Dear Shri Sarabjit
 
     I agree with the views expressed by Shri Dhirendra Krishna. I am afraid 
your contention that internet groups like "rti_india" are political internet 
groups, is not correct. The common bondage between members / subscribers to 
this group, is not any political ideology: it is their involvement and / or 
degree of commitment  for promoting the cause of RTI that binds them and brings 
them together for bonding  for that cause.Most of the subscribers to this 
group, I am sure, do not have any personal acquaintence with each other; they 
may have not even met each other in person at any time.I have not met you 
any time nor do I know Shri Krishna In the given scenario, there cannot be any 
political affiliation or commonality of political leaning, leave aside 
political ideology, amongst the group members. It may not, therefore, be 
appropiate to say that some person who is working with a Government Department 
qnd / or with a Public Sector
 Undertaking is barred from expressing himself on matters relating to RTI and 
the problems in implementing RTI Act in its spirti and content.
Nor do his serevice rules debar him  from expressing himself on issues 
involving RTI. Service Rulels do place a bar on all public sevants from being  
part of political groups. But even this bar does not debar them  from 
exercising their right of casting vote in elections where political parties 
participate for contesting elections based on political ideologies, and most 
ofter almost all public servants cast their votes for one political party or 
the other. The act of casting vote does not make them a political affiliate of 
the political party for which they may have  voted. So, we need not discourage 
or debar any public servant from expressing himself on rti board, if he feels 
like sharing his views.  
 
S K NANGIA

--- On Tue, 28/4/09, Dhirendra Krishna <[email protected]> wrote:

From: Dhirendra Krishna <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: "You may also note that public servants are 
prohibited from joining / postin
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, 28 April, 2009, 9:44 AM

Dear Shri Roy,

It is a matter of interpretation, Sir.

You and I, as moderators of RTI related groups are not the competent
authority to interpret the provisions of CCS (Conduct) Rules and Govt. of
India decisions there-under. We can only decide on the objectives of the
Internet group and act as a moderator.

RTI Act is a law passed by the Parliament and Government is required to
implement it. If an Internet group is a "movement" to voice
citizen's
concern about its non implementation, I believe that it is not an activity
to embarrass or excite dissatisfaction against the Government. As a matter
of fact, most of the RTI applications demand public records that may
embarrass Government. If you carefully look at the preamble of RTI Act, the
enactment is for transparency of information for holding Government
accountable to the governed. It is further stated therein that transparency
of information is vital for containing corruption. If we believe in
paramountcy of the democratic ideal, public servants should be aware of the
deep anguish of the citizens on issues arising from lack of transparency.

RTI Act intends to usher in transparent and accountable public
administration. In my humble opinion ( and also in the opinion of
Administrative Reforms Commission on RTI implementation) every public
servant should be aware of RTI Act, so that they can fulfill the obligations
of public authority in letter and spirit. At the nascent stage of
implementation  of RTI Act, there are controversies and some of these
debatable issues are aired in the Internet group. Every *good* public
servant should not only be aware of citizen's concern about unsatisfactory
implementation of RTI Act and issues revealed by use of RTI Act by citizens.
If membership of Internet groups enables Government servants to become aware
of these issues, it is in public interest for them to remain as Member of
such group.

Let us leave it to the Government to give their decisions under CCS
(Conduct) Rules; it is not for the moderator on  groups to decide one way or
the other. If the Government ever decides to ban membership of RTI related
Internet groups for Government employees, there are adequate grounds for
public interest litigation against it. This could be an interesting debate
before the Supreme Court !

For the present, none of the RTI related groups have been banned under CCS
(Conduct) Rules. It is not for moderators (like you and me) to dissuade
public servant from  Membership.

With best wishes,

Dhirendra Krishna IA&AS (Retired)
Moderator,
Yahoo groups rti4ngo and rti4empwerment.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:31 AM, sroy1947 <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> Dear Mr Krishna
>
> Many thanks for the Govt decision (of Finance Ministry). It supports our
> view that direct participation of Govt servants in SPECIALISED
"political"
> internet groups such as ours is restricted. It is always open to any Govt
to
> ban a group or clarify that a groups ex-facie falls within the mischief of
> Rule 5, but such action cannot be an exhaustive compendium.
>
> The ilustrative explanation to the old rule holds political movement to
> include "any movement or activities tending directly or indirectly to
excite
> disaffection against, or to embarrass, the
> Government as by law established" .. I think our groups fall squarely
> within such definition.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In [email protected] <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>,
Dhirendra
> Krishna <dhirendra....@...> wrote:
> >
>  > Dear Shri Sarbajit,
> >
> > This has been clarified in Government of India Decision number 1,
given
> > below.
> >
> > In my humble opinion, if a Government servant participates in an
internet
> > discussion group, it does not amount to "taking part in politics
or
> > election" OR "assisting political movement or
activity." Each officer is
> > required to judge for himself (or herself) whether participation in
> internet
> > group dealing with citizen's right to information is a violation
of Rule
> 5
> > of CCS (Conduct) Rule- depending on activities and content of each
group.
> If
> > he/she has any doubts, his/her superior can be consulted.
> >
> > Several organisations have been specifically banned by the Government
> > under Rule 5 as per various Government decision under Rule 5; none of
the
> > internet discussion groups have been banned. As such there is no bar
on
> > Government servants membership of any internet group. Your or my
opinion
> > does not matter; it is for the Government of India to frame conduct
rules
> > for the Government servants.
> >
> >
> > Dhirendra Krishna
> >
>
....................................................................................................................................................
> >
> > Government of India Decisions
> >
> > (1) Participation of Government servants in political activities
> >
> > Doubts have been raised recently as to the scope of Rule 23 (i) of
the
> > Government Servants Conduct Rules (now Rule 5) which lays down that
no
> > Government servant shall take part in, subscribe in aid of, or assist
in
> any
> > way, any political movement in India or relating to Indian affairs.
> > According to the Explanation (not in the new rule) to that clause,
the
> > expression "political movement" includes any movement or
activities
> tending
> > directly or indirectly to excite disaffection against, or to
embarrass,
> the
> > Government as by law established or to promote feelings of hatred of
> enemity
> > between classes of His Majesty's subjects or disturb the public
peace.
> This
> > explanation is only illustrative and is not intended in any sense, to
be
> an
> > exhaustive definition of "political movement". Whether or
not the aims
> and
> > activities of any organization are political is a question of fact
which
> has
> > to be decided on the merits of each case. It is, in the opinion of
> > Government, necessary, however, that the Government servants under
the
> > Ministry of Finance etc. should be warned that –
> >
> > (a) it is the duty of the Government servant who wishes to join, or
take
> > part in the activities of any association or organization positively
to
> > satisfy himself that its aim and activities are not of such a nature
as
> are
> > likely to be objectionable under Rule 23 of the Government
Servants'
> Conduct
> > Rules (now rule 5); and
> >
> > (b) the responsibility for the consequences of his decision and
action
> must
> > rest squarely on his shoulders and that a plea of ignorance or
> misconception
> > as to Government's attitude towards the association or
organization would
> > not be tenable.
> >
> > It should also be impressed on them that, in cases where the
slightest
> doubt
> > exists as to whether participation in the activities of an
association or
> > orgaisation involves as infringement of Rule 23 (now Rule 5), the
> Government
> > servant would be well advised to consult his official superiors.
> >
> > [MHA OM No. 25/44/49-Ests (A), dated 17.09.1949]
> >
> > "Government of India Decisions
> >
> > (1) Participation of Government servants in political activities
> >
> > Doubts have been raised recently as to the scope of Rule 23 (i) of
the
> > Government Servants Conduct Rules (now Rule 5) which lays down that
no
> > Government servant shall take part in, subscribe in aid of, or assist
in
> any
> > way, any political movement in India or relating to Indian affairs.
> > According to the Explanation (not in the new rule) to that clause,
the
> > expression "political movement" includes any movement or
activities
> tending
> > directly or indirectly to excite disaffection against, or to
embarrass,
> the
> > Government as by law established or to promote feelings of hatred of
> enemity
> > between classes of His Majesty's subjects or disturb the public
peace.
> This
> > explanation is only illustrative and is not intended in any sense, to
be
> an
> > exhaustive definition of "political movement". Whether or
not the aims
> and
> > activities of any organization are political is a question of fact
which
> has
> > to be decided on the merits of each case. It is, in the opinion of
> > Government, necessary, however, that the Government servants under
the
> > Ministry of Finance etc. should be warned that –
> >
> > (a) it is the duty of the Government servant who wishes to join, or
take
> > part in the activities of any association or organization positively
to
> > satisfy himself that its aim and activities are not of such a nature
as
> are
> > likely to be objectionable under Rule 23 of the Government
Servants'
> Conduct
> > Rules (now rule 5); and
> >
> > (b) the responsibility for the consequences of his decision and
action
> must
> > rest squarely on his shoulders and that a plea of ignorance or
> misconception
> > as to Government's attitude towards the association or
organization would
> > not be tenable.
> >
> > It should also be impressed on them that, in cases where the
slightest
> doubt
> > exists as to whether participation in the activities of an
association or
> > orgaisation involves as infringement of Rule 23 (now Rule 5), the
> Government
> > servant would be well advised to consult his official superiors.
> >
> > [MHA OM No. 25/44/49-Ests (A), dated 17.09.1949]"
> >
>
............................................................................................................................................................
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 11:34 AM, sroy1947 <sroy1...@...>
wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Many Thanks
> > >
> > > Gov servants are restricted from OPENLY associating with groups
such as
> > > "RTI_India" , "RTI4ngo" (of which Mr Krishna
is Moderator) etc which
> are
> > > listed in "Politics" category of Yahoo groups. As
Moderators it is our
> duty
> > > to facilitate participation of ALL citizens in RTI processes -
and
> anonymous
> > > participation is one of the methods open to us.
> > >
> > > Sarbajit
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected]
<rti_india%40yahoogroups.com><rti_india%
> 40yahoogroups.com>, Dhirendra
> > > Krishna <Dhirendra.rti@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Friends,
> > > >
> > > > Rule 5 of CCS(Conduct) Rules and Government decisions are
at :
> > > >
> > >
>
http://persmin.nic.in/EmployeesCorner/Acts_Rules/CCSRules_1964/ccs_conduct_rules_1964_details.htm#05%20Govt%20Decision%2003
> > > > Accordingly, no Government servant shall be a member of, or
be
> otherwise
> > > > associated with, any political party or any organisation
which takes
> part
> > > in
> > > > politics nor shall he take part in, subscribe in aid of, or
assist in
> any
> > > > other manner, any political movement or activity.
> > > >
> > > > It has been clarified by the Moderator that Government
servants are
> > > > restricted from membership of RTI_India group.
> > > >
> > > > Dhirendra Krishna
> > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:25 AM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@>
wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>  
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links






      Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket website. Enter 
http://beta.cricket.yahoo.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to