GOVERNANCE now : UP SIC: Minor cannot file RTI application , RTI activists term the order ‘illegal’

http://www.governancenow.com/gov-next/rti/sic-minor-cannot-file-rti-application

UP SIC: Minor cannot file RTI application

RTI activists term the order 'illegal'

GN Bureau | November 29 2010

In a decision which has not gone down well with RTI activists, the
uttar Pradesh state information commission (SIC) has said that minors
cannot use the right to information (RTI) act .

"The girl would have to get her appeals and complaints filed through a
custodian or present a proof of her being a major so that she be heard
directly, says the order by Ranjit Singh Pankaj, chief information
commissioner, UP.

"Since the girl is a minor, she does not come under the definition of
a major as defined under the Indian majority act. The proceedings
under RTI are quasi-judicial in nature. In such a situation, no minor
can directly get involved in the RTI proceedings, be it filing of
appeals or complaints. Besides, as per civil procedure code, a minor
can file a complaint or appeal only through a custodian," it says
further.

The case relates to nine year old Aishwayra Sharma, class 4 student of
the Montessari school in Lucknow's Rajajipuram area.

In October 2009, Aishwarya wrote a letter to the chief minister's
office (CMO) informing her about the garbage heaps lying just opposite
the school.

Though the garbage was removed later, she was informed that the letter
was not traceable in the CMO.

The girl wanted to know who was responsible for misplacing the letter.

On not getting any satisfactory response from the CMO, Aishwarya moved SIC.

"This order is illegal. I can share several instances where minors,
even a third-standard student, have sought information under RTI in
Delhi," he said. There is no mention in the Act that minors have to
get their case represented through a custodian. The section 3 of the
RTI Act clearly mentions, `subject to provisions of this Act, all
citizens shall have the right to information," The Times of India
quoted RTI activist Arvind Kejrival as saying.

http://www.governancenow.com/gov-next/rti/sic-minor-cannot-file-rti-application

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Uttar Pradesh: Overcrowded Jails , Prisons in U.P. burst at the seams , Those having completed their term still languishing in jails

http://www.thesundayindian.com/article.php?article_id=10461   Uttar Pradesh: Overcrowded Jails Prisons in U.P. burst at the seams Those having completed their term still languishing in jails PUJA AWASTHI | December 5, 2010 14:04   Prisoners who have long completed their terms but have not been released as yet form a considerable chunk of the total prisoners in Uttar Pradesh's jails. This is one of the reasons behind overcrowding of the state's jails, reveals an RTI query filed by Lucknow based activist Urvashi Sharma.  Sharma, on October 4, 2009, had asked for the following information: A list of all the jails in UP with their designated capacity and the actual number of prisoners housed in each jail; jail-wise lists of the names of all convicts who are serving time in spite of having completed their terms; and details of the steps taken by the state government in the last five years to scrutinise the status of all the prisoners in UP jails, apart from certain other details. The reply from the Jail Administration and Reforms Services was enough to give Sharma a shock as she came to know that against the designated capacity of 42,176 inmates, UP's 62 jails actually had 83,805 prisoners. According to a National Crimes Record Bureau (NCRB) report on prisons, 2008, the state's jails have 191.6 per cent occupancy, second only to Chattisgarh where the jail occupancy is 215.2 per cent. According to the report, only 32 per cent of all the inmates in India's jails are convicts while a whopping 67 per cent of them are undertrials. There is just one jail official per eight inmates. Two appeals and a rejoinder later, Sharma received information from only two jails— Meerut and Ghaziabad— that two prisoners, one male and one female, were languishing in Ghaziabad jail even after completion of their terms. As for the query about the scrutiny of the prisoners the response was "Nil". "It is indeed ironical that the department meant to bring reforms in jails has not even  scrutinised the status of the prisoners during the last five years. I am writing to the CM and the Governor to take action and ensure that either the department should prove worthy of its name or it should drop the words 'administration and reforms' from its name," says Sharma. Earlier this year, Law Minister Veerappa Moily launched a drive for the speedy conclusion of the cases of undertrials and to ensure their release. Till July this year, UP had topped the list in that mission by releasing 52,843 undertrials and settling the cases of 4,203 more. But certainly more steps are needed in this direction.    -- Urvashi Sharma RTI Helpmail( Web Based ) aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com Mobile Rti Helpline 8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Open letter to governor of UP to sack UP CIC Ranjit Singh Pankaj

http://www.mynews.in/News/open_letter_to_governor_of_up_to_sack_up_cic_ranjit_singh_pankaj_N114296.html

Open letter to governor of UP to sack UP CIC Ranjit Singh Pankaj
Sharma Urvashi, 29-Nov-2010 11:54:42 AM

Keywords: Minors | rti | up | cic | pankaj | yaishwaryaj |

To: Sri Banwari Lal Joshi
The Governor of Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh Government , Lucknow, IUndia , Pin Code – 226001

From: Social Group " YAISHWARYAJ "
Date: 28th November , 2010

Re. :Concerns for citizens about fair play at State Information
Commission of Uttar Pradesh under the headship of an incompetent ,
act-ignorant , an infirm minded and corrupt State Chief Information
Commissioner Sri Ranjit Singh Pankaj AND demand to stop him from
attending the office of the State Chief Information Commissioner at
once & subsequently remove him from the chair to meet the ends of the
justice in compliance to the section 17 of the Right to Information
Act 2005

On behalf of Social Group " YAISHWARYAJ " , the undersigned has
drafted this memorandum to communicate the collective concerns of our
group to you . Sir you are responsible for compliance of the Right to
Information Act 2005 in letter & spirit and also to ensure the
realization of the civil rights of all the citizens of the Uttar
Pradesh.

Our group is alarmed and distressed to see that the present Uttar
Pradesh chief information commissioner, Sri Ranjit Singh Pankaj has
denied information to Nine Year old Lucknow based girl child Miss
Aishwarya Sharma on the pretext that she is a minor .

Miss Aishwarya Sharma sent a letter on 26-10-09 to the UP CM by
speedpost .The PIO of CM office denied receipt of the said letter dtd.
26-10-09 .Miss Aishwarya used RTI act and sent letter of section 6 on
15-03-10 to the PIO of CM office to search her lost letter . The PIO
of CM office sent a letter on 08-04-10 .Aggrieved by the above order
of PIO dtd.08-04-10 , Miss Aishwarya sent First Appeal on 26-04-10
U/S 19(1) of RTI act to the Appellate Authority of CM office . The
same was returned in original to Miss Aishwarya , by Sri Navneet
Sehgal the Appellate Authority of CM office. Aggrieved by the order
of the Appellate Authority of CM office , Miss Aishwarya moved UPSIC
where case no. S1-1460/C-10 got registered and heard on 06-09-10 by UP
CIC Sri R. S. Pankaj. UPSIC dispatched order on 26-10-10 and asked
Miss Aishwarya to be present before UPSIC on 23-11-10 but the letter
has visible post office date stamp of 25-11-10 , making it crystal
clear that UPSIC had foul play in mind and wanted to ensure that Miss
Aishwarya should not be present in hearing to press her point.

A perusal of order of UP CIC shows it grossly violates the RTI act
2005. For reference –

1) section 3 of RTI act which says "Subject to the provisions of this
Act, all citizens shall have the right to information."

Miss Aishwarya is very much a citizen of INDIA.

2) section 6(1) of RTI act which says "A person, who desires to obtain
any information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or
through electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official
language of the area in which the application is being made,
accompanying such fee as may be prescribed, to— ( a) the Central
Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the
case may be, of the concerned public authority;(b) the Central
Assistant Public Information Officer or State Assistant Public
Information Officer, as the case may be,specifying the particulars of
the information sought by him or her:Provided that where such request
cannot be made in writing, the Central Public Information Officer or
State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall render all
reasonable assistance to the person making the request orally to
reduce the same in writing."

