of income tax returns and Balance sheet submitted from year , 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012
(a) WAJAHAT HABIBULLAHI AAZPH5750R
(a) sathyananadha mishra ABFPM 0609R
(b) ANNAPUMA DIXIT ACJPD 6077H
(c) SHALIESH RAM KUMAR GANDHI AAAPG 7762A
(d) MADAN LAL SHARMA AMHPS 0876K
(e) DEEPAK SANDHU AAMPS1681D
(f) SUSHMA SINGH AAMPS1150R
(g) A.N.TIWARI AASPT 1262G
(h) M.M.ANSARI AAAPA 0523E
(i) O.P.KEJARIAWAL AAAPK 1574H
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.03F 513560
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
Saturday, July 7, 2012
Consumer court holds TAMILNADU information COMMISSION panel liable for deficiency in service
Consumer court holds information panel liable for deficiency in service
R. Sivaraman Share · Comment · print · T+
Share
They are both statutory forums that redress the grievances of people but have been placed at the loggerheads following a verdict by a city consumer court. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chennai, (South) has held the Public Information Officer of the Tamil Nadu State Information Commission liable for “deficiency of service”.
The consumer forum ordered the public information officer to pay compensation of Rs.5,000 to an applicant, holding that he had committed deficiency in service by not furnishing information sought by the complainant under RTI Act within the stipulated period.
The ruling means that RTI applicants are consumers and the furnishing of information under the RTI Act is a ‘service’.
The Commission questioned the maintainability of the complaint, but the Forum, comprising its president V. Gopal and member L. Deenadayalan, ruled against it, saying decisions of the Supreme Court and the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission cited by the complainant made it clear that “the complainant is the consumer and the opposite party (Information Commission) is a service provider.
Aggrieved applicants
Pointing out that the provisions of the Right Information Act provided only for an appeal by aggrieved applicants, the Forum said: “There is no power given to appellate authorities to order compensation to the applicant. When the relief which could be obtained by the consumer under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) as an additional remedy and when such remedy could not be granted by any other court or forum, then, naturally, the consumer can approach only the consumer forum and this view is clear from Section 3 of the CPA, 1986.
B. Ramesh, an advocate, sent an application to the State Information Commission on April 5, 2011 seeking information regarding the number of persons against whom penalty was imposed and whether enquiry was conducted before penalising. The applicant raised 19 questions in the application.
He also affixed a Rs.10 court fee stamp in that application and was, therefore, a consumer.
He contended that the Commission was expected to furnish the information within 30 days but failed to do so. Aggrieved by this, Mr. Ramesh filed the complaint seeking payment of Rs.50,000 as compensation for mental agony and for deficiency in service.
However, the Commission contended that its functioning was free of charge and such functioning would not constitute a ‘service’ as defined in the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
The information requested by the complainant was provided to him on July 7, 2011. As the complainant received the information ultimately, he could not allege that there was deficiency in service on its part.
The Commission further contended that if he did not receive information within the stipulated time, the complainant could have filed an appeal under Section 19 of RTI Act.
Dismissing the contentions, the Consumer Forum said: “The Commission had not furnished the information within the stipulated period but furnished it only after the filing of the complaint. It has committed deficiency in service by not furnishing the information within the stipulated period.”
Mental agony
Holding that the complainant would have suffered mental agony and unnecessary expenditure due to the deficiency in service, the Forum directed payment of compensation of Rs.5,000 to the complainant within six weeks.
If the commission failed to pay amount, it should carry interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum till date of payment.
Keywords: TN Information Commission, Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
PAN card details
Wall Photos
PAN is a 10 digit alpha numeric number, where the first 5 characters are letters, the next 4 numbers and the last one a letter again. These 10 characters can be divided in five parts as can be seen below. The meaning of each number has been explained further.
1. First three characters are alphabetic series running from AAA to ZZZ
2. Fourth character of PAN represents the status of the PAN holder.
• C — Company
• P — Person
• H — HUF(Hindu Undivided Family)
• F — Firm
• A — Association of Persons (AOP)
• T — AOP (Trust)
• B — Body of Individuals (BOI)
• L — Local Authority
• J — Artificial Juridical Person
• G — Government
3. Fifth character represents first character of the PAN holder’s last name/surname.
4. Next four characters are sequential number running from 0001 to 9999.
5. Last character in the PAN is an alphabetic check digit.
Nowadays, the DOI (Date of Issue) of PAN card is mentioned at the right (vertical) hand side of the photo on the PAN card
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Four golden rules for writing effective RTI Applications-Sailesh Gandhi
Four golden rules for writing effective RTI Applications
We often sit down to draft an RTI application in an angry and unrealistic mood. When we write RTI applications, our focus should be on getting information. Instead, we are thinking about stopping some wrongdoings, getting some officials and corrupt contractors penalized, making the authorities "answerable" for negligence etc etc. At such times, we fail to think clearly about the items of information that we need.
Right to Information Act 2005 is a law, and effectiveness in legal work depends on using the law without anger, resentment and wishful thinking.
While asking for information, the 4 golden rules are:
Point to various specific documents. Your application should look like a shopping-list of documents.
Name documents using words from Sec 2(f) and Sec 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act – reports, logbooks, emails, advices, rules, regulations, manuals etc. Only after exhausting these should you use other similar names e.g. quality audit reports, correspondence etc. In case this information is denied, the similarity of wordings will help you to convince appellate authorities that your requested information is "records" and "information" that must be mandatorily given.
Don't ask questions, don't demand explanations, and don't make allegations. Don't make your application sound like a letter of complaint or a letter-to-the-editor. Don't preface it with a covering letter or an introductory paragraph. RTI applications should be emotionless and bland.
Avoid vague expressions and requests such as:
(i) "What is the status of my complaint? What further action has been taken on my complaint/letter? Give me action-taken report." Words like "status" and "action" are open to interpretation, and usually fail to point towards any particular document; they can mean different things to different persons like applicant, PIO, APIO and appellate authorities. In most cases, there is no such document called "action-taken report" in existence, and therefore, the PIO cannot be rightly asked under RTI to generate such a document in reply to your application; PIO can only be asked to give you copy of a document that exists. The right way is to ask for signed and stamped copy of all correspondence till date in the matter of your complaint, including memos, emails, covering letters for forwarding your complaint etc. Ask for copy of logbook or any other book where details of your complaint are entered, marked to specific officers for their investigation and action. Ask for a copy of all their remarks, feedback, reports etc. If the case on your complaint is closed, ask for the closing remarks of the officer concerned.
(ii) "Give particulars of the project to build XYZ." What "particulars" do you want? Engineering drawings? Budgets? Financial projections? Feasibility reports? Consultants' studies? This is not clear. Don't leave it to the PIO to decide what documents to include and what to leave out. Be specific and name the documents that you want copied. Make it difficult for the PIO to loosely interpret your request.
Prepared by
Sailesh Gandhi
Central Information Commissioner
(Circulated in the interest of the public giving them tips to frame good questions while submitting RTI Applications to get the information)
We often sit down to draft an RTI application in an angry and unrealistic mood. When we write RTI applications, our focus should be on getting information. Instead, we are thinking about stopping some wrongdoings, getting some officials and corrupt contractors penalized, making the authorities "answerable" for negligence etc etc. At such times, we fail to think clearly about the items of information that we need.
Right to Information Act 2005 is a law, and effectiveness in legal work depends on using the law without anger, resentment and wishful thinking.
While asking for information, the 4 golden rules are:
Point to various specific documents. Your application should look like a shopping-list of documents.
