AN EXPERIENCE OF STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, LUCKNOW by a RTI activist. I, Bimal Kumar Khemani, Saha Prant Sangathan Mantri of AKHIL BHARATIYA GRAHAK PANCHAYAT Braj Prant, a national organization of consumers have formed a group of about 10 dedicated persons to find out corruption with the help of RTI Act, 2005. We have selected few departments viz. Nagar Nigam, Bharat Sanchar Nigam, Aligarh Development Authority, D.S.Degree College, Aligarh Muslim University, Electricity & Health Department. Besides finding out corruption, we also impart training to various Govt. officials and conduct public awareness campaign. In course of a period of almost 2 years we did not get proper information and so have to file about 30/35 appeals before the STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, LUCKNOW. On request of one of our friends to plead his case before the commission on 24-04-08, I had to visit S I C Lucknow. The State Information Commission office, Lucknow is located on the 6 th Floor of Indira Bhawan. The Govt. of U.P. has allotted an office space about 375 Sq. Mts. for a staff of 10 commissioners and 77 sub-ordinate staff. It has 5 chambers for Commissioners and rest of the space is for the staff and keeping records. Sri Mulayam Singh Yadaw, ex. Chief minster of the state appointed a retired H.C.Judge, Mr.M.A Khan as Chief Information Commissioner and 4 other commissioners. Km. Mayawati the present chief minister of the state appointed another 5 commissioners. These appointments give a political smell. So at present there is a total strength of 10 commissioners. But in this “Palatial building” there are only 5 rooms for the commissioners. So commissioners work in shifts. Five sit from 10.00 to 14.00 hrs. and the other five from 14.00 to 17.00 hrs . Is it not unfortunate ? Is it not a waste of man power and money ? Does it not give out 50% results of the working capacity ? Does it not show how seriously the Govt. of U.P. takes the State Information Commission ? There is no Enquiry desk. An enquiry revealed that there are four clerks to receive DAK, sort it out and send it to the respected commissions . Out of these four persons one opens the letters and enters the details in receipt register and puts the receipt numbers on them. I was also told that normally more than 500 letters are received daily and out of them hardly 400/450 letters are opened and entered into the register. So rest are left to cool there heals. A meeting with the Chief commissioner revealed his easy style of functioning. He graced us to meet us in his retiring room at about 2.00 p.m.. He was shown a list of 31 pending appeals as filed by our group , with a request to get them registered and listed for hearing since more than last 4/5 months have passed . He was also informed that the proper notices of hearing are not received by the appellants and also the copy of the judgments are also not sent to the parties concerned. I was informed that the commission has evolved a noble method for supplying the copy of the decision. One is to apply for a copy as per civil procedure by affixing a court fee stamp of Rs. 10/- and also required to collect the same from the office of the commission. I do not know why at this point the Honorable Chief Information Commissioner got annoyed .and told me to contact Km. MAYAWATI ,and ask her why she is not allotting more funds to the commission. This was also not the end of the drama The retd. High Court Judge cum Chief Commissioner also uttered something and started challenging the role of Khemani as an RTI activist fighting for transparency in the system. The experience shows that an appeal filed to-day may get lost in the office of the commission or be listed after several months due to shortage of space and funds. It became obvious even in this short visit that the whole atmosphere is political. Chief commissioner and other commissioners, are pro-administration. And they are hesitant to impose penalty on the defaulters u/s.20. If this is going to be the fate of R T I Act then one will like to keep mum and just watch. On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 Sidharth wrote : >UP axes CIC after CBI claim of evidence to try Mayawati > >by Kajari Bhattacharya, The Statesman, http://tinyurl.com/5p33qk > >NEW DELHI/LUCKNOW, July 10: Hours after the CBI today told the Supreme >Court that it had "sufficient" evidence to prosecute Uttar Pradesh >chief minister Miss Mayawati in a disproportionate assets case >registered against her five years ago, balls of retaliatory action >started rolling in Lucknow. In the first action of its kind taken >against a state's chief information commissioner (CIC) anywhere in the >country, UP Governor TV Rajeswar put UP CIC Justice (Retd) Mr MA Khan >under suspension and prohibited him from attending office for alleged >corruption, misconduct and irregularities in appointing employees. >Justice (Retd) Mr Khan was a Mulayam Singh Yadav appointee. > >The CBI filed an affidavit in the SC saying it will shortly file a >chargesheet in a disproportionate assets case registered against the >BSP supremo in 2003. It said there was ample evidence to show that >Miss Mayawati had amassed wealth disproportionate to her known sources >of income while responding to a notice issued to it on a petition >filed by her. The UP CM was seeking quashing of criminal proceedings >against her in the case which she alleged was politically motivated. >In Lucknow, a highly-placed source said: "We have sent a reference to >the SC, which will form a committee to inquire into the allegations >and then decide if Justice (Retd) MA Khan will be removed from >office." The source added: "The allegations have been confined to >misconduct and irregularities in hiring employees. We do not want to >level allegations of misappropriation of funds, as these undermine a >Constitutional authority, which a CIC is." He said that in spite of >the fact that the CIC was not supposed to make appointments directly, >Justice (Retd) allegedly Mr Khan had done so, flouting recruitment >rules. "There were no advertisements, no tests." Other information >commissioners were also critical of the CIC. > >Magsaysay awardee and RTI activist Mr Sandeep Pandey said many >complaints against the CIC had been forwarded to the Governor. "The >CIC was more partial to public information officers, who are >government employees, and harsh with RTI applicants. Hearings are >pending in thousands," Mr Pandey alleged. >Justice (Retd) Mr Khan's tenure was due to end in November. The CIC >was appointed in 2005, during the last days of the Mulayam Singh Yadav >government in UP. The appointment was seen by many as a reward from Mr >Yadav to Justice (Retd) Mr Khan, who, as an HC judge in 2003, had >issued a highly-controversial ruling in an anti-defection case that >helped the SP come to power the same year in the state. > > > >http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=1&theme=&usrsess=1&id=212915
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:-09359724625 e.mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