Miss Aishwarya is a person who sought info under RTI act 2005.

3) section 6 ( 2 ) of RTI act which reads "An applicant making request
for information shall not be required to give any reason for
requesting the information or any other personal details except those
that may be necessary for contacting him."

It's a folly that UP CIC is asking about age of Miss Aishwarya .

4) section 22 which reads "The provisions of this Act shall have
effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in
the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being
in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other
than this Act. " means the RTI act 2005 shall have overriding effect
over any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument
having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. The UP CIC had
denied info to minor Aishwarya on the pretext of " INDIAN MAJORITY ACT
" & " CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 " . As is clear from
section 22 of RTI act , RTI act shall have overriding effect over "
INDIAN MAJORITY ACT " & " CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 "
hence these pleadings of UP CIC are not tenable in the eye of law.

On one hand , UN Convention on the Rights of the children advocates
of giving ample of rights to the children including forming
associations to fight for their rights , on the other hand Such
unreasonable order which is contradictory to UNCRC is being passed by
UP CIC. This is ridiculous as India is a signatory at UN Convention on
the Rights of the children .

The RTI Act, emanates from Art. 19 (1 ) (a) of The Constitution & it
is firmly rooted under Fundamental Right enshrined and
guaranteed to every Citizen of India read with Art. 5 , thus
regardless of age any citizen can use RTI act on his/her own .

Even Earlier to his appointment as SCIC , the Charges of corruption
were leveled against the Chief Information Commissioner Sri Ranjit
Singh Pankaj while he was the district magistrate of Gorakhpur in
2008. The charges were corroborated by the divisional commissioner, P
K Mohanty, who conducted an inquiry into the selection process of
3,448 safai karamcharis. The probe report, acting on which the
government cancelled all the appointments, held Pankaj responsible for
violating norms and handpicking men of his choice who later committed
irregularities, including accepting bribes.

Our group is deeply worried and anguished for the info-seekers as to
how they can expect fair play at the State Information Commission of
Uttar Pradesh under the headship of an act-ignorant , infirm-minded ,
incompetent and corrupt State Chief Information Commissioner Sri
Ranjit Singh Pankaj . In these circumstances Sri Ranjit Singh Pankaj
shall not be able to safeguard the citizens' right to information in
the State.

Section 17 of the Right To Information act 2005 reads as given
herein under - " (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (3),
the State Chief information Commissioner or a State Information
Commissioner shall be removed from his office only by order of the
Governor on the ground of proved misbehavior or incapacity after the
Supreme Court, on a reference made to it by the Governor, has on
inquiry, reported that the State Chief Information Commissioner or a
State Information Commissioner, as the case may be, ought on such
ground be removed.

( 2 ) The Governor may suspend from office, and if deem necessary
prohibit also from attending the office during inquiry, the State
Chief Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner in
respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court under
sub-section (1) until the Governor has passed orders on receipt of
thereport of the Supreme Court on such reference.

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the
Governor may by order remove from office the State Chief Information
Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner if a State Chief
Information Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner, as the
case may be,—

(a) is adjudged an insolvent; or

(b) has been convicted of an offence which, in the opinion of the
Governor, involves moral turpitude; or
(c) engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside
the duties of his office; or
(d) is, in the opinion of the Governor, unfit to continue in office by
reason of infirmity of mind or body; or
(e) has acquired such financial or other interest as is likely to
affect prejudicially his functions as the State Chief Information
Commissioner or a State Information Commissioner.

(4) If the State Chief Information Commissioner or a State
Information Commissioner in any way, concerned or interested in any
contract or agreement made by or on behalf of the Government of the
State or participates in any way in the profit thereof or in any
benefit or emoluments arising there from otherwise than as a member
and in common with the other members of an incorporated company, he
shall, for the purposes of sub-section (1), be deemed to be guilty of
misbehavior. "

Keeping abovementioned facts under consideration the Governor / the
State should have taken suo-motto cognizance of the illegalities and
should have stopped Sri Ranjit Singh Pankaj from attending the office
of the State Chief Information Commissioner at once to meet the ends
of the justice in compliance to the section 17( 3 ) of the Right to
Information Act 2005 .

Since the Governor / the State has failed to take the necessary
punitive action against the State Chief Information Commissioner as
per section 17 of the Right to Information Act 2005 , Our group is
compelled to endorse the concerns as stated above , recommend and
demand immediate removal of the State Chief Information Commissioner
from office as Sri Ranjit Singh Pankaj has shown his infirmity of mind
by denying the information to Miss Aishwarya Sharma and has been
convicted of offences which, in the eye of Law involve moral turpitude
and also that immediate non-removal of Sri Pankaj is a constitutional
lapse being violative of the RTI Act 2005 .

Encl. : Order of UPSIC ( 2 Pages )

Yours truly ,
Urvashi Sharma

Founder & Convener

Group " YAISHWARYAJ "

F-2376 , Rajajipuram , Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh , India , Pin Code – 226017

e-mail yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

http://www.mynews.in/News/open_letter_to_governor_of_up_to_sack_up_cic_ranjit_singh_pankaj_N114296.html

A 'minor' reason for rejecting RTI query - 9 year old Aishwarya Sharma of Lucknow denied info on her lost letter

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/A-minor-reason-for-rejecting-RTI-query-/articleshow/6997903.cms

A 'minor' reason for rejecting RTI query
Neha Shukla, TNN, Nov 27, 2010, 12.39am IST

LUCKNOW: A 9-year-old cannot claim her right to information. Says who?
None other than UP State Information Commission (UPSIC). The order by
the chief information commissioner of UPSIC which questions the right
of a "minor" to seek information under the RTI Act has raised a
debate. The RTI experts have termed it "illegal".

The commission has ordered so in the case concerning Aishwarya Sharma,
a 9-year-old girl. She had written to the CM's office in October, 2009
complaining about the garbage dumping ground in the vicinity of her
school. She had requested the CMO to stop garbage disposal at the
spot. After she got no response, the girl filed an RTI application. It
was then that she was informed by the office that her letter was lost.

The girl filed another RTI application after this. "I asked them who
misplaced my letter", said Aishwarya, a student of Class III in a
city-based school. But she got no answer and had to file a complaint
with the SIC. And in the same matter, the commission ordered that she
cannot directly participate in the proceedings of the RTI Act.

The girl would have to get her appeals and complaints filed through a
custodian or present a proof of her being a major so that she be heard
directly, said an order by Ranjit Singh Pankaj, chief information
commissioner, UP. The said order has already been termed "illegal" by
the RTI experts and activists.

"This order is illegal," said Arvind Kejrival, RTI campaigner. "I can
share several instances where minors, even a third-standard student,
have sought information under RTI in Delhi," he said. There is no
mention in the Act that minors have to get their case represented
through a custodian. The section 3 of the RTI Act clearly mentions,
`subject to provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right
to information.'

The CIC's order said that since the girl is a minor, she does not come
under the definition of a major as defined under the Indian Majority
Act. The proceedings under RTI are quasi-judicial in nature. In such a
situation, no minor can directly get involved in the RTI proceedings,
be it filing of appeals or complaints. Besides, as per Civil Procedure
Code, a minor can file a complaint or appeal only through a custodian.

When contacted, Shailesh Gandhi, information commissioner (IC), CIC,
said, "The Act has been made by the Parliament and the Parliament has
not barred minors from using RTI." The person seeking information
under RTI should be a citizen of India, that is the only condition set
by the Act. The Act does not say that RTI user has to be a major or a
minor. "Even a year-old child can use RTI," said Gandhi, IC in Central
Information Commission, Delhi.