Name documents using words from Sec 2(f) and Sec 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act – reports, logbooks, emails, advices, rules, regulations, manuals etc. Only after exhausting these should you use other similar names e.g. quality audit reports, correspondence etc. In case this information is denied, the similarity of wordings will help you to convince appellate authorities that your requested information is "records" and "information" that must be mandatorily given.
Don't ask questions, don't demand explanations, and don't make allegations. Don't make your application sound like a letter of complaint or a letter-to-the-editor. Don't preface it with a covering letter or an introductory paragraph. RTI applications should be emotionless and bland.
Avoid vague expressions and requests such as:
(i) "What is the status of my complaint? What further action has been taken on my complaint/letter? Give me action-taken report." Words like "status" and "action" are open to interpretation, and usually fail to point towards any particular document; they can mean different things to different persons like applicant, PIO, APIO and appellate authorities. In most cases, there is no such document called "action-taken report" in existence, and therefore, the PIO cannot be rightly asked under RTI to generate such a document in reply to your application; PIO can only be asked to give you copy of a document that exists. The right way is to ask for signed and stamped copy of all correspondence till date in the matter of your complaint, including memos, emails, covering letters for forwarding your complaint etc. Ask for copy of logbook or any other book where details of your complaint are entered, marked to specific officers for their investigation and action. Ask for a copy of all their remarks, feedback, reports etc. If the case on your complaint is closed, ask for the closing remarks of the officer concerned.
(ii) "Give particulars of the project to build XYZ." What "particulars" do you want? Engineering drawings? Budgets? Financial projections? Feasibility reports? Consultants' studies? This is not clear. Don't leave it to the PIO to decide what documents to include and what to leave out. Be specific and name the documents that you want copied. Make it difficult for the PIO to loosely interpret your request.
Prepared by
Sailesh Gandhi
Central Information Commissioner
(Circulated in the interest of the public giving them tips to frame good questions while submitting RTI Applications to get the information)
Saturday, April 14, 2012
PIO, cic informing, form no.16 was personal information of Chief information commissioner and other commissioner
Public information officer(PIO) of Central information commission(CIC)informed for the RTI application regarding copies of form no.16 under TDS issued to income Tax Department in respect of Chief information commissioner and other information commissioner.
PIO rejected RTI application stating that it is personal information of Chief information commissioner and other information commissioner, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public authority or interest.Also it would cause unwanted invasion of privacy of the individual. in this view of this, the information is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI act-2005.
PIO, CIC already informed that there was not related documents for definition for personal information and also informed there was No information available regarding personal.( http://gopalakrishanvelu.blogspot.in/2012/03/rti-application-regarding-personal.html)
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From 19-03-2012
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information commission,
NewDelhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
-------------
1. Kindly supply copy of form no.16 under TDS issued to income tax department respect of Chief information commissioner and information commissioner for last five years.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
PIO rejected RTI application stating that it is personal information of Chief information commissioner and other information commissioner, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public authority or interest.Also it would cause unwanted invasion of privacy of the individual. in this view of this, the information is exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI act-2005.
PIO, CIC already informed that there was not related documents for definition for personal information and also informed there was No information available regarding personal.( http://gopalakrishanvelu.blogspot.in/2012/03/rti-application-regarding-personal.html)
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From 19-03-2012
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information commission,
NewDelhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
-------------
1. Kindly supply copy of form no.16 under TDS issued to income tax department respect of Chief information commissioner and information commissioner for last five years.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
CIC informing they does not have information which information can be supplied and exemted to parliament relation to sec 8(1)(j) of RTI act-2005
From 20-03-2012
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information Commission,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
Kindly supply the following information under RTI Act
1. List of the information which are to be furnished to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
2. List of the information which are exempted from furnishing to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
3. Copy of order, direction or any of its kind received by the CIC from the Parliament/ Govt of India containing the list under item 1 and 2 above enabling the CIC to pronounce orders to the effect of denying the information under RTI application.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information Commission,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
Kindly supply the following information under RTI Act
1. List of the information which are to be furnished to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
2. List of the information which are exempted from furnishing to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
3. Copy of order, direction or any of its kind received by the CIC from the Parliament/ Govt of India containing the list under item 1 and 2 above enabling the CIC to pronounce orders to the effect of denying the information under RTI application.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
The unpleasant truth: 90 percent Indians are fools by Markandey Katju
The 90% : The unpleasant truth: 90 percent Indians are fools
by Markandey Katju
The unpleasant truth: 90 per cent of Indians are fools
Someone asked me, “Justice Katju, you say you wish to keep away from controversies, but why is it that controversies keep chasing you?” I replied that while it is true that I wish to be uncontroversial, I have a great defect: I cannot remain silent when I see my country going downhill. Even if others are deaf and dumb, I am not. So I will speak out. As Faiz said: “Bol ki lab azad hain tere/ Bol zubaan ab tak teri hai.”
In our shastras it is written: “Satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat, na bruyat satyam apriyam.” It means, “Speak the truth, speak the pleasant, but do not speak the unpleasant truth.” I wish to rectify this. The country’s situation today requires that we say “Bruyat satyam apriyam”, i.e. “Speak the unpleasant truth”.
When I said that 90 per cent Indians are fools I spoke an unpleasant truth. The truth is that the minds of 90 per cent Indians are full of casteism, communalism, superstition. Consider the following:
First, when our people go to vote in elections, 90 per cent vote on the basis of caste or community, not the merits of the candidate. That is why Phoolan Devi, a known dacoit-cum-murderer, was elected to Parliament — because she belonged to a backward caste that had a large number of voters in that constituency. Vote banks are on the basis of caste and community, which are manipulated by unscrupulous politicians and others.
Second, 90 per cent Indians believe in astrology, which is pure superstition and humbug. Even a little common sense tells us that the movements of stars and planets have nothing to do with our lives. Yet, TV channels showing astrology have high TRP ratings.
Third, cricket has been turned into a religion by our corporatised media, and most people lap it up like opium. The real problems facing 80 per cent of the people are socio-economic — poverty, unemployment, malnourishment, price rise, lack of healthcare, education, housing etc. But the media sidelines or minimises these real issues, and gives the impression that the real issues are the lives of film stars, fashion, cricket, etc. When Rahul Dravid retired, the media depicted it as a great misfortune for the country, and when Sachin Tendulkar scored his 100th century it was depicted as a great achievement for India. Day after day, the media kept harping on this, whereas the issues of a quarter of a million farmers’ suicides and 47 per cent Indian children being malnourished were sidelined.
Fourth, I had criticised the media hype around Dev Anand’s death at a time when 47 farmers in India were committing suicide on an average every day for the last 15 years. A section of the media attacked me for doing so, but I reiterate that I see no justification for the high publicity given by the media to this event for several days. In my opinion, Dev Anand’s films transported the minds of poor people to a world of make-believe, like a hill station where Dev Anand was romancing some girl. This gave relief for a couple of hours to the viewers from their lives of drudgery. Such films, to my mind, serve no social purpose, but act instead like a drug or alcohol to send the viewer temporarily from his miserable existence to a beautiful world of tinsel.
Finally, during the recent Anna Hazare agitation in Delhi, the media hyped the event as a solution to the problem of corruption. In reality it was, as Shakespeare said in Macbeth, “...a tale/ Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,/ Signifying nothing”. (In an earlier piece in this paper, ‘Recreating Frankenstein’s monster’, IE, March 31, I had said, “The Lokpal Bill will create a parallel bureaucracy, which will turn into Frankenstein’s monster.”) At that time, if anyone had raised any logical questions, he would have been denounced as a “gaddar” or “deshdrohi”. The people who collected at Jantar Mantar or the Ramlila grounds displayed a mob mentality that has been accurately described by Shakespeare in Julius Caesar.
