Â
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 C K Jam wrote : >Dear Mr Sarabjit, > >Please do not misunderstand my earlier post. >I am nobody to decide what is to be posted and what is not. > >Since I joined voluntarily (after your acceptance of my request) there is no >question of my being troubled by what is being posted. I just read the posts >in the last few days and was wondering - where have I landed up ? > >Well, I sincerely hope that it will be a enriching experience for me and I can >contribute something positive. I will just have to get used to ignoring all >non RTI related posts. > >Now to your surprise quiz question: > >For example YOU could explain why information is > ordinarily to be given by the department which "generates" it. > >The department which "generates" the information is the "custodian" of that >information. Therefore, under Section 6(1), an applicant should ordinarily >make a request for information to the PIO of the PA (Public Authority) which >is custodian of the information. Explaining at a more basic level, there is no >point in applying to the PIO of the Regional Passport Office and asking how >many Industrial Power connections have been given in a particular area over >the last 6 months ! > >However, sometimes, the drafters of laws and acts in India shower some tender >mercies on us poor citizens. Either by design or by intent or by oversight, >they have incorporated Sec 6(3) into the RTI Act, under which it is obligatory >for the recipient PIO to transfer either the full or a part of the >application, which covers a subject which pertains to another public >authority. This has to be done within 5 days of receiving the application and >under intimation to the applicant. > >Sir, pass or fail ? Please tell me the grade. I am eagerly waiting because the >last time I received a grade card was 28 years ago ! Really miss that suspense >and excitement. > >=========== > >Now, back to the question of the office of the Finance Minister in Kerala. > >RTI Act 2005 covers "Public Authorities" as defined in Sec 2(h) of the Act. > >Sec 2(h)(a) states: > >h)"public authority" means any authority or body or institution of self- >government established or constituted— a)by or under the Constitution; >The office of the Minister has been established under the constitution so it >squarely falls under Sec 2(h)(a) quoted above. It is immaterial for the >purposes of the RTI Act, whether that Public Authority generates information >or keeps records. That issue will only be addressed when a application is made >and the PIO can then very well say that either he does not have the >information and is transferring under Sec 6(3) or is using Sec 5(4) and 5(5) >to secure the information requested form some other officer in the PA. > >For a moment let us agree with the stand taken by the KIC that the office of >the Minister does not generate any information or keep any records. Then, can >I ask what are all those dozens of officers and staff doing in that office ? I >suppose they are reading the Bhagwad Gita in the office, just like the Jt. >Commissioner of Income Tax whom I have to visit very so often (yes, strange >but true !). Nothing wrong with the reading the Bhagwad Gita, but please do >not do it on tax payers money and time. > >Doesn't that office of the Minister have at least a attendance register ? >Doesn't it have a appointments diary for the Minister ? Doesn't it have a >inward and outward register ? Doesn't it have the log book of the Minister's >official car ? All those are "records" as defined in the RTI Act and any >citizen can ask for those records under the RTI Act. > >Please do not give me any benefit of doubt and treat me as a novice or still >better a RTI idiot (wow, a new term). Maybe whatever I said before is all >bullshit. But what about the following argument : > >Let's agree with KIC that the Finance department PIO can be requested for >information pertaining to the Minister's office. That means KIC agrees that at >least the Finance Department is a PA. Then, under Sec 5(1), the Finance >Department is supposed to appoint PIO's in ALL administrative offices or units >under it. So, since the office of the Minister is a unit of the original PA, >it should have a PIO or at least a APIO. > >Lastly, I wish to draw your attention to the attached order of the CIC. Order >in Appeal Nr. CIC/WB/C/2006/00167. If the offices of the CM and Ministers of >Delhi can be considered to be PA's by CIC and ordered to appoint PIO's and >AA's, then what is so different with the office of the Finance Minister of >Kerala ? After all the RTI Act is same all over India (except J & K). > >As you can see, the CIC order is dated 15 September 2006, but the website of >Delhi Government ( http://www.delhigovt.nic.in/rti/search_pio.asp ) still >shows a PIO/AA only in the office of the CM and no information is available >regarding PIO/AA in the office of other Ministers. Speaks volumes of >respecting and obeying decisions of a "quasi-judicial" authority. As you >probably know, we Indians (including you and me) suffer from a strange disease >called " diarrhea of words and constipation of action". > >Quiz on the "bounce" (by a RTI idiot) > >Can Property Returns filed by "Government servants" be disclosed under RTI ? > >Regards, >RTIWanted > > > > > >sroy1947 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Mr.Jam, > > This is your Moderator speaking. I sincerely regret that you are > troubled by the messages posted at RTI_India - India's most notorious > RTI Yahoo group. > > Firstly, as per the Rules of this group - self publicity (especially > by advocates) is not allowed. Some of the old members like Ashish are > alert and vocal about such things. Previously they used to email me > privately and sound off, nowadays these things are coming out in the > open. Anticipating our senior members, I had myself drawn attention > (subtly I thought - to the Parivartan tag in DJJ's post) but I was > proved wrong. > > Secondly, I dont unlist anyone from the group - this is the age of > self service, you can easily do so yourself (search the old messages > of our group to find out how). > > Thirdly, our RTI group is meant for ordinary citizens. We are unique > insofar as having many PIOs and FAAs (like Ashish) here to assist you. > Stick around, maybe you could enjoy yourself and contribute for > everyone's benefit. For example YOU could explain why information is > ordinarily to be given by the department which "generates" it. > > Sarbajit > > --- In [email protected], C K Jam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Moderator/Owner, > > > > Is this group about RTI or about Parivartan (I do not even know who > they are) ? > > > > I am a ordinary citizen and just joined two days ago after the > moderator approved my request for membership. > > > > All I have seen till now are postings about Parivartan, Foreign > Funding and snide remarks directed at each other. > > > > I am sorry, but I joined to learn more about RTI, not about > Parivartan, the funding by CIA and KGB and MI6 ! > > > > Moderator, I request you to please delist me from this group for the > above mentioned reason. > > > > Thanks & Best Wishes > > RTIWanted > > > > > > ashish kr1965 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is a curious statement by Parivartan's advocate. > > > > > ". I would also like to inform you that Parivartan does not take > > > any foreign funding as a matter of policy. Human Rights Law > > > Network also does not give any funds to Parivartan." > > > > Parivartan by their own admission and accounts accepts foreign funds. > > > > Mr. Arvind Kejriwal contributes US$200 on 13.11.2006. > > In the same year US residents send over US$1000. > > > > Mr. Arvind Kejriwal regularly finances the organisation to tune of > lakhs > > of rupees - his full sources of finance are not in public domain. > He also > > publicly accepts foreign funds from MI-6 and CIA front organisations > > like bogus DFID, Asoka awards and Magsaysay awards - all in Foreign > exchange. > > > > Previously funds to Parivartan were audited (as it was a registered > Society), > > ever since Mr.Kejriwal got famous, the funds are his (and Manish's) > alone to > > control and all the honest and dedicated workers from old days have > > abandoned these two. > > > > This message is on the basis of unrebutted information in the > public domain. > > Perhaps the Parivartan advocate and members of this group would > care to clarify. > > > > Ashish > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. > Try it now. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------- >Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > BIMAL KUMAR KHEMANI Saha-Prant Sangathan Mantri, AKHIL BHARATIYA GRAHAK PANCHAYAT BRAJ PRANT, 2/40D, Janakpuri, Marrish Road, ALIGARH-202001. INDIA Phone:0571-2401557, MOB:-093597BIMAL e.mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