With this, UPSIC may be headed towards setting its own RTI rules.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

TOI : A 'minor' reason for rejecting RTI query

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/A-minor-reason-for-rejecting-RTI-query-/articleshow/6997903.cms

A 'minor' reason for rejecting RTI query

Neha Shukla, TNN, Nov 27, 2010, 12.39am IST

LUCKNOW: A 9-year-old cannot claim her right to information. Says who?
None other than UP State Information Commission (UPSIC). The order by
the chief information commissioner of UPSIC which questions the right
of a "minor" to seek information under the RTI Act has raised a
debate. The RTI experts have termed it "illegal".

The commission has ordered so in the case concerning Aishwarya Sharma,
a 9-year-old girl. She had written to the CM's office in October, 2009
complaining about the garbage dumping ground in the vicinity of her
school. She had requested the CMO to stop garbage disposal at the
spot. After she got no response, the girl filed an RTI application. It
was then that she was informed by the office that her letter was lost.

The girl filed another RTI application after this. "I asked them who
misplaced my letter", said Aishwarya, a student of Class III in a
city-based school. But she got no answer and had to file a complaint
with the SIC. And in the same matter, the commission ordered that she
cannot directly participate in the proceedings of the RTI Act.

The girl would have to get her appeals and complaints filed through a
custodian or present a proof of her being a major so that she be heard
directly, said an order by Ranjit Singh Pankaj, chief information
commissioner, UP. The said order has already been termed "illegal" by
the RTI experts and activists.

"This order is illegal," said Arvind Kejrival, RTI campaigner. "I can
share several instances where minors, even a third-standard student,
have sought information under RTI in Delhi," he said. There is no
mention in the Act that minors have to get their case represented
through a custodian. The section 3 of the RTI Act clearly mentions,
`subject to provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right
to information.'

The CIC's order said that since the girl is a minor, she does not come
under the definition of a major as defined under the Indian Majority
Act. The proceedings under RTI are quasi-judicial in nature. In such a
situation, no minor can directly get involved in the RTI proceedings,
be it filing of appeals or complaints. Besides, as per Civil Procedure
Code, a minor can file a complaint or appeal only through a custodian.

When contacted, Shailesh Gandhi, information commissioner (IC), CIC,
said, "The Act has been made by the Parliament and the Parliament has
not barred minors from using RTI." The person seeking information
under RTI should be a citizen of India, that is the only condition set
by the Act. The Act does not say that RTI user has to be a major or a
minor. "Even a year-old child can use RTI," said Gandhi, IC in Central
Information Commission, Delhi.

With this, UPSIC may be headed towards setting its own RTI rules.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/A-minor-reason-for-rejecting-RTI-query-/articleshow/6997903.cms

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

" Minors don't have Right to Information " utters U.P. CIC Ranjit Singh Pankaj

" Minors have no Right to information "says Uttar Pradesh CIC

Uttar Pradesh CIC , Ranjit Singh Pankaj denied information to Nine
Year old Lucknow based Aishwarya Sharma on the pretext that she is a
minor .

Aishwarya sent a letter dtd. 26-10-09 to the UP CM by speedpost (
annex. 1 ), available at given link
http://file1.hpage.com/002161/04/bilder/aish_letter_to_cm.jpg

The PIO of CM office denied receipt of the said letter dtd. 26-10-09 (
annex. 2 ) available at given link
http://file1.hpage.com/002161/04/bilder/aish_rti_gh_cmo_reply.jpg

Aishwarya used RTI act and sent letter of section 6 dated 15-03-10 to
the PIO of CM office to search her lost letter .

The PIO of CM office sent letter dtd.08-04-10 ( annex. 3 ) available
at given link
http://file1.hpage.com/002161/04/bilder/aish_ml_pio_reply.jpg

Aggrieved by the above order of PIO dtd.08-04-10 , Aishwarya sent
First Appeal dtd. 26-04-10 U/S 19(1) of RTI act to the Appellate
Authority of CM office . The same was returned in original to
Aishwarya , by Navneet Sehgal the Appellate Authority of CM office (
annex. 4 ). available at given link
http://file1.hpage.com/002161/04/bilder/aish_ml_second_appeal_returned.jpg

The covering letter of returned first appeal ( annex. 5 ) available at
given link
http://file1.hpage.com/002161/04/bilder/aish_ml_second_appeal_returned_cover.jpg

Returning an appeal was gross violation of RTI act 2005 by navneet sehgal .

Aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Authority of CM office ,
Aishwarya moved UPSIC where case no. S1-1460/C-10 got registered and
heard on 06-09-10 by UP CIC R. S. Pankaj. The order ( annex. 6 & 7 )
available at given link
http://file1.hpage.com/002161/04/bilder/s1-1460-c-10_order_dtd_06-09-10_page_1_of_2.jpg

http://file1.hpage.com/002161/04/bilder/s1-1460-c-10_order_dtd_06-09-10_page_2_of_2.jpg

UPSIC dispatched order on 26-10-10 and asked Aishwarya to present
before UPSIC on 23-11-10 but the letter has visible post office date
stamp of 25-11-10 emphasizes that UPSIC had foul play in mind and
wanted to ensure that Aishwarya should not be present in hearing to
press her point.

A perusal of order of UP CIC shows it grossly violates the RTI act 2005.

For reference one can see –

1) section 3 which says "Subject to the provisions of this Act, all
citizens shall have the right to information." Aishwarya is very
much a citizen of INDIA.

2) section 6(1) which says "A person, who desires to obtain any
information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through
electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language of
the area in which the application is being made, accompanying such fee
as may be prescribed, to— ( a) the Central Public Information Officer
or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of the
concerned public authority;(b) the Central Assistant Public
Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as
the case may be,specifying the particulars of the information sought
by him or her:Provided that where such request cannot be made in
writing, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public
Information Officer, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable
assistance to the person making the request orally to reduce the same
in writing."
Aishwarya is a person who sought info under RTI act 2005.
3) section 6 ( 2 ) which reads "An applicant making request for
information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting
the information or any other personal details except those that may be
necessary for contacting him."
It's a folly that UP CIC is asking about age of Aishwarya .
4) section 22 which reads "The provisions of this Act shall have
effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in
the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being
in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other
than this Act. "
means the RTI act 2005 shall have overriding effect over any other
law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by
virtue of any law other than this Act. The UP CIC had denied info to
minor Aishwarya on the pretext of " INDIAN MAJORITY ACT " & " CIVIL
PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 " . As is clear from section 22 of
RTI act , RTI act shall have overriding effect over " INDIAN MAJORITY
ACT " & " CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 " .

if Uttar Pradesh CIC is right or wrong in his decision ? pls. comment.

i strongly feel children do have right to information in india .

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

“ Minors have no Right to information ”says Uttar Pradesh CIC

" Minors have no Right to information "says Uttar Pradesh CIC

Uttar Pradesh CIC , Ranjit Singh Pankaj denied information to Nine
Year old Lucknow based Aishwarya Sharma on the pretext that she is a
minor .

Aishwarya sent a letter dtd. 26-10-09 to the UP CM by speedpost ( annex. 1 )

The PIO of CM office denied receipt of the said letter dtd. 26-10-09 (
annex. 2 )

Aishwarya used RTI act and sent letter of section 6 dated 15-03-10 to
the PIO of CM office to search her lost letter .

The PIO of CM office sent letter dtd.08-04-10 ( annex. 3 )

Aggrieved by the above order of PIO dtd.08-04-10 , Aishwarya sent
First Appeal dtd. 26-04-10 U/S 19(1) of RTI act to the Appellate
Authority of CM office . The same was returned in original to
Aishwarya , by Navneet Sehgal the Appellate Authority of CM office (
annex. 4 ).

The covering letter of returned first appeal ( annex. 5 )

Returning an appeal was gross violation of RTI act 2005 by navneet sehgal .

Aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Authority of CM office ,
Aishwarya moved UPSIC where case no. S1-1460/C-10 got registered and
heard on 06-09-10 by UP CIC R. S. Pankaj. The order ( annex. 6 & & )

UPSIC dispatched order on 26-10-10 and asked Aishwarya to present
before UPSIC on 23-11-10 but the letter has visible post office date
stamp of 25-11-10 emphasizes that UPSIC had foul play in mind and
wanted to ensure that Aishwarya should not be present in hearing to
press her point.

A perusal of order of UP CIC shows it grossly violates the RTI act 2005.

For reference one can see –

1) section 3 which says "Subject to the provisions of this Act, all
citizens shall have the right to information." Aishwarya is very
much a citizen of INDIA.

2) section 6(1) which says "A person, who desires to obtain any
information under this Act, shall make a request in writing or through
electronic means in English or Hindi or in the official language of
the area in which the application is being made, accompanying such fee
as may be prescribed, to— ( a) the Central Public Information Officer
or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, of the
concerned public authority;(b) the Central Assistant Public
Information Officer or State Assistant Public Information Officer, as
the case may be,specifying the particulars of the information sought
by him or her:Provided that where such request cannot be made in
writing, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public
Information Officer, as the case may be, shall render all reasonable
assistance to the person making the request orally to reduce the same
in writing."

Aishwarya is a person who sought info under RTI act 2005.

3) section 6 ( 2 ) which reads "An applicant making request for
information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting
the information or any other personal details except those that may be
necessary for contacting him."

It's a folly that UP CIC is asking about age of Aishwarya .

4) section 22 which reads "The provisions of this Act shall have
effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in
the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being
in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other
than this Act. "

means the RTI act 2005 shall have overriding effect over any other
law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by
virtue of any law other than this Act. The UP CIC had denied info to
minor Aishwarya on the pretext of " INDIAN MAJORITY ACT " & " CIVIL
PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 " . As is clear from section 22 of
RTI act , RTI act shall have overriding effect over " INDIAN MAJORITY
ACT " & " CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE – procedure order 32 "

hence another wrong decision of UP CIC Ranjit Singh Pankaj.
-
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

TOI- UP-jails-bursting-at-the-seams

UP jails bursting at the seams
Neha Shukla, Nov 19, 2010, 05.20am IST

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/UP-jails-bursting-at-the-seams/articleshow/6951504.cms

LUCKNOW: Jails in Uttar Pradesh have a problem of plenty. Such is the
state of overcrowding that most of the prisons have to adjust a number
that is more than double the capacity. According to a response from
the prisons department to an RTI query, the total population at 60
prisons of the state is 83,805 against the authorised capacity of
44,439.

In response to an RTI query by an applicant Urvashi Sharma, the
department of jail administration and reform services has revealed
that the rate of overcrowding in the state prisons is 1.89. As per the
information, in some of the prisons, occupancy was almost double the
sanctioned strength. The prison reforms scheme of the MHA could not be
meeting its purpose in UP.

Not only this, department said it has "nil information" about details
of actions taken by state government in the past five years to
scrutinise status of all prisoners.

The applicant on October 4, 2009 had sent an RTI query to the PIO, the
state's home department, seeking a four-point information. She had
sought information about names of all prisons in UP along with their
designated capacity and actual number of prisoners housed therein.

She also sought prison-wise list containing names of all convicts who
are serving time in prisons despite serving their decreed term of
sentence of courts. She has requested for certified copies of rules,
GOs, jail manuals and government circulars as per which a convict can
be kept in jail beyond his conviction period.

The query also fetched a letter bearing signature of AK Panda, Police
DIG (Jails), Meerut Zone which states that two convicts are serving
prison terms despite completing their sentences decreed by
court.Prisons being a state subject, its management and administration
falls

exclusively in the domain of state governments. States have the
primary role, responsibility and authority to change the current
prison laws, rules and regulations. However, KB Joshi, research
officer, department of jail administration and reform services, sought
more time to provide rest of the information on reforms in state
prisons.

The high occupancy rate in UP jails has always been a concern. A 2004
report, 'Children of Women Prisoners in Jails: A Study in UP',
sponsored by Planning Commission and compiled by Pandit Govind Ballabh
Pant Institute of Studies in Rural Development showed 149.1% occupancy
rate for 61 jails of the state till December 2000. The effective
capacity of the jails was 33,468 and actual population stood at
49,885.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

rti & u p jails

http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/most-jails-overcrowded-in-state-says-rti-plea/593855/

http://www.mynews.in/News/inhumane_and_insensitive_behavior_of_up_jail_authorities_make_jails_hell_for_inmates__N109973.html

Most jails overcrowded in state, says RTI plea

Lucknow Jails in various districts of the state are plagued with the
problem of overcrowding with a total prison population of 83,805
against the authorised capacity of 44,439, an RTI plea has revealed.
Urvashi Sharma, an activist, filed the RTI plea following the National
Human Rights Commission's recent report observing that overcrowding in
jail was a result of "unnecessary and unjustified arrests" coupled
with slow judicial process.

Admitting that the overall overcrowding ratio is 1.89, the information
released by the department of Jail Administration and Reform Services
indicates that in majority of the jails the occupancy is almost double
the sanctioned strength.

According to the status as on December 31, 2009, the worst scenario is
at the Moradabad district jail where around 2,274 prisoners are housed
against the sanctioned strength of only 605. At the time when the
records were released, Moradabad jail housed around 2,080 undertrials
and 194 convicts.

Similar was the plight at Shahjahanpur district jail where 1,791
prisoners were kept against a capacity of 511.

Of the 53 district jails in the state, majority had double the
sanctioned inmates. But the only exception was Mau district jail where
only 485 criminals have been housed as against the capacity of 540.

Interestingly, the Etah district jail, which received the coveted ISO:
9001 (2000) certification last year, has around 1,339 inmates as
against the capacity of 607 prisoners.

In the central jails, which are supposed to admit lifers and prisoners
who are serving long sentences, the occupancy ratio was no better. In
the five central jails of the state as many as 13,298 criminals were
lodged against the capacity of 7,037. While Naini, Varanasi, Fatehgarh
and Agra Central jail records showed almost double the occupancy,
Bareily Central Jail had more than two criminals lodged against one.

The picture at special jails is far better than that of Central or
district jails. In Model Jail, only 371 prisoners were housed against
a capacity of 600 while in Nari Bandi Niketan, 143 women convicts were
lodged as against the sanctioned strength of 420. Overall, 2,759 women
were shown to be lodged in different jails.

At Kishore Sadan, Bareily, the only jail in Uttar Pradesh for children
with a capacity of 188, only six children were housed as on December
31, 2009.

In the other jails, however, 96 children were shown to be living with
women who were convicted. Also, as many as 182 foreigners were also
shown to be lodged in different jails of the state.

The reply under the RTI failed to answer another important question
raised in the plea concerning the details of convicts serving jail
terms despite completing their sentences decreed by court.

In a reply filed by K B Joshi, Research Officer, department of Jail
Administration and Reform Services, the department asked for more time
on the pretext of collecting the relevant data.

"I have filed the first appeal requesting to provide the data as early
as possible," said Urvashi Sharma.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mynews.in/News/inhumane_and_insensitive_behavior_of_up_jail_authorities_make_jails_hell_for_inmates__N109973.html

Inhumane & insensitive behavior of UP jail authorities make jails hell
for inmates

Convicts serving jail terms despite completing their sentences
decreed by court in U.P. , Jail authorities admit no action to
scrutinized the status of the prisoners in last five years.