After Caesar’s murder, Mark Antony stirred up the Roman mob, which went around seeking revenge on the conspirators. One of the conspirators was named Cinna. The mob caught hold of another man, also named Cinna, who protested that he was Cinna the poet and not Cinna the conspirator. Despite his protests, the mob said, “tear him for his bad verses”, and lynched him.
The Jan Lokpal Bill 2011 defines an act of corruption as punishable under Chapter IX of the Indian Penal Code or under the Prevention of Corruption Act vide Section 2(e). Section 6(a) of the bill says the Lokpal will exercise superintendence over investigation of acts of corruption, and section 6(c) empowers the Lokpal to punish acts of corruption after giving a hearing. Section 6(e) authorises the Lokpal to initiate prosecution, and section 6(f) authorises him to ensure proper prosecution. Section 6(i)(j) authorises him to receive complaints.
Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act defines a public servant very widely. It includes not only government servants but also a host of other categories, such as employees of a local body, judges, certain office-bearers of some cooperative societies, officials of Service Commission or Board, and vice chancellors and teachers in universities.
As pointed out in ‘Recreating Frankenstein’s monster’, there are about 55 lakh government employees (13 lakh in the Railways alone). There will be several lakhs more in other categories coming under the definition of public servant according to the Prevention of Corruption Act. Obviously, one person cannot supervise and decide on presumably millions of complaints pouring in against them. Hence, thousands of Lokpals, maybe 50,000 or more, will have to be appointed. They will have to be given salaries, offices, staff, etc. Considering the low level of morality prevailing in India, we can be fairly certain that most of them will become blackmailers. It will create a parallel bureaucracy, which in one stroke will double the corruption in the country. And who will guard these Praetorian Guards? A body of Super Lokpals?
All this was not rationally analysed. Instead, the hysterical mob that gathered in Jantar Mantar and Ramlila grounds in Delhi thought that corruption would be ended by shouting “Bharat Mata ki Jai” and “Inquilab Zindabad”.
It is time Indians woke up to all this. When I called 90 per cent of them fools my intention was not to harm them, rather it was just the contrary. I want to see Indians prosper, I want poverty and unemployment abolished, I want the standard of living of the 80 per cent poor Indians to rise so that they get decent lives.
But this is possible when their mindset changes, when their minds are rid of casteism, communalism and superstition, and they become scientific and modern.
By being modern, I do not mean wearing a nice suit or a beautiful sari or skirt. Being modern means having a modern mind, which means a rational mind, a logical mind, a questioning mind, a scientific mind. At one time, India led the world in science and technology (see my article “Sanskrit as a language of Science” on kgfindia.com). That was because our scientific ancestors, like Aryabhata, Brahmagupta, Sushruta, Charaka etc, questioned everything. However, we subsequently took the unscientific path of superstition and empty ritual, which has led us to disaster. Today we are far behind the West in science and technology.
The worst thing in life is poverty, and 80 per cent of our people are poor. To abolish poverty, we need to spread the scientific outlook to every nook and corner of our country. It is only then that India will shine. And until that happens, the vast majority of our people will continue to be taken for a ride.
The writer, a former judge of the Supreme Court, is chairman of the Press Council, express@expressindia.com
by Markandey Katju
The unpleasant truth: 90 per cent of Indians are fools
Someone asked me, “Justice Katju, you say you wish to keep away from controversies, but why is it that controversies keep chasing you?” I replied that while it is true that I wish to be uncontroversial, I have a great defect: I cannot remain silent when I see my country going downhill. Even if others are deaf and dumb, I am not. So I will speak out. As Faiz said: “Bol ki lab azad hain tere/ Bol zubaan ab tak teri hai.”
In our shastras it is written: “Satyam bruyat, priyam bruyat, na bruyat satyam apriyam.” It means, “Speak the truth, speak the pleasant, but do not speak the unpleasant truth.” I wish to rectify this. The country’s situation today requires that we say “Bruyat satyam apriyam”, i.e. “Speak the unpleasant truth”.
When I said that 90 per cent Indians are fools I spoke an unpleasant truth. The truth is that the minds of 90 per cent Indians are full of casteism, communalism, superstition. Consider the following:
First, when our people go to vote in elections, 90 per cent vote on the basis of caste or community, not the merits of the candidate. That is why Phoolan Devi, a known dacoit-cum-murderer, was elected to Parliament — because she belonged to a backward caste that had a large number of voters in that constituency. Vote banks are on the basis of caste and community, which are manipulated by unscrupulous politicians and others.
Second, 90 per cent Indians believe in astrology, which is pure superstition and humbug. Even a little common sense tells us that the movements of stars and planets have nothing to do with our lives. Yet, TV channels showing astrology have high TRP ratings.
Third, cricket has been turned into a religion by our corporatised media, and most people lap it up like opium. The real problems facing 80 per cent of the people are socio-economic — poverty, unemployment, malnourishment, price rise, lack of healthcare, education, housing etc. But the media sidelines or minimises these real issues, and gives the impression that the real issues are the lives of film stars, fashion, cricket, etc. When Rahul Dravid retired, the media depicted it as a great misfortune for the country, and when Sachin Tendulkar scored his 100th century it was depicted as a great achievement for India. Day after day, the media kept harping on this, whereas the issues of a quarter of a million farmers’ suicides and 47 per cent Indian children being malnourished were sidelined.
Fourth, I had criticised the media hype around Dev Anand’s death at a time when 47 farmers in India were committing suicide on an average every day for the last 15 years. A section of the media attacked me for doing so, but I reiterate that I see no justification for the high publicity given by the media to this event for several days. In my opinion, Dev Anand’s films transported the minds of poor people to a world of make-believe, like a hill station where Dev Anand was romancing some girl. This gave relief for a couple of hours to the viewers from their lives of drudgery. Such films, to my mind, serve no social purpose, but act instead like a drug or alcohol to send the viewer temporarily from his miserable existence to a beautiful world of tinsel.
Finally, during the recent Anna Hazare agitation in Delhi, the media hyped the event as a solution to the problem of corruption. In reality it was, as Shakespeare said in Macbeth, “...a tale/ Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,/ Signifying nothing”. (In an earlier piece in this paper, ‘Recreating Frankenstein’s monster’, IE, March 31, I had said, “The Lokpal Bill will create a parallel bureaucracy, which will turn into Frankenstein’s monster.”) At that time, if anyone had raised any logical questions, he would have been denounced as a “gaddar” or “deshdrohi”. The people who collected at Jantar Mantar or the Ramlila grounds displayed a mob mentality that has been accurately described by Shakespeare in Julius Caesar.
After Caesar’s murder, Mark Antony stirred up the Roman mob, which went around seeking revenge on the conspirators. One of the conspirators was named Cinna. The mob caught hold of another man, also named Cinna, who protested that he was Cinna the poet and not Cinna the conspirator. Despite his protests, the mob said, “tear him for his bad verses”, and lynched him.
The Jan Lokpal Bill 2011 defines an act of corruption as punishable under Chapter IX of the Indian Penal Code or under the Prevention of Corruption Act vide Section 2(e). Section 6(a) of the bill says the Lokpal will exercise superintendence over investigation of acts of corruption, and section 6(c) empowers the Lokpal to punish acts of corruption after giving a hearing. Section 6(e) authorises the Lokpal to initiate prosecution, and section 6(f) authorises him to ensure proper prosecution. Section 6(i)(j) authorises him to receive complaints.
Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act defines a public servant very widely. It includes not only government servants but also a host of other categories, such as employees of a local body, judges, certain office-bearers of some cooperative societies, officials of Service Commission or Board, and vice chancellors and teachers in universities.
As pointed out in ‘Recreating Frankenstein’s monster’, there are about 55 lakh government employees (13 lakh in the Railways alone). There will be several lakhs more in other categories coming under the definition of public servant according to the Prevention of Corruption Act. Obviously, one person cannot supervise and decide on presumably millions of complaints pouring in against them. Hence, thousands of Lokpals, maybe 50,000 or more, will have to be appointed. They will have to be given salaries, offices, staff, etc. Considering the low level of morality prevailing in India, we can be fairly certain that most of them will become blackmailers. It will create a parallel bureaucracy, which in one stroke will double the corruption in the country. And who will guard these Praetorian Guards? A body of Super Lokpals?
All this was not rationally analysed. Instead, the hysterical mob that gathered in Jantar Mantar and Ramlila grounds in Delhi thought that corruption would be ended by shouting “Bharat Mata ki Jai” and “Inquilab Zindabad”.
It is time Indians woke up to all this. When I called 90 per cent of them fools my intention was not to harm them, rather it was just the contrary. I want to see Indians prosper, I want poverty and unemployment abolished, I want the standard of living of the 80 per cent poor Indians to rise so that they get decent lives.
But this is possible when their mindset changes, when their minds are rid of casteism, communalism and superstition, and they become scientific and modern.
By being modern, I do not mean wearing a nice suit or a beautiful sari or skirt. Being modern means having a modern mind, which means a rational mind, a logical mind, a questioning mind, a scientific mind. At one time, India led the world in science and technology (see my article “Sanskrit as a language of Science” on kgfindia.com). That was because our scientific ancestors, like Aryabhata, Brahmagupta, Sushruta, Charaka etc, questioned everything. However, we subsequently took the unscientific path of superstition and empty ritual, which has led us to disaster. Today we are far behind the West in science and technology.
The worst thing in life is poverty, and 80 per cent of our people are poor. To abolish poverty, we need to spread the scientific outlook to every nook and corner of our country. It is only then that India will shine. And until that happens, the vast majority of our people will continue to be taken for a ride.
The writer, a former judge of the Supreme Court, is chairman of the Press Council, express@expressindia.com
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
PIO, CIC informing no information available which are to be furnished to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act
Public information officer (PIO) of central Information commission informing no information available which are to be furnished to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act
confidential
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From 20-03-2012
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information Commission,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
Kindly supply the following information under RTI Act
1. List of the information which are to be furnished to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
2. List of the information which are exempted from furnishing to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
3. Copy of order, direction or any of its kind received by the CIC from the Parliament/ Govt of India containing the list under item 1 and 2 above enabling the CIC to pronounce orders to the effect of denying the information under RTI application.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
confidential
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From 20-03-2012
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information Commission,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
Kindly supply the following information under RTI Act
1. List of the information which are to be furnished to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
2. List of the information which are exempted from furnishing to the parliament in relation to sec. 8(1)(j) of RTI Act, by the various department / Public Authorities of state and Central Government.
3. Copy of order, direction or any of its kind received by the CIC from the Parliament/ Govt of India containing the list under item 1 and 2 above enabling the CIC to pronounce orders to the effect of denying the information under RTI application.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
Saturday, March 17, 2012
DVAC raid on house of former Anna University V-C
Officers of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption (DVAC) on Friday carried out raids on the houses of former Anna University Vice-Chancellor D. Viswanathan and four others in connection with alleged irregularities in awarding tenders for procurement of electronic equipment for the university.
Documents pertaining to the tenders were seized from the houses of the suspects, the DVAC said.
Apart from the house of Mr. Viswanathan in Thiruvanmiyur, DVAC teams conducted simultaneous raids on the residences of Professor P. Narayanaswamy and Assistant K. Nagarajan, both from the Department of Computer Science of Anna University in Kottur and Guindy respectively.
The office of Barnas International in Vepery and the residences of its CEO P.M. Najimudeen and Manager R. Yeswanthakumar in Egmore and Avadi respectively were also raided.
DVAC sources said the raid followed a complaint lodged by an RTI activist alleging that Barnas International Private Limited had submitted fabricated quotations in the name of other companies, apart from its own bid.
It subsequently won the orders and delivered computers, CCTV systems and other electronic equipment to the university a few years from 2008.
Computers loaded with software that was not needed for academic purposes were purchased by the university at inflated rates, the sources alleged.
The DVAC sources also said the former V-C had allegedly pressured affiliated colleges to make their procurements from this company.
Keywords: D. Viswanathan, Anna university irregularities, vigilance raid
-----------------------------------
complaint was sent the following office.
sir
i enclosed some documents related to governor son and governor son
friend company. And also i made complaint to president of India.
--------------------------
complaint against the present Governor of Tamilnadu and offical
awarded tender to the below two companies.
To
The President Of India,
The chief justice of India,supreme court,
The Chief justice ofmadras High court,chennai,
The Chief Minister of Tamilnadu,
the commissioner of state vigilance, tamilnadu,
The Director, DVAC,Chennai
sir/madam,
sub: Tender was awarded to Tamilnadu governor Barnala's son
runinng company in the name of Barnas international pvt limited and
barnala's son friend company name datavision 21 runing in the same
premises.-regarding.
------
All tender issued by the university, govt engg college, public
authority in the name of Governor or Chancellor, Governor is the
Appropiate authority of state. In Tamilnadu for all university
Chancellor is Tamilandu Governor Surjit singh Barnala.
Tender was awarded to the present Tamilandu governor's son
company Barnas international pvt limited by the ANNA university,
mettur power station, chennai city police, etc. and also Barnas
international pvt limited manager director Mr. Najimudeen runinng
another company in the nameof Datavision 21 in the same premises of
Barnas international Pvt limited, 2nd floor mr. Najimudeen is a full
time Managing Director of Datavision21 some of the tender awarded to
this company by various govt authority, university, govt college,etc.,
kindly take necessary action against Chancellor, Vice chancellor,
vigilance officers, officals who awarded tender to the above two
companies.
Tamilnadu governor Barnala's son runinng company
in the name of Barnas international pvt limited. company registered in
ROC , CIN :U24230CH2005FTC029150,
ROC code:roc-Chandigarh,
registration number 029150,
with compny limitedby shares,
authorised capital of rs.30,000,000/-
paid upcapital Rs.5,000,000/-.
address of registered office :18 udyog Bhawan, Himalaya Marg, Chandigarh.
date of incorporation: 07/11/2005.Barnala was governor of Tamilnadu
from 3rd november 2004.
Mr. Jasjit Singh Barnala
Mr. Najimudeen
about Barnala: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surjit_Singh_Barnala
aboutcompany http://www.barnascctv.com/Clients.html
V.Gopalakrishnan
Documents pertaining to the tenders were seized from the houses of the suspects, the DVAC said.
Apart from the house of Mr. Viswanathan in Thiruvanmiyur, DVAC teams conducted simultaneous raids on the residences of Professor P. Narayanaswamy and Assistant K. Nagarajan, both from the Department of Computer Science of Anna University in Kottur and Guindy respectively.
The office of Barnas International in Vepery and the residences of its CEO P.M. Najimudeen and Manager R. Yeswanthakumar in Egmore and Avadi respectively were also raided.