RTI filed by Member of Lucknow based Social organization "
YAISHWARYAJ " revealed that the overcrowding in jails is the result
of "unnecessary and unjustified arrests" coupled with slow judicial
process. The RTI petition dated 04-10-09 was sent to Home Department
of Uttar Pradesh Government. RTI reply by the department of Jail
Administration and Reform Services revealed that Uttar Pradesh Jails
are overcrowded with a total prison population of 83,805 against the
authorized capacity of 44,439 means a overcrowding ratio of 1.89 .
The information released also indicated that in majority of the jails
the occupancy was almost double the sanctioned strength.

On one of the other points Rajendra Prasad , The PIO of Jail
Administration and Reform Services sent information annexing a letter
of M.L. Prakash , ADG Jail Administration and Reform Services which
shows the inhumane and insensitive approach of the concerned
authorities towards the jail-inmates .

Letter of M.L. Prakash , ADG Jail Administration and Reform Services
has one letter of A.K.Panda ,Police D.I.G. ( Jails ) – Meerut Zone as
a annexure which states that two convicts were serving jail terms
despite completing their sentences decreed by court .

" This is highly inhumane & insensitive behavior of jail authorities
of U. P. and gross violation of Human Rights by U. P. Jail
authorities with the state being a mute spectator. We are writing to
National Human Rights Commission to take action against the
defaulters officials " said Usha , one of the members .

This is even more painful that RTI reply of M.L.Prakash ADG Jail
Administration and Reforms states " NIL INFORMATION " against the
required info that reads "Certified copies containing details of
actions taken by state government in last five years to scrutinized
the status of all the prisoners jailed in all the jails of Uttar
Pradesh , "

" This is a shameful paradox where the department meant to bring
reforms in jails has done NOTHING even to scrutinized the status of
all the prisoners , not to say of any other reforms , in last full
five years so our group " YAISHWARYAJ " shall send memorandum to CM
and Governor of Uttar Pradesh to take action and ensure that at least
the department should prove some worth of its name or the Government
should delete the words " administration and reforms " from this
department's name " said Ram Prakash .

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

RTI answer : Convicts serving jail terms despite completing their sentences decreed by court & no action by authorities to scrutinized the status of the prisoners in last five years.

RTI answer : Convicts serving jail terms despite completing their
sentences decreed by court & no action by authorities to scrutinized
the status of the prisoners in last five years.
======================================================================================================================================
I filed a RTI plea to check my viewpoint that overcrowding in jail
was a result of "unnecessary and unjustified arrests" coupled with
slow judicial process. The RTI petition dated 04-10-09 is available at
given link –
http://aishwaryaj.hpage.com/rti_petition_re_u_p_jails_to_home_04oct09_27384349.html
There was the problem of overcrowding with a total prison population
of 83,805 against the authorized capacity of 44,439, partial reply by
the department of Jail Administration and Reform Services to my RTI
petition revealed that the overall overcrowding ratio was 1.89, the
information released also indicated that in majority of the jails the
occupancy was almost double the sanctioned strength. K B Joshi,
Research Officer, department of Jail Administration and Reform
Services department asked for more time on the pretext of collecting
the relevant data to furnish rest of the info.
Subsequently I filed first appeal on 15-11-09 followed by the second
appeal in UPSIC on 23-12-09 against receipt no. 62491 . Case no.
S1-38/A/09 got registered in UPSIC and was heard by UPCIC Ranjit Singh
Pankaj on 12-01-10 & 27-04-10 . I was absent in all hearings . I filed
a rejoinder / objection letter on 31-05-10 which is available at given
link-
http://aishwaryaj.hpage.com/rejoinder_case_s1_38_a_09_dtd_31_may_10_27118766.html
On 01-11-10 , Rajendra Prasad , The PIO of Jail Administration and
Reform Services again sent partial info vide letter no. 29952 / ja.
Su. Cell-801 which is available at given link –
http://file1.hpage.com/000223/57/bilder/pio_reply_01nov10_re_rejoinder31may10.jpg
With abovementioned letter , the PIO has annexed letter dated 26-10-10
issued under signature of M.L. Prakash , ADG Jail Administration and
Reform Services which is available at given link –
http://file1.hpage.com/000223/57/bilder/adg_jail_reply_26oc10t_re_rti_04oct09.jpg
Letter of M.L. Prakash , ADG Jail Administration and Reform Services
has one letter no. 3138/07(62)/2010 dated 15 October 2010 bearing
signature of A.K.Panda ,Police D.I.G. ( Jails ) – Meerut Zone as a
annexure which states that two convicts were serving jail terms
despite completing their sentences decreed by court . This is highly
inhumane & insensitive behavior of jail authorities of U. P. and
gross violation of Human Rights by U. P. Jail authorities with the
state being a mute spectator. I am writing to NHRC to take action
against the defaulters officials. The letter is available at given
link –
http://file1.hpage.com/000223/57/bilder/annexure_to_adg_jail_reply_26oct10_refer_pt._1.jpg
This is even more painful to see that letter no. 3138/07(62)/2010
dated 15 October 2010 of M.L.Prakash ADG Jail Administration and
Reforms has flatly written " NIL INFORMATION " against point no. 4 of
my RTI plea which was humane-centric reading "Certified copies
containing details of actions taken by state government in last five
years to scrutinized the status of all the prisoners jailed in all
the jails of Uttar Pradesh , " This is a shameful paradox where the
department meant to bring reforms in jails has done NOTHING even to
scrutinized the status of all the prisoners , not to say of other
things in last full five years. I am writing to CM and Governor to
take action and ensure that at least the department should prove some
worth of its name or delete the words " administration and reforms "
from the department's name.
--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

'Right to Be Forgotten'

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704658204575610771677242174.html

Forget any 'Right to Be Forgotten' Don't count on government to censor
information about you online.

The stakes keep rising in the debate over online privacy. Last week,
the Obama administration floated the idea of a privacy czar to
regulate the Internet, and the European Union even concocted a new
"right to be forgotten" online.

The proposed European legislation would give people the right, any
time, to have all of their personal information deleted online.
Regulators say that in an era of Facebook and Google, "People should
have the 'right to be forgotten' when their data is no longer needed
or they want their data to be deleted." The proposal, which did not
explain how this could be done in practice, includes potential
criminal sanctions.

Privacy viewed in isolation looks more like a right than it does when
seen in context. Any regulation to keep personal information
confidential quickly runs up against other rights, such as free
speech, and many privileges, from free Web search to free email.

There are real trade-offs between privacy and speech. Consider the
case of German murderer Wolfgang Werle, who does not think his name
should be used. In 1990, he and his half brother killed German actor
Walter Sedlmayr. They spent 15 years in jail. German law protects
criminals who have served their time, including from references to
their crimes.

Last year, Werle's lawyers sent a cease-and-desist letter to
Wikipedia, citing German law, demanding the online encyclopedia remove
the names of the murderers. They even asked for compensation for
emotional harm, saying, "His rehabilitation and his future life
outside the prison system is severely impacted by your unwillingness
to anonymize any articles dealing with the murder of Mr. Sedlmayr with
regard to our client's involvement."

.Censorship requires government limits on speech, at odds with the
open ethos of the Web. It's also not clear how a right to be forgotten
could be enforced. If someone writes facts about himself on Facebook
that he later regrets, do we really want the government punishing
those who use the information?

UCLA law Prof. Eugene Volokh has explained why speech and privacy are
often at odds. "The difficulty is that the right to information
privacy—the right to control other people's communication of
personally identifiable information about you—is a right to have the
government stop people from speaking about you," he wrote in a law
review article in 2000.

Indeed, there's a good argument that "a 'right to be forgotten' is not
really a 'privacy' right in the first place," says Adam Thierer,
president of the Progress and Freedom Foundation. "A privacy right
should only concern information that is actually private. What a
'right to be forgotten' does is try to take information that is, by
default, public information, and pretend that it's private."

There are also concerns about how information is collected for
advertising. A Wall Street Journal series, "What They Know," has shown
that many online companies don't even know how much tracking software
they use. Better disclosure would require better monitoring by
websites. When used correctly, these systems benignly aggregate
information about behavior online so that advertisers can target the
right people with the right products.

Many people seem happy to make the trade-off in favor of sharing more
about themselves in exchange for services and convenience. On Friday,
when news broke of potential new regulations in the U.S., the Journal
conducted an online poll asking, "Should the Obama administration
appoint a watchdog for online privacy?" Some 85% of respondents said
no.

As Brussels and Washington were busily proposing new regulations last
week, two of the biggest companies were duking it out over consumer
privacy, a new battlefield for competition. Google tried to stop
Facebook from letting users automatically import their address and
other contact details from their Gmail accounts, arguing that the
social-networking site didn't have a way for users to get the data out
again.

When users tried to import their contacts to Facebook, a message from
Gmail popped up saying, "Hold on a second. Are you super sure you want
to import your contact information for your friends into a service
that won't let you get it out?" The warning adds, "We think this is an
important thing for you to know before you import your data there.
Although we strongly disagree with this data protectionism, the choice
is yours. Because, after all, you should have control over your data."

One of the virtues of competitive markets is that companies vie for
customers over everything from services to privacy protections.
Regulators have no reason to dictate one right answer to these
balancing acts among interests that consumers are fully capable of
making for themselves.
--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

RTI answer : Convicts serving jail terms despite completing their sentences decreed by court & no action by authorities to scrutinized the status of the prisoners in last five years.

RTI reply reveals : Convicts  serving jail terms despite completing their sentences decreed by court & no action by authorities to scrutinized the  status of the  prisoners in last five years. =============================================== I filed a RTI plea to check my viewpoint that  overcrowding in jail was a result of "unnecessary and unjustified arrests" coupled with slow judicial process. The RTI petition dated 04-10-09 is available at given link – http://aishwaryaj.hpage.com/rti_petition_re_u_p_jails_to_home_04oct09_27384349.html There was the problem of overcrowding with a total prison population of 83,805 against the authorized capacity of 44,439, partial reply by the department of Jail Administration and Reform Services to my RTI petition revealed that the overall overcrowding ratio was 1.89, the information released also indicated that in majority of the jails the occupancy was almost double the sanctioned strength. K B Joshi, Research Officer, department of Jail Administration and Reform Services department asked for more time on the pretext of collecting the relevant data to furnish rest of the info. Subsequently I filed first appeal on 15-11-09 followed by the second appeal in UPSIC on 23-12-09 against receipt no. 62491 . Case no. S1-38/A/09 got registered in UPSIC and was heard by UPCIC Ranjit Singh Pankaj on 12-01-10 & 27-04-10 . I was absent in all hearings . I filed a rejoinder / objection letter on 31-05-10 which is available at given link- http://aishwaryaj.hpage.com/rejoinder_case_s1_38_a_09_dtd_31_may_10_27118766.html On 01-11-10 , Rajendra Prasad , The PIO of  Jail Administration and Reform Services again sent partial info vide letter no. 29952 / ja. Su. Cell-801 which is available at given link – http://file1.hpage.com/000223/57/bilder/pio_reply_01nov10_re_rejoinder31may10.jpg With abovementioned letter , the PIO has annexed letter dated 26-10-10 issued under signature of M.L. Prakash  , ADG Jail Administration and Reform Services which is available at given link – http://file1.hpage.com/000223/57/bilder/adg_jail_reply_26oc10t_re_rti_04oct09.jpg Letter of M.L. Prakash  , ADG Jail Administration and Reform Services has one  letter no. 3138/07(62)/2010 dated 15 October 2010 bearing signature of A.K.Panda ,Police D.I.G. ( Jails ) – Meerut Zone as a annexure which states that two convicts were serving jail terms despite completing their sentences decreed by court . This is highly inhumane & insensitive behavior of jail authorities  of U. P. and  gross violation of Human Rights by U. P. Jail authorities with the state being a mute spectator. I am writing to NHRC to take action against the defaulters officials. The letter is available at given link – http://file1.hpage.com/000223/57/bilder/annexure_to_adg_jail_reply_26oct10_refer_pt._1.jpg This is even more painful to see that letter   no. 3138/07(62)/2010 dated 15 October 2010 of M.L.Prakash  ADG Jail Administration and Reforms has flatly written " NIL INFORMATION " against point no. 4 of my RTI plea which was humane-centric reading "Certified copies containing details of actions taken by state government in last five years to scrutinized the  status of all the  prisoners jailed in all the jails of Uttar Pradesh , " This is a shameful paradox where the department meant to bring reforms in jails has done NOTHING even to scrutinized the  status of all the  prisoners , not to say of other things in last full five years. I am writing to CM and Governor to take action and ensure that at least the department should prove some worth of its name or delete the words " administration and reforms " from the department's name.   Regards   Urvashi Sharma Mobile - 9369613513   -- Urvashi Sharma RTI Helpmail( Web Based ) aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com Mobile Rti Helpline 8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Re: Memorandum letter : Domestic maids/helps & Rag-Pickers should be within the ambit of PWSH Bill 2010

On 11/6/10, urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com> wrote:
> by e-mail
>
> To,
> The Hon'ble Prime Minister Dr. Man Mohan Singh
> Government of India , South Block
> New Delhi-110011
>
> With copy for necessary action to
> The Hon'ble President Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil
> Rashtrapati Bhavan , New Delhi – 110011
>
> Respected Sir / Madam ,
>
> I wish to bring to your notice that at first I am delighted that the
> Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at the Work Place Bill
> 2010 , that will place victims of sexual harassment at the workplace
> almost at par with rape victims or juvenile delinquents , has been
> cleared by the Union cabinet, in which a key feature is acknowledgment
> of the stigma and social discomfort which filing a case generates for
> a victim. This is good that acknowledging victims' need for absolute
> confidentiality, the bill provides for " no information on the
> complainant or the complaint be made known to the media public in any
> manner".
> Though this would overpower the provisions of the Right to Information
> Act 2005, forbidding investigating officials, government officers and
> anyone else with access to the relevant information to disclose any of
> it , but we welcome this move of the government in the larger interest
> of society. This is also good that to control fake complaints , for
> the very first time , the bill provides for punishment under service
> rules for any person giving a false complaint or false evidence .
>
> Though the bill provides protection to women who are employed and
> also to any woman who enters the workplace as a client, customer,
> apprentice, daily wage worker or in ad hoc capacity , Students,
> research scholars in colleges or university and patients in hospitals
> , the bill has left the most vulnerable ( to sexual harassment )
> section of the society i.e. the domestic maids , who are not covered
> by the bill and this is the most negative aspect of the bill that
> takes all the positives of the bill away from it.
>
> This is in utter injustice that the government wants to leave that
> section of women workers who constitutes a major chunk of
> working-women and are amongst the most exploited ones . Studies have
> shown that they are extremely vulnerable to sexual harassment. In this
> Context , the Bill has extremely limited scope and it is very
> condemnable that the government has not taken this marginalized
> section of the society which constitutes the largest section of
> working-women though working in an unorganized sector.
>
> The Bill shall now be presented in Parliament. I demand that before
> tabling the bill in the parliament , necessary provisions be made to
> bring domestic maids/helps and Rag-pickers within the ambit of the
> "Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at the Work Place Bill
> 2010 " .
>
> Regards;
>
> Date : 06-11-10
>
> Yours truly,
> Urvashi sharma
> (Social Worker )
> F 2376 rajajipuram
> Lucknow - 226017
> mobile 8081898081
>

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Nuclear Risk

Hi rtiact2005india4u.aishwaryaj,

I have just signed a petition to put Indian interests above the interests of foreign nuclear corporations. Please see the mail below and sign the petition at http://www.greenpeace.org/india/en/Tell-manmohan-singh-to-stop-import-of-untested-nuclear-reactors/

Regards,

---

Last week over 600 people were arrested for standing up for their rights to live and work in safe surroundings. Over 2320 acres of land are being acquired by the NPCIL(Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd) to build 6 mega nuclear reactors in Ratnagiri district. The public protests have been suppressed using police violence and false charges^[1].