DVAC sources said the raid followed a complaint lodged by an RTI activist alleging that Barnas International Private Limited had submitted fabricated quotations in the name of other companies, apart from its own bid.
It subsequently won the orders and delivered computers, CCTV systems and other electronic equipment to the university a few years from 2008.
Computers loaded with software that was not needed for academic purposes were purchased by the university at inflated rates, the sources alleged.
The DVAC sources also said the former V-C had allegedly pressured affiliated colleges to make their procurements from this company.
Keywords: D. Viswanathan, Anna university irregularities, vigilance raid
-----------------------------------
complaint was sent the following office.
sir
i enclosed some documents related to governor son and governor son
friend company. And also i made complaint to president of India.
--------------------------
complaint against the present Governor of Tamilnadu and offical
awarded tender to the below two companies.
To
The President Of India,
The chief justice of India,supreme court,
The Chief justice ofmadras High court,chennai,
The Chief Minister of Tamilnadu,
the commissioner of state vigilance, tamilnadu,
The Director, DVAC,Chennai
sir/madam,
sub: Tender was awarded to Tamilnadu governor Barnala's son
runinng company in the name of Barnas international pvt limited and
barnala's son friend company name datavision 21 runing in the same
premises.-regarding.
------
All tender issued by the university, govt engg college, public
authority in the name of Governor or Chancellor, Governor is the
Appropiate authority of state. In Tamilnadu for all university
Chancellor is Tamilandu Governor Surjit singh Barnala.
Tender was awarded to the present Tamilandu governor's son
company Barnas international pvt limited by the ANNA university,
mettur power station, chennai city police, etc. and also Barnas
international pvt limited manager director Mr. Najimudeen runinng
another company in the nameof Datavision 21 in the same premises of
Barnas international Pvt limited, 2nd floor mr. Najimudeen is a full
time Managing Director of Datavision21 some of the tender awarded to
this company by various govt authority, university, govt college,etc.,
kindly take necessary action against Chancellor, Vice chancellor,
vigilance officers, officals who awarded tender to the above two
companies.
Tamilnadu governor Barnala's son runinng company
in the name of Barnas international pvt limited. company registered in
ROC , CIN :U24230CH2005FTC029150,
ROC code:roc-Chandigarh,
registration number 029150,
with compny limitedby shares,
authorised capital of rs.30,000,000/-
paid upcapital Rs.5,000,000/-.
address of registered office :18 udyog Bhawan, Himalaya Marg, Chandigarh.
date of incorporation: 07/11/2005.Barnala was governor of Tamilnadu
from 3rd november 2004.
Mr. Jasjit Singh Barnala
Mr. Najimudeen
about Barnala: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surjit_Singh_Barnala
aboutcompany http://www.barnascctv.com/Clients.html
V.Gopalakrishnan
Friday, March 9, 2012
RTI application regarding Personal information to president ofindia office
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER (PIO), PRESIDENT OF INDIA OFFICES, FORWARDED MY RTI APPLICATION QUERY NO.1 TO 11 TO LAW MINSITRY AND DOPT REGARDING PERSONAL INFROMATION.
FOR QUERY NO.12. SALARY PAID TO PRESIDENT Rs. 1,50,000/- PER MONTH.
FOR QUERY NO.13, REQUESTED COPY OF FORM-16. PIO REPLIED" information sought on this point is in the nature of personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and it would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. hence it can not be provided as per section 8(1)(j) of the RTI act-2005."
pio forwarded information regarding personal, now he is claiming it is personal information.
for query no.14 pio willfully not forwarded to concern public authority information regarding Income Tax returns copies, why?.
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From
V. GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.Nagar,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
President of India office,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
1. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in any Act in India.
2. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc.
3. Kindly supply relevant copy of Central Act/ any Act in India/Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc., speaks about the Definition for Personal Information.
4. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Right To Information Act-2005.
5. Kindly supply relevant copy of Right To Information Act-2005, speaks about Definition for Personal Information.
6. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
7. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
8. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part there of that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
9. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
10. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
11. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
12. Kindly inform salary, allowances, etc., paid to President of India Smt. Pratibha Devsingh Patil from year 2007 to till now.
13. Kindly supply copy of Form -16 issued for President of India Smt. Pratibha Devsingh Patil from year 2004 to 2012.
14. Kindly supply of income tax returns filed by President of India Smt. Pratibha Devsingh Patil from year 2004 to 2012 to income Tax Department.
If any information not available, kindly forward to consent office/department as per sec 6(3) of RTI Act
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
FOR QUERY NO.12. SALARY PAID TO PRESIDENT Rs. 1,50,000/- PER MONTH.
FOR QUERY NO.13, REQUESTED COPY OF FORM-16. PIO REPLIED" information sought on this point is in the nature of personal information, the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and it would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individual. hence it can not be provided as per section 8(1)(j) of the RTI act-2005."
pio forwarded information regarding personal, now he is claiming it is personal information.
for query no.14 pio willfully not forwarded to concern public authority information regarding Income Tax returns copies, why?.
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From
V. GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.Nagar,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
President of India office,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
1. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in any Act in India.
2. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc.
3. Kindly supply relevant copy of Central Act/ any Act in India/Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc., speaks about the Definition for Personal Information.
4. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Right To Information Act-2005.
5. Kindly supply relevant copy of Right To Information Act-2005, speaks about Definition for Personal Information.
6. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
7. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
8. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part there of that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
9. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
10. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
11. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
12. Kindly inform salary, allowances, etc., paid to President of India Smt. Pratibha Devsingh Patil from year 2007 to till now.
13. Kindly supply copy of Form -16 issued for President of India Smt. Pratibha Devsingh Patil from year 2004 to 2012.
14. Kindly supply of income tax returns filed by President of India Smt. Pratibha Devsingh Patil from year 2004 to 2012 to income Tax Department.
If any information not available, kindly forward to consent office/department as per sec 6(3) of RTI Act
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
RTI application regarding Personal information to INCOME TAX DEPTCHENNAI
PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER (PIO), INCOMETAX DEP, CHENNAI CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS NO DEFINITION FOR PERSONAL INFORMATION.
THEN HOW INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CLAIMING INCOME TAX RETURNS AS PERSONAL INFORMATION?
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information commission,
NewDelhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
1. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in any Act in India.
2. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc.
3. Kindly supply relevant copy of Central Act/ any Act in India/Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc., speaks about the Definition for Personal Information.
4. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Right To Information Act-2005.
5. Kindly supply relevant copy of Right To Information Act-2005, speaks about Definition for Personal Information.
6. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
7. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
8. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part there of that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
9. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
10. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
11. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
THEN HOW INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CLAIMING INCOME TAX RETURNS AS PERSONAL INFORMATION?
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information commission,
NewDelhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
1. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in any Act in India.
2. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc.
3. Kindly supply relevant copy of Central Act/ any Act in India/Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc., speaks about the Definition for Personal Information.
4. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Right To Information Act-2005.
5. Kindly supply relevant copy of Right To Information Act-2005, speaks about Definition for Personal Information.
6. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
7. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
8. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part there of that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
9. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
10. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
11. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
RTI application regarding Personal information to CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION (CIC) HAS FURNISHED TO DIFFERENT REPLY FOR SAME rti APPLICATION. CIC CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT NO INFORMATION AVAILABLE FOR SL. NO.1 TO 4 COPIES FOR PERSONAL INFORMATION. SEE VAGUE REPLY GIVEN BY PIO OF CIC REST OF QUERY
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information commission,
NewDelhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
1. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in any Act in India.
2. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc.
3. Kindly supply relevant copy of Central Act/ any Act in India/Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc., speaks about the Definition for Personal Information.
4. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Right To Information Act-2005.
5. Kindly supply relevant copy of Right To Information Act-2005, speaks about Definition for Personal Information.
6. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
7. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
8. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part there of that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
9. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
10. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
11. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
RTI Application under sec 6(1) of RTI Act-2005
From
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN,
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi Street,
M.G.R.NAGAR,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public Information Officer,
Under Right to Information ACT 2005,
Central Information commission,
NewDelhi.
Sir,
Sub: Under the RTI ACT 2005 sec 6(1), request to furnish information and attested
photo copy.- regarding.
--------
1. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in any Act in India.
2. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc.
3. Kindly supply relevant copy of Central Act/ any Act in India/Government order/ Rules/ proceedings/ circular/ clarification, etc., speaks about the Definition for Personal Information.
4. Kindly inform, is there any Definition for Personal Information in Right To Information Act-2005.
5. Kindly supply relevant copy of Right To Information Act-2005, speaks about Definition for Personal Information.
6. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
7. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied voluntarily by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
8. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part there of that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
9. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof that has been supplied mandatorily under any rule/statute by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has not been/ought not to be marked as confidential (not mentioned as confidential) by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/ form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
10. Kindly inform relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
11. Kindly supply copy of relevant section of Right To information which states that any information or record, or part thereof has been supplied by an individual or by any public authority to other public authority and has been marked as confidential by that individual/authority while submitting documents/letter/form/ application etc., should not be disclosed under right to information Act.
I ENCLOSED INDIAN POSTAL ORDER OF RS.10 TOWARDS RTI FEE. NO.
V.GOPALAKRISHNAN
Saturday, March 3, 2012
appointment of CBI shri.A.P.SINGH IPS 1974
APPLICATION U/s 6 (1) R/w 7 (1) proviso OF RTI ACT Issuable
in 48 HOURS.
From 28.01.12
V.Gopalakrishnan
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi street,
M.G.R.Nagar,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public information Officer,
DoPT, New Delhi.
Sir/ Madam,
Sub: Under the Right to Information Act 2005, sec 6(1) . I request you to furnish
Some information about Selection of CBI director.- regarding.
INFORMATION SOUGHT.
1. Provide certified copy of all records relating to the selection of the present CBI director.
V. Gopalakrishnan
Please further note that the information sought is covered by section 4 of RTI Act.
I enclosed postal order no. 99E 878251 Rs.10/- towards RTI fee.
********************************************
PIO, DOPT REPLY
in 48 HOURS.
From 28.01.12
V.Gopalakrishnan
13/7, Pammal Nalla Thambi street,
M.G.R.Nagar,
Chennai-78.
To
The Public information Officer,
DoPT, New Delhi.
Sir/ Madam,
Sub: Under the Right to Information Act 2005, sec 6(1) . I request you to furnish
Some information about Selection of CBI director.- regarding.
INFORMATION SOUGHT.
1. Provide certified copy of all records relating to the selection of the present CBI director.
V. Gopalakrishnan
Please further note that the information sought is covered by section 4 of RTI Act.
I enclosed postal order no. 99E 878251 Rs.10/- towards RTI fee.
********************************************
PIO, DOPT REPLY
Friday, March 2, 2012
Tamil Nadu: HC Moved for Deducting INCOME TAX for MPs, MLAs
http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=753965
Tamil Nadu: HC Moved for Deducting I-T for MPs, MLAs
PTI | Chennai | Mar 02, 2012
An anti-corruption association has moved the Madras High Court for a
direction to the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and Tamil Nadu
Legislative Assembly Secretariat to deduct tax at source for MPs and
MLAs in keeping with section 190 of the Income Tax Act 1961.
When the petition filed by C Selvaraj, President of Association of
Transparency and Anti-Corruption, also seeking a direction to the
authorities concerned to pay allowances only on valid claims, with
proof attached came up for hearing today, the First Bench headed by
Chief Justice M Y Eqbal adjourned it for hearing on March 13.
Claiming that citizens of the country, including himself, paid income
tax and other taxes, subject to their income being above Rs 1.60 lakh
per annum, the petitioner alleged TDS was not being applied to the MPs
and state legislators receiving payments totalling Rs 11.40 lakh and
Rs 5.60 lakh per annum (excluding exemptions) respectively.
He claimed that a research of data filed by state MLAs for the period
2006-11 showed eight MLAs did not have a permanent account number
(PAN) while six others claimed nil income. He also alleged 47 others
had under-reported their income.
The petitioner said he had sent complaints on August 4 and December 1
last year to the Director General of Income Tax but there was no
action.
He sought a direction to the I-T DG to recover income tax not paid by
MPs and MLAs during the period.
Filed On: Mar 02, 2012 23:18 IST
Tamil Nadu: HC Moved for Deducting I-T for MPs, MLAs
PTI | Chennai | Mar 02, 2012
An anti-corruption association has moved the Madras High Court for a
direction to the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and Tamil Nadu
Legislative Assembly Secretariat to deduct tax at source for MPs and
MLAs in keeping with section 190 of the Income Tax Act 1961.
When the petition filed by C Selvaraj, President of Association of
Transparency and Anti-Corruption, also seeking a direction to the
authorities concerned to pay allowances only on valid claims, with
proof attached came up for hearing today, the First Bench headed by
Chief Justice M Y Eqbal adjourned it for hearing on March 13.
Claiming that citizens of the country, including himself, paid income
tax and other taxes, subject to their income being above Rs 1.60 lakh
per annum, the petitioner alleged TDS was not being applied to the MPs
and state legislators receiving payments totalling Rs 11.40 lakh and
Rs 5.60 lakh per annum (excluding exemptions) respectively.
He claimed that a research of data filed by state MLAs for the period
2006-11 showed eight MLAs did not have a permanent account number
(PAN) while six others claimed nil income. He also alleged 47 others
had under-reported their income.
The petitioner said he had sent complaints on August 4 and December 1
last year to the Director General of Income Tax but there was no
action.
He sought a direction to the I-T DG to recover income tax not paid by
MPs and MLAs during the period.
Filed On: Mar 02, 2012 23:18 IST
Sunday, February 26, 2012
OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: Disclosure of third party information under the RTI Act, 2005.
NO. 8/2/2010-lR
Govemrnent of India
Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training ***
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Dated: the 27"'April, 2010
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Disclosure of third party information under the RTI Act, 2005.
***
The undersigned is directed to say that the Goveminent,'in a number of
cases makes inter departmental consultations. In the process, a public authority
may send some confidential papers to another public authority. A question has
arisen whether the recipient public authority can disclose such confidential
papers under the RTI Act, 2005. If yes, what procedure is required to be
followed for doing so.
2. Section 11 of the Act provides the procedure of disclosure of 'third
party' information. According to it, if a Public Information Officer (PIO)
intends to disclose an information supplied by a third party which the third party
has treated as confidential, the PIO, before taking a decision to disclose the
information shall invite the third party to make submission in the matter. The
third party has a right to make an appeal to the Departmental Appellate
Authority against the decision of the PI0 and if not satisfied with the decision
of the Departmental Appellate Authority, a second appeal to the concerned
Information Commission. The PI0 cannot disclose such information unless the
procedure prescribed in section 11 is completed.