The NPCIL is planning to import expensive and unsafe nuclear reactors from French company, Areva. US and European nuclear regulators have identified severe flaws in the reactor and they have not approved the design.^[2]

Over 2000 people will lose their land and over 10,000 people will have their health and livelihood affected due to this plant. Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh has the power to stop the import of dangerous nuclear reactors and listen to the concerns of the local people.

Can you write a letter to Dr. Manmohan Singh asking him to put the interests of Indian people above the interests of foreign nuclear companies.

http://www.greenpeace.org/india/en/Tell-manmohan-singh-to-stop-import-of-untested-nuclear-reactors/

Most of the people around the region have refused the compensation offered by the goverment. Showing their opposition to the nuclear power plant, over 3000 people voluntarily risked jail and they have been joined by prominent figures such as former High Court judge B. G. Kolse-Patil, Admiral L. Ramdas and retired Supreme Court Judge P. B. Samant.

The Indian government is once again putting the profits of foreign companies above the interests of it's own people. Instead of putting people at risk we can provide safe electricity at a cheaper cost^[3] and much faster^[4] with decentralised Renewable Energy.

Write to Dr. Manmohan Singh now and put the safety of Indians first.

http://www.greenpeace.org/india/en/Tell-manmohan-singh-to-stop-import-of-untested-nuclear-reactors/

Thanks a billion!


Karuna Raina
Greenpeace India

---

Sources: 1. Nuke power project: 3000 villagers court arrest in Ratnagiri, The Times of India, Oct 29, 2010http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Nuke-power-project-3000-villagers-court-arrest-in-Ratnagiri/articleshow/6836138.cms

2. Areva EPR reactor computers still need work-NRC, Reuters, July 26, 2010 http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKN2613361120100726

3. Nuclear power could cost trillions over renewables Scientific American, June 19, 2009http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=nuclear-power-could-cost-trillions-2009-06-19

4. India's nuclear chimera, Down to Earth, Aug 15, 2010, http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/1652 rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com

You are receiving this email because someone you know sent it to you from the Greenpeace site. Greenpeace retains no information about individuals contacted through its site, and will not send you further messages without your consent -- although your friends could, of course, send you another message.

RTI reveals Human Right’s Violation in U. P. Jails

RTI reveals Human Right's Violation in U. P. Jails

RTI reveals that Two Bangladesis were not freed from Uttar Pradesh
jail despite completing their decreed term of sentence of hon'ble
court . The matter is related to District jail Ghaziabad.

While answering my RTI petition , Sri Rajendra Prasad ,The PIO ( HQ –
Jail Administration of Uttar Pradesh ) has revealed this vide his
letter no. 29952 dtd. 01-11-10.

-
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

why leave domestic maids/helps and rag-pickers out of PWSH Bill 2010 ;asks social activists

http://www.merinews.com/article/bring-domestic-maids-within-the-ambit-of-pwsh-bill-2010/15834520.shtml

Bring domestic maids within the ambit of PWSH Bill 2010

Before tabling the bill in the parliament , necessary provisions
should be be made to bring domestic maids/helps and rag-pickers within
the ambit of the 'Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at the
Work Place Bill 2010'.

CJ: urvashi sharma Mon, Nov 08, 2010 12:50:39 IST

BEFORE TABLING the 'Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at
the Work Place Bill 2010' in the parliament, necessary provisions
should be made to bring domestic maids/helps and rag-pickers within
the ambit of the 'Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at the
Work Place Bill 2010'.
An online petition and memorandum submitted by activists asserts that
though the bill provides protection to women, who are employed and
also to any woman, who enters the workplace; it has left the most
vulnerable (to sexual harassment) section of the society ie, the
domestic maids, who are not covered by the bill and this is the most
negative aspect of the bill that takes all the positives points of the
bill away from it.

"This is in utter injustice that the government wants to leave that
section of women workers who constitutes a major chunk of
working-women and are amongst the most exploited ones. Studies have
shown that they are extremely vulnerable to sexual harassment. In this
context, the bill has extremely limited scope and it is very
condemnable that the government has not taken this marginalised
section of the society which constitutes the largest section of
working-women though working in an unorganised sector," said activist
Usha of social group Yaishwaryaj.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

How far "PID PPMD Bill 2010 " shall help the whistleblowers when the goons are the HODs

please go thru the times of india news and decide -

urvashi

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Prasar-Bharati-CEO-going-after-those-who-spoke-out/articleshow/6868737.cms

Prasar Bharati CEO going after those who spoke out?

Himanshi Dhawan, TNN, Nov 4, 2010, 03.09am IST

NEW DELHI: The Central Vigilance Commission might be keen on
questioning Prasar Bharati CEO B S Lalli — in the thick of a storm
over a controversial Commonwealth Games broadcast deal with UK firm
SIS Live — but he is bent on interrogating officials who were spoken
to by the anti-corruption watchdog.

While the government prepares to debate the whistleblowers bill in
Parliament this month, officials in Doordarshan and All India Radio
who tendered views and information to the CVC that questioned Lalli's
decisions are finding themselves being quizzed by
the CEO.

Lalli has shot off letters to Prasar Bharati board members and
officials in DD and AIR demanding explanations on issues the CVC has
red-flagged and were part of testimonials against him.

Sources said the tone of the letters was "bullying" and "nasty" and
the officials — who went before the CVC— fear retributive action from
Lalli who continues to be powerful and enjoys support of a faction in
the public broadcaster.

When contacted, Lalli said he had approached only 5-6 senior
officials. "I was asked to give comments on the CVC report on alleged
irregularities in PB. In connection therewith, five officers from both
DD and AIR who had handled the concerned matters have been asked to
give their comments. On most matters, comments based on record have
been received," he said.

He, however, dismissed the fact that some officials feared retributive action.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Fwd: Save cultural values foundation - "shall self-impose "Right To Information" and every singly penny maybe examined by anyone"

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: ashish kumar srivastava
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 21:24:35 -0700
Subject: Save cultural values foundation
To: urvashi sharma
<rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com,.........................................
*

Dear All,

Please find the attachments with this mail. We have registered Save Cultural
Values Foundation for our collective objective to endorse civic sense, and
transparency in Government and in Society both. To earn our dreams in
certainty we hereby declare that we will self-impose "Right To Information" ,
and all affairs or decisions or course of actions and every singly penny may
be examined by anyone. All members of this organization are
already contributing in social development sector with their gravity and
earnestness, and this conglomerate is meant to get them on a single
platform. SCVF welcomes you all to be part of this organisation and
contribute to apprehend these subjects. Every suggestion and submission and
question will be our strength and guiding force. We are looking for your
blessings and cooperation.
***
*Warm Regards,
Ashish K. Srivastava
Social Activist,
SAVE CULTURAL VALUE FOUNDATION.*
*Asha Parivar, NAPM,*
*Al-Khair Credit Cooperative Society
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh,
India
Cell. No.
+91-9198864150
+91-9473896465
*

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Concerns for Social responsibilities : Age is no bar for "the little fairy" Aishwarya from Lucknow

please read full story in dainik jagran lucknow edition suppliment "
SANGINI " page 2 of 4 .