3. As defined in clause (n) of Section 2 of the Act, 'third party' includes a
public authority. Reading of the definition of the terin, 'third party' and Section
I 1 together makes it clear that if a public authority 'X' receives some
information from another public authority 'Y' which that public authority has
treated as confidential, then 'X' cannot disclose the infonnation without
consulting 'Y', the third party in respect of the information and without
following the procedure prescribed in Section 11 of the Act. It is a statutory
requirement, non-compliance of which may make the PI0 liable to action.
4. The Public Information Officers and the First Appellate Authorities
should keep these provisions of the Act in view while taking decision, about
disclosure of third party information in general and disclosure of the third party
information, when third party is a public authority, in particular.
5. Hindi version will follow.
(K.G. VERMA)
Director
Tei: 23052158
Copy to:
1. All the Ministries/Departments of the Government of India.
2. Union Public Service Commission/Lok Sabha SecretariatlRajya Sabha
SecretariatlCabinet Secretariat/ Central Vigilance Commission/
President's SecretariatlVice-Presidents's SecretariatlPrime Minister's
Office/PIanning Commission/Election Commission.
3. Central lnformation Commission/State lnformation Commissions.
4. Staff Selection Commission, CGO Complex, New Delhi.
5. Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of lndia, 10, Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi.. ,
6. All Officers/Desks/Sections, Department of Personnel & Training and
Department of Pension & Pensions Welfare.
Copy to: Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs,
Govemrnent of India
Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training ***
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Dated: the 27"'April, 2010
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Disclosure of third party information under the RTI Act, 2005.
***
The undersigned is directed to say that the Goveminent,'in a number of
cases makes inter departmental consultations. In the process, a public authority
may send some confidential papers to another public authority. A question has
arisen whether the recipient public authority can disclose such confidential
papers under the RTI Act, 2005. If yes, what procedure is required to be
followed for doing so.
2. Section 11 of the Act provides the procedure of disclosure of 'third
party' information. According to it, if a Public Information Officer (PIO)
intends to disclose an information supplied by a third party which the third party
has treated as confidential, the PIO, before taking a decision to disclose the
information shall invite the third party to make submission in the matter. The
third party has a right to make an appeal to the Departmental Appellate
Authority against the decision of the PI0 and if not satisfied with the decision
of the Departmental Appellate Authority, a second appeal to the concerned
Information Commission. The PI0 cannot disclose such information unless the
procedure prescribed in section 11 is completed.
3. As defined in clause (n) of Section 2 of the Act, 'third party' includes a
public authority. Reading of the definition of the terin, 'third party' and Section
I 1 together makes it clear that if a public authority 'X' receives some
information from another public authority 'Y' which that public authority has
treated as confidential, then 'X' cannot disclose the infonnation without
consulting 'Y', the third party in respect of the information and without
following the procedure prescribed in Section 11 of the Act. It is a statutory
requirement, non-compliance of which may make the PI0 liable to action.
4. The Public Information Officers and the First Appellate Authorities
should keep these provisions of the Act in view while taking decision, about
disclosure of third party information in general and disclosure of the third party
information, when third party is a public authority, in particular.
5. Hindi version will follow.
(K.G. VERMA)
Director
Tei: 23052158
Copy to:
1. All the Ministries/Departments of the Government of India.
2. Union Public Service Commission/Lok Sabha SecretariatlRajya Sabha
SecretariatlCabinet Secretariat/ Central Vigilance Commission/
President's SecretariatlVice-Presidents's SecretariatlPrime Minister's
Office/PIanning Commission/Election Commission.
3. Central lnformation Commission/State lnformation Commissions.
4. Staff Selection Commission, CGO Complex, New Delhi.
5. Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of lndia, 10, Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi.. ,
6. All Officers/Desks/Sections, Department of Personnel & Training and
Department of Pension & Pensions Welfare.
Copy to: Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs,
OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: Disclosure of third party information under the RTI Act, 2005.
NO. 8/2/2010-lR
Govemrnent of India
Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training ***
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Dated: the 27"'April, 2010
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Disclosure of third party information under the RTI Act, 2005.
***
The undersigned is directed to say that the Goveminent,'in a number of
cases makes inter departmental consultations. In the process, a public authority
may send some confidential papers to another public authority. A question has
arisen whether the recipient public authority can disclose such confidential
papers under the RTI Act, 2005. If yes, what procedure is required to be
followed for doing so.
2. Section 11 of the Act provides the procedure of disclosure of 'third
party' information. According to it, if a Public Information Officer (PIO)
intends to disclose an information supplied by a third party which the third party
has treated as confidential, the PIO, before taking a decision to disclose the
information shall invite the third party to make submission in the matter. The
third party has a right to make an appeal to the Departmental Appellate
Authority against the decision of the PI0 and if not satisfied with the decision
of the Departmental Appellate Authority, a second appeal to the concerned
Information Commission. The PI0 cannot disclose such information unless the
procedure prescribed in section 11 is completed.
3. As defined in clause (n) of Section 2 of the Act, 'third party' includes a
public authority. Reading of the definition of the terin, 'third party' and Section
I 1 together makes it clear that if a public authority 'X' receives some
information from another public authority 'Y' which that public authority has
treated as confidential, then 'X' cannot disclose the infonnation without
consulting 'Y', the third party in respect of the information and without
following the procedure prescribed in Section 11 of the Act. It is a statutory
requirement, non-compliance of which may make the PI0 liable to action.
4. The Public Information Officers and the First Appellate Authorities
should keep these provisions of the Act in view while taking decision, about
disclosure of third party information in general and disclosure of the third party
information, when third party is a public authority, in particular.
5. Hindi version will follow.
(K.G. VERMA)
Director
Tei: 23052158
Copy to:
1. All the Ministries/Departments of the Government of India.
2. Union Public Service Commission/Lok Sabha SecretariatlRajya Sabha
SecretariatlCabinet Secretariat/ Central Vigilance Commission/
President's SecretariatlVice-Presidents's SecretariatlPrime Minister's
Office/PIanning Commission/Election Commission.
3. Central lnformation Commission/State lnformation Commissions.
4. Staff Selection Commission, CGO Complex, New Delhi.
5. Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of lndia, 10, Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi.. ,
6. All Officers/Desks/Sections, Department of Personnel & Training and
Department of Pension & Pensions Welfare.
Copy to: Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs,
Govemrnent of India
Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training ***
North Block, New Delhi-110001
Dated: the 27"'April, 2010
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Disclosure of third party information under the RTI Act, 2005.
***
The undersigned is directed to say that the Goveminent,'in a number of
cases makes inter departmental consultations. In the process, a public authority
may send some confidential papers to another public authority. A question has
arisen whether the recipient public authority can disclose such confidential
papers under the RTI Act, 2005. If yes, what procedure is required to be
followed for doing so.
2. Section 11 of the Act provides the procedure of disclosure of 'third
party' information. According to it, if a Public Information Officer (PIO)
intends to disclose an information supplied by a third party which the third party
has treated as confidential, the PIO, before taking a decision to disclose the
information shall invite the third party to make submission in the matter. The
third party has a right to make an appeal to the Departmental Appellate
Authority against the decision of the PI0 and if not satisfied with the decision
of the Departmental Appellate Authority, a second appeal to the concerned
Information Commission. The PI0 cannot disclose such information unless the
procedure prescribed in section 11 is completed.
3. As defined in clause (n) of Section 2 of the Act, 'third party' includes a
public authority. Reading of the definition of the terin, 'third party' and Section
I 1 together makes it clear that if a public authority 'X' receives some
information from another public authority 'Y' which that public authority has
treated as confidential, then 'X' cannot disclose the infonnation without
consulting 'Y', the third party in respect of the information and without
following the procedure prescribed in Section 11 of the Act. It is a statutory
requirement, non-compliance of which may make the PI0 liable to action.
4. The Public Information Officers and the First Appellate Authorities
should keep these provisions of the Act in view while taking decision, about
disclosure of third party information in general and disclosure of the third party
information, when third party is a public authority, in particular.
5. Hindi version will follow.
(K.G. VERMA)
Director
Tei: 23052158
Copy to:
1. All the Ministries/Departments of the Government of India.
2. Union Public Service Commission/Lok Sabha SecretariatlRajya Sabha
SecretariatlCabinet Secretariat/ Central Vigilance Commission/
President's SecretariatlVice-Presidents's SecretariatlPrime Minister's
Office/PIanning Commission/Election Commission.
3. Central lnformation Commission/State lnformation Commissions.
4. Staff Selection Commission, CGO Complex, New Delhi.
5. Office of the Comptroller & Auditor General of lndia, 10, Bahadur Shah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi.. ,
6. All Officers/Desks/Sections, Department of Personnel & Training and
Department of Pension & Pensions Welfare.
Copy to: Chief Secretaries of all the States/UTs,
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Section 138. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RESPECTING ASSESSEES.
RTI ACT notified in official gazette
-------------------------------------------
Income Tax - Notification No. 48 2009 Dated Tuesday, June 16, 2009 -
Section 138(1)(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Disclosure of
information respecting assessees to specified officer, authority or
body performing functions under any other law - Notified authority
Income Tax - Notification No. 284 2006 Dated Monday, October 09, 2006
- Under section 138 Central Government hereby specifies DG, Employees
State Insurance Corporation
Section 138. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RESPECTING ASSESSEES.
(1)(a) The Board or any other income-tax authority specified 1408 by
it by a general or special order in this behalf may furnish or cause
to be furnished to - (i) Any officer, authority or body performing any
functions under any law relating to the imposition of any tax, duty or
cess, or to dealings in foreign exchange 1409 as defined in section
2(d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (7 of 1947) 1410 ;
or
(ii) Such officer, authority or body performing functions under any
other law as the Central Government may, if in its opinion it is
necessary so to do in the public interest, specify by notification in
the Official Gazette in this behalf, any such information received or
obtained by any income-tax authority in the performance of his
functions under this Act as may, in the opinion of the Board or other
income-tax authority, be necessary for the purpose of enabling the
officer, authority or body to perform his or its functions under that
law.
(b) Where a person makes an application to the Chief Commissioner or
Commissioner in the prescribed form 1413b for any information relating
to any assessee received or obtained by any income-tax authority in
the performance of his functions under this Act, the Chief
Commissioner or Commissioner may, if he is satisfied that it is in the
public interest so to do, furnish or cause to be furnished the
information asked for and his decision in this behalf shall be final
and shall not be called in question in any court of law.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or any other
law for the time being in force, the Central Government may, having
regard to the practices and usages customary or any other relevant
factors, by order notified in the Official Gazette, direct that no
information or document shall be furnished or produced by a public
servant in respect of such matters relating to such class of assessees
or except to such authorities as may be specified in the order.
-------------------------------------------
Income Tax - Notification No. 48 2009 Dated Tuesday, June 16, 2009 -
Section 138(1)(a)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Disclosure of
information respecting assessees to specified officer, authority or
body performing functions under any other law - Notified authority
Income Tax - Notification No. 284 2006 Dated Monday, October 09, 2006
- Under section 138 Central Government hereby specifies DG, Employees
State Insurance Corporation
Section 138. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION RESPECTING ASSESSEES.
(1)(a) The Board or any other income-tax authority specified 1408 by
it by a general or special order in this behalf may furnish or cause
to be furnished to - (i) Any officer, authority or body performing any
functions under any law relating to the imposition of any tax, duty or
cess, or to dealings in foreign exchange 1409 as defined in section
2(d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (7 of 1947) 1410 ;
or
(ii) Such officer, authority or body performing functions under any
other law as the Central Government may, if in its opinion it is
necessary so to do in the public interest, specify by notification in
the Official Gazette in this behalf, any such information received or
obtained by any income-tax authority in the performance of his
functions under this Act as may, in the opinion of the Board or other
income-tax authority, be necessary for the purpose of enabling the
officer, authority or body to perform his or its functions under that
law.
(b) Where a person makes an application to the Chief Commissioner or
Commissioner in the prescribed form 1413b for any information relating
to any assessee received or obtained by any income-tax authority in
the performance of his functions under this Act, the Chief
Commissioner or Commissioner may, if he is satisfied that it is in the
public interest so to do, furnish or cause to be furnished the
information asked for and his decision in this behalf shall be final
and shall not be called in question in any court of law.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or any other
law for the time being in force, the Central Government may, having
regard to the practices and usages customary or any other relevant
factors, by order notified in the Official Gazette, direct that no
information or document shall be furnished or produced by a public
servant in respect of such matters relating to such class of assessees
or except to such authorities as may be specified in the order.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Sonia Gandhi cites privacy, refuses to disclose info on I-T returns
CHENNAI: Congress chief Sonia Gandhi has declined to disclose details of her income tax returns under the RTI Act, citing personal freedom and security risk. In her reply to the I-T department, she also said there was no public interest involved in disclosing such information.
Chennai-based RTI activist V Gopalakrishnan had sought details of her I-T returns from the year 2000-2001 to 2010-2011. The assistant commissioner of income tax, New Delhi, who is also the chief public information officer (CPIO), wrote to the UPA chairperson on January 23 as per Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005, seeking her response to the application. In her reply, Sonia said disclosure of such private information to third parties in guise of transparency in public life would amount to unwarranted invasion of the individual's privacy. The information submitted to the I-T department by an individual was confidential and private in nature and cannot be disclosed as per Section 138 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, she said.
This is the second time that the CPIO has rejected the petition. The application was first rejected without even seeking objection from Sonia. After the appellate authority's intervention last month on Gopalakrishnan's plea, the CPIO sought a response from Sonia. "By not calling for an objection, the CPIO has ignored the possibility of the third party expressing willingness for disclosure of personal I-T information," the authority had said.
Shri Sonia Gandhi objected or refused to disclose her Income Tax returns filed for my RTI Applications
Chennai-based RTI activist V Gopalakrishnan had sought details of her I-T returns from the year 2000-2001 to 2010-2011. The assistant commissioner of income tax, New Delhi, who is also the chief public information officer (CPIO), wrote to the UPA chairperson on January 23 as per Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005, seeking her response to the application. In her reply, Sonia said disclosure of such private information to third parties in guise of transparency in public life would amount to unwarranted invasion of the individual's privacy. The information submitted to the I-T department by an individual was confidential and private in nature and cannot be disclosed as per Section 138 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, she said.
This is the second time that the CPIO has rejected the petition. The application was first rejected without even seeking objection from Sonia. After the appellate authority's intervention last month on Gopalakrishnan's plea, the CPIO sought a response from Sonia. "By not calling for an objection, the CPIO has ignored the possibility of the third party expressing willingness for disclosure of personal I-T information," the authority had said.
Shri Sonia Gandhi objected or refused to disclose her Income Tax returns filed for my RTI Applications
Pay and Acoount office not deducted tax for income for formerly Chief minister Mr.Karunanidhi
Pay and Acoount office not deducted tax for income for formerly Chief minister Mr.Karunanidhi. PIO informed TDS was deducted. But TDS deducted only for certain period.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)