Links -

http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/epaper/index.php?location=37&edition=2010-11-06&type=supp&pageno=2

thanks

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Memorandum letter : Domestic maids/helps & Rag-Pickers should be within the ambit of PWSH Bill 2010

by e-mail

To,
The Hon'ble Prime Minister Dr. Man Mohan Singh
Government of India , South Block
New Delhi-110011

With copy for necessary action to
The Hon'ble President Smt. Pratibha Devisingh Patil
Rashtrapati Bhavan , New Delhi – 110011

Respected Sir / Madam ,

I wish to bring to your notice that at first I am delighted that the
Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at the Work Place Bill
2010 , that will place victims of sexual harassment at the workplace
almost at par with rape victims or juvenile delinquents , has been
cleared by the Union cabinet, in which a key feature is acknowledgment
of the stigma and social discomfort which filing a case generates for
a victim. This is good that acknowledging victims' need for absolute
confidentiality, the bill provides for " no information on the
complainant or the complaint be made known to the media public in any
manner".
Though this would overpower the provisions of the Right to Information
Act 2005, forbidding investigating officials, government officers and
anyone else with access to the relevant information to disclose any of
it , but we welcome this move of the government in the larger interest
of society. This is also good that to control fake complaints , for
the very first time , the bill provides for punishment under service
rules for any person giving a false complaint or false evidence .

Though the bill provides protection to women who are employed and
also to any woman who enters the workplace as a client, customer,
apprentice, daily wage worker or in ad hoc capacity , Students,
research scholars in colleges or university and patients in hospitals
, the bill has left the most vulnerable ( to sexual harassment )
section of the society i.e. the domestic maids , who are not covered
by the bill and this is the most negative aspect of the bill that
takes all the positives of the bill away from it.

This is in utter injustice that the government wants to leave that
section of women workers who constitutes a major chunk of
working-women and are amongst the most exploited ones . Studies have
shown that they are extremely vulnerable to sexual harassment. In this
Context , the Bill has extremely limited scope and it is very
condemnable that the government has not taken this marginalized
section of the society which constitutes the largest section of
working-women though working in an unorganized sector.

The Bill shall now be presented in Parliament. I demand that before
tabling the bill in the parliament , necessary provisions be made to
bring domestic maids/helps and Rag-pickers within the ambit of the
"Protection of Women Against Sexual Harassment at the Work Place Bill
2010 " .

Regards;

Date : 06-11-10

Yours truly,
Urvashi sharma
(Social Worker )
F 2376 rajajipuram
Lucknow - 226017
mobile 8081898081

Sign & Circulate the petition to "Keep Domestic maids/helps within the ambit of PWSH Bill" & show that you really care

Sign & Circulate the petition to "Keep Domestic maids/helps within the
ambit of PWSH Bill" & show that you really care. the link is -

http://www.petitiononline.com/suryalko/petition.html

regards

urvashi sharma
9369613513

INDIAN GOVERNMENT INTRODUCED ONLINE JUST 4U(To Make Things Easy) -- Important Info.

thanks.

really the information.

urvashi

On 11/5/10, M K Singhal <mk.singhal@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>
>
>
> Indian Government Online!! - Really Marvelous Effort
> Obtain:
> 1. Birth Certificate < http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=1>
> .
> 2. Caste Certificate < http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=4>
> .
> 3. Tribe Certificate <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=8> .
>
> 4. Domicile Certificate <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=5> .
>
> 5. Driving Licence < http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=6> .
> 6. Marriage Certificate <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=3> .
>
> 7. Death Certificate < http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=2>
> .
> Apply for:
> 1. PAN Card <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=15> .
>
> 2. TAN Card <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=3> .
>
> 3. Ration Card < http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=7> .
> 4. Passport <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=2 > .
>
> 5. Inclusion of name in the Electoral Rolls <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=10> .
>
> Register:
> 1. Land/Property < http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=9> .
> 2. Vehicle < http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=13> .
> 3. With State Employment Exchange <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/howdoi.php?service=12> .
>
> 4. As Employer <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=17> .
>
> 5. Company <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=19> .
>
> 6. .IN Domain <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=18> .
>
> 7. GOV.IN Domain <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=25> .
>
>
> Check/Track:
> 1. Waiting list status for Central Government Housing <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=9> .
>
> 2. Status of Stolen Vehicles <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=1> .
>
> 3. Land Records < http://www.india.gov.in/landrecords/index.php> .
> 4. Cause list of Indian Courts <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=7> .
>
> 5. Court Judgments (JUDIS ) <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=24> .
>
> 6. Daily Court Orders/Case Status <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=21> .
>
> 7. Acts of Indian Parliament <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=13> .
>
> 8. Exam Results <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=16> .
>
> 9. Speed Post Status <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=10> .
>
> 10. Agricultural Market Prices Online <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=6> .
>
> Book/File/Lodge:
> 1. Train Tickets Online <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=5> .
>
> 2. Air Tickets Online <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=4> .
>
> 3. Income Tax Returns <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=12> .
>
> 4. Complaint with Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=14> .
>
> Contribute to:
> 1. Prime Minister's Relief Fund <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=11> .
>
> Others:
> 1. Send Letters Electronically <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/otherservice_details.php?service=20> .
>
> Recently Added Online Services
> 1. Tamil Nadu: Online application of marriage certificate for persons
> having
> registered their marriages <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2691> .
>
> 2. Tamil Nadu: Online District wise soil Details of Tamil Nadu <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2693> .
>
> 3. Tamil Nadu: View Water shed Atlas of Tamil Nadu <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2694> .
>
> 4. Tamil Nadu: E-Pension District Treasury Tirunelveli <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2695> .
>
> 5. Meghalaya: Search Electoral Roll Online by Name (2008) <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2697> .
>
> 6. Meghalaya: Search Electoral Roll Online by EPIC number (2008) <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2698> .
>
> 7. Meghalaya: Search Electoral Roll Online by House number (2008) <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2699> .
>
> 8. Himachal Pradesh: Revised Pay and Arrears Calculator-Fifth Pay <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2702> .
>
> 9. Meghalaya: Search Electoral Roll Online by Part number (2008) <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2700> .
>
> 10. Andhra Pradesh: Online Motor Driving School Information <
> http://www.india.gov.in/howdo/onlineservice_detail.php?service=2705> .
>
> Global Navigation
> 1. Citizens < http://www.india.gov.in/citizen.php> .
> 2. Business (External website that opens in a new window) <
> http://business.gov.in/> .
>
> 3. Overseas < http://www.india.gov.in/overseas.php> .
> 4. Government < http://www.india.gov.in/govt.php> .
> 5. Know India < http://www.india.gov.in/knowindia.php> .
> 6. Sectors < http://www.india.gov.in/sector.php> .
> 7. Directories < http://www.india.gov.in/directories.php> .
> 8. Documents < http://www.india.gov.in/documents.php> .
> 9. Forms < http://www.india.gov.in/forms/forms.php> .
> 10. Acts < http://www.india.gov.in/govt/acts.php> .
> 11. Rules < http://www.india.gov.in/govt/rules.php> .
> 12. Schemes < http://www.india.gov.in/govt/schemes.php> .
> 13. Tenders < http://www.india.gov.in/tenders.php> .
> 14. Home < http://www.india.gov.in/defaultphp> .
> 15. About the Portal < http://www.india.gov.in/abouttheportal.php> .
> 16. Site Map < http://www.india.gov.in/sitemap.php> .
> 17. Link to Us < http://www.india.gov.in/linktous.php> .
> 18. Suggest to a Friend < http://www.india.gov.in/suggest/suggest.php> .
> 19. Help < http://www.india.gov.in/help.php> .
> 20. Terms of Use < http://www.india.gov.in/termscondtions.php> .
> 21. Feedback < http://www.india.gov.in/feedback.php> .
> 22. Contact Us < http://www.india.gov.in/contactus.php> .
> 23. Accessibility Statement <
> http://www.india.gov.in/accessibilitystatement.php>
>
>

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )