Monday 30 May, 2011

Since these are "the persons of eminence " so is UPSIC " the place of disappointment and disgrace " to the info-seekers

Dear all ,

Now n then, we all hear about almost defunct Uttar Pradesh State
Information Commission. as per YAISHWARYAJ team , the main reason of
inefficient functioning of UPSIC is the team of information
commisioners , many of which lack even the normal IQ to understnd the
cases being put before them .

Since sycophants have managed to become persons of eminence , the
results are before the world.

here we are giving you the five of the resumes as uploaded by UPSIC on
its website . Please go through and share with us as if there is any
bottomline of political selfishness.?
==================================================================

1- Sri Sunil Kumar Chaudhary

http://upsic.up.nic.in/SKCHAUDHRYCV.html

श्री सुनील कुमार चौधरी
राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त

शैक्षिक अभिलेख एवं कार्य अनुभव

नाम
श्री सुनील कुमार चौधरी

पिता का नाम
श्री वी0एस0 चौधरी

जन्‍म तिथि
22.10.1968

जन्‍म स्‍थान बड़ौत, जिला बागपत।

पता
टप्‍/9 मंत्री आवास, विभूतिखण्‍ड, गोमती नगर, लखनऊ ।

शिक्षा
स्‍नातक लखनऊ विश्‍वविद्यालय, लखनऊ (1990)

एल0एल0बी0, लखनऊ विश्‍वविद्यालय, लखनऊ (1993)

कार्य अनुभव
1


दिनांक 13.07.2007 को शपथ ग्रहण करके राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त के रूप में
कार्यभार ग्रहण किया।

2
1994 से माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय, लखनऊ में अधिवक्‍ता। अधिवक्‍ता के तौर
पर कई निगमों के स्‍थाई अधिवक्‍ता के रूप में कार्य किया एवं इसके
अतिरिक्‍त शासकीय अधिवक्‍ता, उ0प्र0 एवं स्‍थाई अधिवक्‍ता, उ0प्र0 सरकार
के रूप में माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय लखनऊ खण्‍डपीठ, लखनऊ में भी कार्य
किया है।


2- Sri Subhash Chandra Pandey

http://upsic.up.nic.in/SCPANDEYCV.html

श्री सुभाष चन्‍द्र पाण्‍डेय
राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त

शैक्षिक अभिलेख एवं कार्य अनुभव

नाम
श्री सुभाष चन्‍द्र पाण्‍डेय

पिता का नाम
श्री आर0बी0 पाण्‍डेय

जन्‍म तिथि
05.08.1964

जन्‍म स्‍थान शाहपुर, जिला सुल्‍तानपुर
पता
24 वी0आई मंत्री आवास, विभूतिखण्‍ड, गोमती नगर, लखनऊ

शिक्षा
स्‍नातक, इलाहाबाद विश्‍वविद्यालय, इलाहाबाद

एल0एल0बी0, इलाहाबाद विश्‍वविद्यालय, इलाहाबाद

पंजीकरण
उ0प्र0 बार काउन्सिल में 1992 में अधिवक्‍ता के रूप में

कार्य अनुभव
1


दिनांक 13.07.2007 को शपथ ग्रहण करके राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त के रूप में
कार्यभार ग्रहण किया।

2
15 वर्ष का माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय में अधिवक्‍ता के तौर पर कार्य का अनुभव।

3
स्‍थाई अधिवक्‍ता, उ0प्र0 माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय लखनऊ (उ0प्र0 सरकार)
में भी कार्य करने का अनुभव प्राप्‍त है।

3- Sri Ram Saran Awasthi

http://upsic.up.nic.in/RSAWASTHICV.html

श्री राम सरन अवस्‍थी
राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त

शैक्षिक अभिलेख एवं कार्य अनुभव

नाम
श्री राम सरन अवस्‍थी

पिता का नाम
श्री वासुदेव अव‍स्‍थी

जन्‍म तिथि
05.07.1969

जन्‍म स्‍थान ग्राम- खेरा, पोस्‍ट- सराय रावत, तहसील- हैदरगढ़, जिला- बाराबंकी।

पता
8/वी0आई0 मंत्री आवास, विभुतिखण्‍ड, गोमती नगर, लखनऊ।

शिक्षा
स्‍नातक, लखनऊ विश्‍वविद्यालय, लखनऊ ।

एल0एल0बी0, लखनऊ विश्‍वविद्यालय, लखनऊ।

पंजीकरण
उ0प्र0 बार काउन्सिल में 1996 में अधिवक्‍ता के रूप में

कार्य अनुभव
1


दिनांक 13.07.2007 को शपथ ग्रहण करके राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त के रूप में
कार्यभार ग्रहण किया।

2
अतिरिक्‍त शासकीय अधिवक्‍ता,(उ0प्र0 सरकार) माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय लखनऊ
खण्‍डपीठ, लखनऊ ।

3
अगस्‍त, 96 से जुलाई 07 तक माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय में अधिवक्‍ता के तौर
पर कार्य का अनुभव।

4- Sri Brajesh Kumar Mishra

http://upsic.up.nic.in/BKMISHRACV.html

श्री बृजेश कुमार मिश्र
राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त

शैक्षिक अभिलेख एवं कार्य अनुभव

नाम
श्री बृजेश कुमार मिश्र

पिता का नाम
श्री अमर नाथ मिश्र

जन्‍म तिथि
01.01.1976

जन्‍म स्‍थान जिला मऊ।

पता
616, सेक्‍टर-3, उदयन-1 एल्डिकों कालोनी, जेल रोड, लखनऊ।

शिक्षा
बी0एस0सी0, लखनऊ विश्‍वविद्यालय, लखनऊ

एल0एल0बी0, लखनऊ विश्‍वविद्यालय, लखनऊ

कार्य अनुभव
1


दिनांक 13.07.2007 को शपथ ग्रहण करके राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त के रूप में
कार्यभार ग्रहण किया।

2
अनुभव वर्ष 2000 से माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय, लखनऊ पीठ, लखनऊ में
अधिवक्‍ता के रूप में कार्य किया, इसके अतिरिक्‍त राज्‍य विधि अधिकारी
उ0प्र0 के रूप में भी माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय में कार्य किया तथा कई
कम्‍पनियों/बैंकों के भी अधिवक्‍ता रहे। इसके अतिरिक्‍त कई समाजसेवी
संस्‍थाओं से भी जुडे रहे।

5- Sri Gyan Prakash Maurya

http://upsic.up.nic.in/gpm.html

श्री ज्ञान प्रकाश मौर्य
राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त

शैक्षिक अभिलेख एवं कार्य अनुभव

नाम
श्री ज्ञान प्रकाश मौर्य

पिता का नाम
श्री राजाराम मौर्य

जन्‍म तिथि
05.04.1969

जन्‍म स्‍थान
इलाहाबाद- उत्‍त्‍र प्रदेश

स्‍थायी पता
464/2/5-सी रामानन्‍द नगर अल्‍लाहपुर, इलाहाबाद-21006

स्‍थानीय पता
16/VI, मंत्री आवास, विभूतिखण्‍ड, गोमती नगर, लखनऊ ।

शिक्षा
एम0 ए0, एल0 एल0 बी0

कार्य अनुभव
1


दिनांक 30 जून , 2009 को शपथ ग्रहण करके राज्‍य सूचना आयुक्‍त के रूप
में कार्यभार ग्रहण किया।

2
अधिवक्‍ता, माननीय उच्‍च न्‍यायालय, इलाहाबाद में 8 वर्ष विधि कार्य का
अनुभव प्राप्‍त


waiting 4 feedback on these five

Rest in next mail

team yaishwaryaj

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Sunday 29 May, 2011

online petition on lokpal : 111 views from across the globe : appeal to have your valuable view

link to sign the petition
http://www.petitiononline.com/urvashi1/petition-sign.html

link to the petition
http://www.petitiononline.com/urvashi1/petition.html

text of the petition : To: The Citizens of India including NRIs
Dear all Citizens of India ,

We all know that the Joint Drafting Committee on the Lokpal Bill has
deferred the question of including the office of the Prime Minister
and the higher judiciary to be discussed later . The Joint Drafting
Committee proposes to draft the said bill by June 30.

YAISHWARYAJ is at your doorsteps once again . This time we are before
you with the simplest of the pledges of being the part of the direct
democracy i.e. an initiative / a proposition . Through this
initiative/proposition , YAISHWARYAJ is asking for your opinion as to
whether the Prime Minister and the Judiciary should be within the
purview of LOKPAL or not . All you have to do is just to opine for or
against the said proposal by writing Yes or No. Of course Your
valuable comments shall also be the most welcome and shall strengthen
the cause of the ordinary citizens of India , raised in this petition.


Sincerely,

The Undersigned


every view counts , so please .

regards

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Wednesday 25 May, 2011

online poll petition on Lokpal : participate to get a broader view

the link is
http://www.petitiononline.com/urvashi1/petition.html

please.

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Monday 23 May, 2011

online petition : 25 views so far : please sign and spread widely

The Prime Minister and the Higher Judiciary should be within the
purview of coming LOKPAL Bill

http://www.petitiononline.com/urvashi1/petition.html

To: The Citizens of India including NRIs
Dear all Citizens of India ,

We all know that the Joint Drafting Committee on the Lokpal Bill has
deferred the question of including the office of the Prime Minister
and the higher judiciary to be discussed later . The Joint Drafting
Committee proposes to draft the said bill by June 30.

YAISHWARYAJ is at your doorsteps once again . This time we are before
you with the simplest of the pledges of being the part of the direct
democracy i.e. an initiative / a proposition . Through this
initiative/proposition , YAISHWARYAJ is asking for your opinion as to
whether the Prime Minister and the Judiciary should be within the
purview of LOKPAL or not . All you have to do is just to opine for or
against the said proposal by writing Yes or No. Of course Your
valuable comments shall also be the most welcome and shall strengthen
the cause of the ordinary citizens of India , raised in this petition.


Sincerely,

The Undersigned

http://yaishwaryaj.hpage.com/

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Sunday 22 May, 2011

Your opinion counts : Opine at online petition :The Prime Minister and the Higher Judiciary should be within the purview of coming LOKPAL Bill

Your opinion counts : Opine at online petition :The Prime Minister and
the Higher Judiciary should be within the purview of coming LOKPAL
Bill link

http://www.petitiononline.com/urvashi1/petition.html

Regards

Urvashi Sharma
--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Thursday 19 May, 2011

Airtel: Switch off Diesel

Hi rtiact2005india4u.aishwaryaj,

I just signed a petition opposing Airtel's use of dirty diesel energy to power their cell phone towers.

Please read the mail below and take action.

Regards,



Dear friends,

Thanks to the telecommunications sector, every new call and SMS is hurting our environment. Lakhs of massive mobile network towers in our country run on dirty diesel.

Airtel is the market leader and trend-setter of the Indian telecom industry. If we get them to switch to renewable energy, it will set an example for the others to follow. Customers are the mainstay of this industry. Airtel would notice if customers ask them to make their calls green by using clean energy to power company’s mobile towers.

You should ask Airtel to switch to renewable energy.

http://www.greenpeace.org/india/en/What-We-Do/Stop-Climate-Change/Green-Electronics/switch-off-diesel/airtel-switch-off-diesel/

Several current and potential Airtel subscribers, asking them to switch to renewable energy will help put pressure on them to act. Since the company is bound to provide good service to its subscribers, they will not be able to ignore this feedback.

Like coal and nuclear, oil too is an unsustainable energy option. The Deepwater Horizon oil spill last year showed the dangers of our addiction to oil.[2] Studies conducted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have shown that renewable energy is capable of powering the world.[3] Airtel needs to realise this and quit dirty energy.

Tell them now.

http://www.greenpeace.org/india/en/What-We-Do/Stop-Climate-Change/Green-Electronics/switch-off-diesel/airtel-switch-off-diesel/

Thanks a billion!

Photo of Abhishek Pratap

Abhishek Pratap
Climate and Energy Campaigner
Greenpeace India


Sources:

1. Dirty Talking? Case for telecom to shift from diesel to renewable, Greenpeace India, May 19, 2011
http://www.greenpeace.org/india/Global/india/docs/cool-it/reports/telecom-report-may-2011.pdf [PDF]

2. BP Oil Spill: How Bad Is Damage to Gulf One Year Later? Time magazine, April 19, 2011
http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20110419/hl_time/08599206603100

3. Renewable energy can power the world, says landmark IPCC study, Guardian, May 9, 2011
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/09/ipcc-renewable-energy-power-worldrtimahilamanchup@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.

UPSIC fails to upload orders on website

Publication: The Times Of India Lucknow; Date: May 19, 2011;
Section: Times Region; Page: 6

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTC8yMDExLzA1LzE5I0FyMDA2MDE=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom

UPSIC fails to upload orders on website

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Lucknow: The public discontentment over the functioning of UP State
Information Commission is brewing. The RTI activists have tried to
draw the attention of UP governor BL Joshi towards the laidback
functioning of the UPSIC through a memorandum.

The commission has entered into its sixth year of functioning on
March 22 this year. Even after completing five years of functioning
the commission has not recorded its output. The commission has neither
put any of its decisions on its website nor does it provide certified
copies of the decisions under the RTI act to the info-seekers.

"We will bring this to the notice of the governor," said RTI
activist Urvashi Sharma. The commission got funds from the Centre in
December 2008 for digitalization of records. However, the
digitalization of records is still awaited.

The activists also allege that the administrative reforms
department which is the nodal department for the implementation of RTI
Act in the state has also failed to make the commission act fast on
technological front.

The department of personnel and training, Government of India had
identified 19 State Information Commissions for e-enabling and the
funds were dispersed for the same in 2008. The funds, hence disbursed,
were to be used only for digitalization of SIC records and development
of a user-friendly website.

The activists will request the governor to initiate an inquiry
into the delay and to also direct the commission to regularly update
its orders on its website. The Central Information Commission as well
as several other state information commissions upload all orders on
their website as it also increases public awareness about the Act.

The sources at UP State Information Commission, however, blame it
to shortage of staff. "We do not have enough staff to handle day to
day functioning of the commission," said sources.

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTC8yMDExLzA1LzE5I0FyMDA2MDE=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Wednesday 18 May, 2011

RTI Activists in Lucknow mount pressure on UPSIC to comply Section 4(1)(b) of RTI Act 2005

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/9141988-rti-activists-in-lucknow-mount-pressure-on-upsic-to-comply-section-41b-of-rti-act-2005

RTI Activists in Lucknow mount pressure on UPSIC to comply Section
4(1)(b) of RTI Act 2005


One of the Prime responsibilities of Information Commissions is to
ensure that all Public Authorities in their respective domains should
ensure strict compliance of section 4(1)(b) of Right to Information
act 2005.
But what would you say when the information commission does not comply
section 4(1)(b) of Right to Information act 2005. How can such an
information commission exert pressure on other public authorities of
its state to comply this most important section of RTI act 2005.This
is the case with Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission.
In Uttar Pradesh , the RTI activists toiled hard to ensure compliance
of section 4(1)(b) of Right to Information act 2005 by UPSIC itself .
Lucknow based social group YAISHWARYAJ took initiatives in August 2010
and the partial compliance of section 4(1)(b) was made by UPSIC in
December 2010. Since then , UPSIC has done nothing to finish the
incomplete work or even to update the information related to section
4(1)(b) that is there on its website.
" Our group has sent memorandums attaching the pdf file containing
obsolete information to Sri B. L. Joshi ,the Governor , Km. Mayawati ,
the Chief Minister & the minister of Nodal Department for
implementation of RTI in state ( ARD Deptt. ) and Sri R. S. Pankaj ,
The Chief Information Commissioner of Uttar Pradesh with the clear
demand that the UPSIC should show exemplary compliance of RTI act in
all of its deeds if it wants the other departments to follow suit "
said Ram Prakash , a senior member of YAISHWARYAJ.
Recently YAISHWARYAJ has raised many relevant issues related to the
weak functioning of UPSIC which include Competent persons of eminence
be appointed as info-commissions , regular uploading of orders of
UPSIC on its website , Compilation of one thousand blunders of UPSIC
and complete compliance of section 4(1)(b) by UPSIC and all other
Public Authorities of Uttar Pradesh.

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Monday 16 May, 2011

High Court might have directed an entry be made in the service record of Ranjit Singh Pankaj ( the UPCIC ) , had he not ben retired from IAS

it is as if u involve in any irregular act n then either get urself
transferred or get retired , u r not going to be touched for ur past
misdeeds.

which kind of a world is this we are living in .

existing SCIC of Uttar Pradesh was Director Social welfare when he
committed contempt of court. the court made harsh remarks but let
panjaj go scotfree on the pretext that he has been retired from IAS.

his working as SCIC does not attract any punishment for him for all
the irregularities he earlier committed.

this is the folloy of the system.

a law-breaker is holding the highest post of watchdog of transparancy law in up.

i shall try to meet governor and hand him over memo to remove pankaj
taking suo motto cognizance of the court order.

the court order is given below

eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System
(Judgment/Order in Text Format)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic
copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake,
please bring it to the notice of Deputy Registrar(Copying).


HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 26

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11246 of 2006

Petitioner :- Doodh Nath And Others
Respondent :- Director, Directorate Social Welfare, U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Awadhesh Singh,Rameshwar Nath
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Jitendra Pal Singh,Sanjeev Kumar Yadav

Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J.
Affidavit filed by Shri Ranjit Singh Pankaj, Chief Information
Commissioner is taken on record. He prays for and is granted a week's
time to file reply.
In view of the fact that the Director in the affidavit filed today,
has admitted that a mistake has been committed and order has been
passed in the teeth of judgement of the Division Bench of this Court
in Special Appeal No. 445 of 1998, Special Appeal No. 446 of 1998 and
Special Appeal No. 447 of 1998 decided on 23.1.2002 and that the
mistake committed by him is not relevant or intentional.
The presence of Shri Ranjit Singh Pankaj is exempted with a
observation that in future such orders which virtually impact of
overwriting the judgement of the High Court must not be passed and
there should not be further occasion for this Court the complaint
being made that the order of the High Court is being taken too
lightly. This Court would have directed in the facts of the case, an
entry be made in the service record of the Officer concerned but since
he has retired such a direction is not being issued. This Court
records that unhappiness in a manner in which the matter has been
proceeded with.
List on 19.4.2011.
Order Date :- 5.4.2011
Puspendra


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/StartWebSearch.do
for more Judgments/Orders delivered at Allahabad High Court and Its
Bench at Lucknow. Disclaimer

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

RTI activists to prepare UPSIC report card

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/RTI-activists-to-prepare-UPSIC-report-card/articleshow/8357237.cms

RTI activists to prepare UPSIC report card
TNN | May 16, 2011, 07.18am IST

LUCKNOW: RTI activists will get a report card of the UP State
Information Commission (UPSIC ) ready. The commission entered its
sixth year of functioning on March 22, 2011. The orders passed by the
commission so far are not very satisfactory , is the public opinion.

"Occasionally there might have been good orders," said one of the
activists. The activists working in the state have appealed to all
stakeholders of the RTI regime in UP to exert their influence at their
respective districts, so that, now on, Information Commissioners (ICs)
be selected from retired judges and prominent RTI experts.

RTI helpline started by the activists receives several complaints
regarding commission's functioning. The activists plan to compile 1000
blunders of UPSIC with an objective to underline the problems raised
by RTI users.


--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Sunday 15 May, 2011

One thousand Blunders of Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission : to be published by YAISHWARYAJ

http://rtilucknow.sulekha.com/blog/post/2011/05/one-thousand-blunders-of-uttar-pradesh-state-information.htm

After completing five years , U.P.S.I.C. entered the sixth year of
functioning on 22-03-2011 . During these five years , the sycophant (
to state power ) and incompetent information commissioners have
delivered everything but any relief to info-seekers under RTI act.

Occasionally there might have been good orders that found deserving
places in media , to our surprises these orders remained in papers
only and were never implemented to provide final justice to the info
seeker or to ensure compliance of RTI act in its true spirit . By and
large, however, the position appears to be far from satisfactory in
the functioning of Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission.

We, at YAISHWARYAJ , therefore, reiterate our conviction and appeal to
all stakeholders of the RTI regime in Uttar Pradesh to exert their
influence at their respective districts so that all the coming
Information Commissioners should be selected from amongst Retired
Judges and prominent RTI Experts of unimpeachable integrity . We
strongly feel only such persons can carry the RTI movement forward in
consonance with the letter and spirit of the RTI Act.

YAISHWARYAJ runs Mobile RTI helpline 8081898081 . Through the feedback
received from the helpline users and other sources , we at YAISHWARYAJ
are sure that While delivering the decisions , most of the Information
Commissioners erred / miscued/ slipped/ stumbled/ tripped up/
Delivered absurdity/ showed act of folly/ bad job/ misapprehended/
misconceived/ misconstrued/ misinterpreted/ misread/ misunderstood/
confounded/ confused/ mixed up things and what not. Nothing can
mitigate the pain of those who have suffered lakhs of act-defying ,
strange & shocking orders.

We are planning to bring out a publication to enable all to understand
one of the major problems of act-defying non-speaking orders by UPSIC
that is being continuously faced by the RTI users in Uttar Pradesh in
their resolve to expose corruption through the RTI Act since UPSIC
started working.

In first phase YAISHWARYAJ has planned to pioneer the compilation of
unique one thousand Blunders of Uttar Pradesh State Information
Commission . The stated objective for bringing out this compilation is
to underline the problems raised by the UPSIC itself to the RTI users
of the state.

Later on we shall come out with a much detailed compilation titled
"One Lakh Blunders of Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission " .

Since the orders of UPSIC are delivered in Hindi language so these
compilations shall be in hindi.

We have sent requests to the Governor , the Chief Minister and the
Chief State information Commissioner to help us in providing the
orders of UPSIC , delivered since its inception to date.

We request all RTI organizations , RTI activists , RTI users , NGOs ,
PIOs etc. who are in any way associated with RTI activities related to
Uttar Pradesh , to send us their valuable feedback to help us in our
effort .

All communication should be addressed to YAISHWARYAJ F-2376 First
Floor , Rajajipuram , Lucknow – 226017 , India or
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com .

For any specific query feel free to call us at 8081898081 or
9369613513 or 9305463313.

In anticipation of full support from all .

Urvashi Sharma

For YAISHWARYAJ


--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Fwd: Request to to get all the orders of UPSIC in digital form on CDs , delivered since 22 March 2006 to date

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2011 13:03:56 +0530
Subject: Request to to get all the orders of UPSIC in digital form on
CDs , delivered since 22 March 2006 to date
To: hgovup <hgovup@up.nic.in>, governup <governup@up.nic.in>, cmup
<cmup@up.nic.in>, cmup <cmup@nic.in>, "scic.up" <scic.up@up.nic.in>,
"sec. sic" <sec.sic@up.nic.in>

To,
1- Sri B. L. Joshi
The Governor of Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh Governor House
Lucknow , Uttar Pradesh , India – 226001
hgovup@up.nic.in , governup@up.nic.in ,

2- Km. Mayawati
The Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh Government , Lucknow
Uttar Pradesh , India , Pin Code – 226001
cmup@up.nic.in , cmup@nic.in ,

3- Sri R. S. Pankaj
The Chief State Information Commissioner
Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission
6th Floor , Indira Bhawan , Ashok Marg ,Lucknow
Uttar Pradesh , India , Pin Code – 226001
scic.up@up.nic.in , sec.sic@up.nic.in ,

Sub.: Request to to get all the orders of UPSIC in digital form on CDs
, delivered since 22 March 2006 to date


Dear Sir / Madam

As we all are aware that after completing five years , U.P.S.I.C.
entered the sixth year of functioning on 22-03-2011 . During these
five years , the sycophant ( to state power ) and incompetent
information commissioners have delivered everything but any relief to
info-seekers under RTI act.

Occasionally there might have been good orders that found deserving
places in media , to our surprises these orders remained in papers
only and were never implemented to provide final justice to the info
seeker or to ensure compliance of RTI act in its true spirit . By and
large, however, the position appears to be far from satisfactory in
the Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission.

We, at YAISHWARYAJ , therefore, reiterate our conviction and appeal to
all stakeholders of the RTI regime in Uttar Pradesh to exert their
influence at their respective fields so that all the coming
Information Commissioners should be selected from amongst Retired
Judges and prominent RTI Experts of unimpeachable integrity . We
strongly feel only such persons can carry the RTI movement forward in
consonance with the letter and spirit of the RTI Act.


YAISHWARYAJ runs Mobile RTI helpline 8081898081 . Through the feedback
received from the helpline users and other sources , we at YAISHWARYAJ
are sure that While delivering the decisions , most of the Information
Commissioners erred / miscued/ slipped/ stumbled/ tripped up/
Delivered absurdity/ showed act of folly/ bad job/ misapprehended/
misconceived/ misconstrued/ misinterpreted/ misread/ misunderstood/
confounded/ confused/ mixed up things and what not. Nothing can
mitigate the pain of those who have suffered lakhs of act-defying ,
strange & shocking orders.


We are planning to bring out a publication to enable all to understand
one of the major problems of act-defying non-speaking orders by UPSIC
that is being continuously faced by the RTI users in Uttar Pradesh in
their resolve to expose corruption through the RTI Act since UPSIC
started working.

In first phase YAISHWARYAJ has planned to pioneer the compilation of
unique one thousand Blunders of Uttar Pradesh State Information
Commission . The stated objective for bringing out this compilation is
to underline the problems raised by the UPSIC itself to the RTI users
of the state.

Later on we shall come out with a much detailed compilation titled
"One Lakh Blunders of Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission " .

Since the orders of UPSIC are delivered in Hindi language so these
compilations shall be in hindi.

Through this letter we are sending request to your good self to help
us in providing the orders of UPSIC in digital form on CDs the cost of
which shall be borne by us , delivered since its inception to date.

We shall request all RTI organizations , RTI activists , RTI users ,
NGOs , PIOs etc. also , who are in any way associated with RTI
activities related to Uttar Pradesh , to send us their valuable
feedback to help us in our effort .

All communication can be addressed to YAISHWARYAJ F-2376 First Floor
, Rajajipuram , Lucknow – 226017 , India or yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

For any specific query our contact nos. are 8081898081 , 9369613513
or 9305463313.

In anticipation of full support from all of you to help us strengthen
the implementation of RTI act in Uttar Pradesh .

Urvashi Sharma
For YAISHWARYAJ


--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Saturday 14 May, 2011

citizen’s prerogative to decide the mechanism to obtain the information : Complete text of CIC Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000237/SG/12351 dated 11 may 2011

Page 1 of 8
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000237/SG/12351
Appeal No. CIC/SM/A/2011/000237/SG
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. R. S. Misra,
S- 93, New Palam Vihar,
Phase- I, Gurgaon- 122017
Respondent : Mrs. Smita Vats Sharma,
CPIO,
Supreme Court of India,
New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 20/04/2010
PIO replied on : 07/05/2010
First Appeal filed on : 23/05/2010
First Appellate Authority Order of : 18/06/2010
Second Appeal filed before Commission : 05/02/2011
Information Sought:
The Appellant has sought information on nine queries pertaining to
inter alia action taken/ status
report on certain letters, reasons for judicial decisions, etc.
Information provided by Public Information Officer (PIO):
Queries 1 to 7: The PIO mentioned that the Appellant was represented
by Ms. Rachna Gupta,
Advocate in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) Nos.
8219-8220 of 2010. Inspection can be
done and information/certified copies of the judicial records
/judgments of the Supreme Court of India
("Supreme Court") can be obtained by moving an application to the
Registrar (Copying), Supreme
Court under Order XII, Supreme Court Rules, 1966 (the "SC Rules") on
payment of prescribed fees
and charges.
Query 9: Under the RTI Act, it is beyond the scope and jurisdiction of
the PIO to interpret the law,
judgments of the Supreme Court or of any other Court, opine, comment
or advise on matters. The
information sought was not covered under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA observed that the Appellant had addressed certain letters to
the judges in relation to his SLP
No. 8219- 8220/ 2010 and sought information about the action taken on
the same. The Appellant was
represented by a counsel in the said case. The inspection of the
documents and information relating to
judicial records can be done only under Order XII, SC Rules. Under
query 9, the Appellant had sought
the opinion of the PIO, does not fall within Section 2(f) of the RTI
Act. Hence, the First Appeal was
dismissed.
Page 2 of 8
Ground for Second Appeal:
Information was wrongly denied to the Appellant.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing held on May 6, 2011:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. R. S. Misra;
Respondent: Mrs. Smita Vats Sharma, CPIO & Additional Registrar and
Ms. Priyanka S. Telang,
Advocate.
The Appellant stated that he was seeking information about the action
taken on/ status report of his
letters, which must be provided to him as per the provisions of the RTI Act.
The Respondent did not produce any written submissions before the
Commission. The Respondent
relied on certain decisions (and the judgments quoted therein) of the
Commission in Manish Kumar
Khanna v. Supreme Court of India CIC/WB/A/2006/00940 dated 07/12/2007,
Rakesh Kumar Gupta v.
Supreme Court of India CIC/WB/A/2009/000553 dated 05/05/2009 and R. K.
Pandey v. Supreme
Court of India CIC/WB/A/2008/00777 dated 24/04/2008 and
CIC/WB/A/2009/00150 dated
20/02/2009. The main contention of the Respondent was that as per
Section 22 of the RTI Act, the RTI
Act shall have an overriding effect only when any other law was
inconsistent with the provisions of
the RTI Act. In this regard, the Respondent directed the attention of
the Commission to specific
portions of the decisions mentioned above (which have been quoted below).
Further, the Commission enquired of the Respondent whether she would
like to furnish arguments in
addition to the decisions cited above. The Respondent stated that she
did not wish to furnish any
further arguments and submitted that the Supreme Court already had a
specific provision to furnish
information under Order XII of the SC Rules and therefore, information
relating to judicial matters
may be provided only under the said provision. The Respondent further
argued that since the then
Chief Information Commissioner had upheld this contention in the
decisions cited above, their
arguments before this Commission were already covered under the said decisions.
The Commission enquired of the Respondent that where multiple routes
were available to a citizen for
obtaining information, was the citizen required to seek information
only in accordance with the SC
Rules. The Respondent stated that there were a number of queries under
RTI applications, which were
answered by the Supreme Court. However, to facilitate access to
records pertaining to judicial
proceedings/ matters, the applicants were apprised of the SC Rules,
which laid down the procedure for
obtaining the information in this regard.
The relevant portions marked by the Respondent in the decision of
Manish Kumar Khanna v. Supreme
Court of India CIC/WB/A/2006/00940 dated 07/12/2007 were:
"… The non-obstante clause of the Right to Information Act does not,
therefore, mean an
implied repeal of the Supreme Court Rules and orders framed
thereunder, but only an
override of RTI in case of 'inconsistency'. In this context, the
following observations of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in R.S. Raghunath vs. State of Karnataka — AIR 1992 SC 81 are
pertinent:
"The general Rule to be followed in case of conflict between the two
statutes is that
the latter abrogates the earlier one. In other words, a prior special
law would yield to
a later general law, if either of the two following conditions is satisfied.
(i) The two are inconsistent with each other.
(ii) There is some express reference in the later to the earlier enactment.
Page 3 of 8
If either of these two conditions is fulfilled, the later law, even
though general, would
prevail."
… This issue came again for consideration before the Hon'ble Apex
Court in Chandra
Prakash Tiwari vs. Shakuntala Shukla — A1R2002 SC 2322 and the Hon'ble Supreme
Court quoted with approval the Broom's Legal Maxim in reference to two
Latin Maxims in
the following words:
"It is then, an elementary Rule that an earlier Act must give place to
a later, if the
two cannot be reconciled - lex posterior derogat priori - non est
novum ut priores
lages ad posteriores trahantur (Emphasis supplied) - and one Act may
repeal another
by express words or by implication; for it is enough if there be words which by
necessary implication repeal it. But repeal by implication is never to
be favoured, and
must not be imputed to the legislature without necessity, or strong
reason, to be
shown by the party imputing it. It is only effected where the
provisions of the later
enactment are so inconsistent with, or repugnant to, those of the
earlier that the two
cannot stand together unless the two Acts are so plainly repugnant to
each other that
effect cannot be given to both at the same time a repeal cannot be implied; and
special Acts are not repealed by general Acts unless there be some
express reference
to the previous legislation, or a necessary inconsistency in the two
Acts standing
together, which prevents the maxim generalia specialibus non derogant (Emphasis
supplied) from being applied. For where there are general words in a later Act
capable of reasonable application without being extended to subjects
specially dealt
with by earlier legislation, then, in the absence of an indication of
a particular
intention to that effect, the presumption is that the general words
were not intended to
repeal the earlier and special legislation, to take away a particular
privilege of a
particular class of persons."
The differences between the Right to Information Act and the procedure
as prescribed by the
Supreme Court for conduct of its own practice and procedure have to be
looked into from
another angle also as to whether there is a direct inconsistency
between the two. In this
context, it may be mentioned that neither provision prohibits or
forbids dissemination of
information or grant of copies of records. The difference is only
insofar as the practice or
payments of fees etc. is concerned. There is, therefore, no inherent
inconsistency between the
two provisions.
Over and above, the Supreme Court Rules are particular or special law
dealing with a
particular phase of the subject covered by the Right to Information
Act and, therefore,
consistency is possible. It is a sound principle of all jurisprudence
that a prior particular law
is not easily to be held to be abrogated by a posterior law expressed
in general terms. The
said principle was accepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and expressed
by Justice
Mudholkar in the following words:
"A general statute applies to all persons and localities within its
jurisdiction and
scope as distinguished from a special one which in its operation is
confined to a
particular locality and, therefore, where it is doubtful whether the
special statute was
intended to be repealed by the general statute the court should try to
give effect to
both the enactments as far as possible." "
Based on the same, the then Chief Information concluded:
"U/s 22 of the RTI Act the provisions of the RTI Act have effect
notwithstanding anything
inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for time being
enforced or instrument
having effect by virtue in law other than this Act. However, since
both the Act and Order XII
Page 4 of 8
of the Supreme Court Rules provide for disclosure of information of
the kind sought in the
present case we find that there is nothing inconsistent in the rules.
It is only that Supreme
Court Rules 1966 through Order XII, Rule 2 prescribe the procedure for
obtaining the
information. This procedure together with fees is in the province of
the prescribed authority
u/s 28 of the RTI Act. This issue is disposed of accordingly."
The Respondent also relied on certain portions of the decision in R.
K. Pandey v. Supreme Court of
India CIC/WB/A/2008/00777 dated 24/04/2008 and CIC/WB/A/2009/00150
dated 20/02/2009, which
was marked as 1 and 2 by the Respondent, and is reproduced as follows:
"…We have, however, indeed found that Order No. XII of the Supreme
Court Rules 1965 is
not inconsistent with the RTI Act. Section 22 of the RTI Act is
overriding only in that it
requires that the provisions of the RTI Act "shall have the effect
notwithstanding anything
inconsistent therewith contained in any other law 1 for the time being
in force", including the
Official Secret Act, 1923.
Therefore, any law or Rule not inconsistent with the RTI Act is a law
or rule which must
stand notwithstanding coming into force the RTI Act. Appellant Shri
R.K. Pandey expressed
the apprehension that if this is the case every department will have
its own rules and laws
and the majesty of the RTI Act will be totally eroded. This, of
course, is not so because it is
not every public authority which has a right to frame rules. Under
Sections 27 and 28 of the
RTI Act this authority is only given either to the appropriate
Government or to the competent
authority'. The competent authority is clearly defined in Section 2
(e) of the RTI Act."
The Commission reserved the order during the hearing held on 06/05/2011.
Decision announced on May 11, 2011:
The Appellant has sought information about the action taken on/ status
report of certain letters. In
relation to queries 1 to 7, the PIO replied that inspection may be
done and information/certified copies
of the judicial records /judgments of the Supreme Court may be
obtained by moving an application
under Order XII of the SC Rules on payment of the prescribed fees. As
regards query 9, the PIO stated
that the information sought did not come within the ambit of Section
2(f) of the RTI Act. The
information so provided by the PIO was accepted by the FAA.
Dissatisfied with the same, the
Appellant filed a Second Appeal before the Commission. At the outset,
the Commission would like to
state that it will not delve into the merits of the information sought
by the Appellant. Further, the
Commission is satisfied with the reply of the PIO provided in relation
to query 9.
Based on the contentions of the Respondent and the decisions cited,
the main issue which arises for
determination before the Commission is where there were methods of
obtaining information from a
public authority in existence before the RTI Act, can a citizen insist
on obtaining the information under
the RTI Act.
The right to information is a fundamental right of the citizens of
India. This has been clearly
recognised by the Supreme Court in several decisions and subsequently,
codified by the Parliament in
2005. The RTI Act was enacted with the spirit of ensuring transparency
and access to information
giving citizens the right to information. It lays down the substantive
right to information of the citizens
and the practical mechanism to enforce the said right. Section 3 of
the RTI Act lays down that subject
to the provisions of the RTI Act, all citizens shall have the right to
information. The RTI Act is a crisp
legislation comprising of 31 Sections, which confer upon citizens, the
right to information accessible
under the RTI Act, which is held by or under the control of a public
authority. The scheme of the RTI
Act stipulates inter alia that information sought shall be provided
within the prescribed period,
formulation of a proper appellate mechanism and invoking of stringent
penalty where the PIO fails to
1 Underlined by us for reference.
Page 5 of 8
provide the information within the mandated period without reasonable
cause. The RTI Act is
premised on disclosure being the norm, and refusal, the exception. It
is legally established that
information requested for under the RTI Act may be exempted from
disclosure in accordance with
Sections 8 and 9 only and no other exemptions can be claimed while
rejecting a demand for disclosure.
Further, Section 22 of the RTI Act expressly provides that the
provisions of the RTI 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 the RTI Act. In other words, where there is any inconsistency in
a law as regards furnishing of
information, such law shall be superseded by the RTI Act. Insertion of
a non- obstante clause in
Section 22 of the RTI Act was a conscious choice of the Parliament to
safeguard the citizens'
fundamental right to information from convoluted interpretations of
other laws adopted by public
authorities to deny information. The presence of Section 22 of the RTI
Act simplifies the process of
implementing the right to information both for citizens as well the
PIO; citizens may seek to enforce
their fundamental right to information by simply invoking the
provisions of the RTI Act.
Given the above, two scenarios may be envisaged:
1. An earlier law/ rule whose provisions pertain to furnishing of
information and is consistent
with the RTI Act: Since there is no inconsistency between the law/
rule and the provisions of the
RTI Act, the citizen is at liberty to choose whether she will seek
information in accordance with
the said law/ rule or under the RTI Act. If the PIO has received a
request for information under the
RTI Act, the information shall be provided to the citizen as per the
provisions of the RTI Act and
any denial of the same must be in accordance with Sections 8 and 9 of
the RTI Act only; and
2. An earlier law/ rule whose provisions pertain to furnishing of
information but is inconsistent
with the RTI Act: Where there is inconsistency between the law/ rule
and the RTI Act in terms of
access to information, then Section 22 of the RTI Act shall override
the said law/ rule and the PIO
would be required to furnish the information as per the RTI Act only.
The Commission has perused the decisions cited by the Respondent and
noted that the then Chief
Information Commissioner has delved into the semantics of
interpretations of statutes. This
Commission agrees with the observations and the judgments quoted
therein which discuss the
overriding effect of a later general law over an earlier special law.
Based on these observations, this
Commission agrees that the RTI Act does not abrogate or repeal the SC
Rules. This Commission also
agrees with the observations of Mudholkar J., that "where it is
doubtful whether the special statute was
intended to be repealed by the general statute the court should try to
give effect to both the enactments
as far as possible".
The SC Rules as well as the RTI Act coexist and therefore, it is for
the citizen to determine which
route she would prefer for obtaining the information. The right to
information available to the citizens
under the RTI Act cannot be denied where such citizen chooses to
exercise such right, as has been
done by the PIO in the instant case. The Commission would like to
highlight that just as the SC Rules
put in place by the Supreme Court are not abrogated, the RTI Act
passed by the Parliament also cannot
be suspended. If the PIO has received a request for information under
the RTI Act, the information
shall be provided to the applicant as per the provisions of the RTI
Act and any denial of the same must
be in accordance with Sections 8 and 9 of the RTI Act only. In view of
the same, this Commission
respectfully differs with the decisions of the then Chief Information
Commissioner when he concluded
that since the SC Rules were not inconsistent with the RTI Act, the
citizen shall be required to obtain
the information under Order XII of the SC Rules.
In the instant case, the PIO had stated that there was a separate
procedure under Order XII of the SC
Rules for obtaining information and that the Appellant could obtain
the same only by following the
mechanism mentioned in Order XII of the SC Rules. In other words, it
appears that the Appellant
Page 6 of 8
would not be able to enforce the right to information available to her
under the RTI Act and have to
necessarily follow the procedure mentioned in the SC Rules. Moreover,
even where the Parliament has
guaranteed every citizen the right to information under the RTI Act,
the PIO, in the instant case, has
abrogated the same by directing the Appellant to obtain the
information in accordance with Order XII
of the SC Rules.
The Commission has noted that the PIO has rejected the request for
information under the RTI Act
without taking recourse to Sections 8 and 9 of the RTI Act, which is
clearly against the statutory
mandate. If the reply provided by the PIO is to be accepted, it would
negate the citizen's right to
information under the RTI Act and frustrate the implementation of the
latter. The RTI Act is a
reflection of the will of the citizens of India that has been codified
by the Parliament, and accepting the
reply of the PIO furnished in the instant case would render the RTI
Act redundant. Merely because
Order XII of the SC Rules provide for a mechanism by which certain
information may be obtained by
the applicant, does not mean that the citizen cannot exercise her
right to obtain the same information
by taking recourse to the RTI Act (subject always to the provisions of
Sections 8 and 9 of the RTI
Act).
In view of the aforesaid arguments, this Commission holds that it is
the citizen's prerogative to
decide under which mechanism i.e. either Order XII of the SC Rules or
the RTI Act, she would
like to obtain information. If the PIO has received a request for
information under the RTI Act,
the information shall be provided to the applicant as per the
provisions of the RTI Act and any
denial of the same must be in accordance with Sections 8 and 9 of the
RTI Act only; the
applicant cannot be forced to obtain the information as per Order XII
of the SC Rules.
At this juncture, the Commission would like to mention certain
decisions of the Supreme Court in CIT
v. A. Raman & Co. [1968] 67 ITR 11 (SC), which was upheld in CIT v.
Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd.
[1973] 91 ITR 8 (SC) and subsequently in UOI v. Azadi Bachao Andolan
[2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC),
where Shah J., observed as follows:
"… Avoiding of tax liability by so arranging commercial affairs that
charge of tax is
distributed is not prohibited. A tax payer may resort to a device to
divert the income before
it accrues or arises to him. Effectiveness of the device depends not
upon considerations of
morality, but on the operation of the Income Tax Act. Legislative
injunction in taxing
statutes may not, except on peril of penalty, be violated, but it may
be lawfully
circumvented..." (Emphasis Added)
Therefore, even when the State may lose revenue, the Supreme Court has
ruled that an individual tax
payer has the liberty to arrange her commercial affairs in order to
reduce her tax liability, so long as
such arrangement is within the operation of tax legislation(s).
Drawing an analogy, it certainly stands
to reason that a citizen should be able to decide on the method most
convenient and expedient by
which she would obtain information.
Having laid down the above, this Commission would now additionally
examine whether there is any
inconsistency between the RTI Act and Order XII of the SC Rules, and
if so, whether Section 22 of the
RTI Act shall override the provisions of the SC Rules. As discussed
above, Section 22 of the RTI Act
expressly provides that the provisions of the RTI 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 the RTI Act. Section 22 of
the RTI Act, in no uncertain terms, lays down that the RTI Act shall
override anything inconsistent
contained in any other law. Order XII of the SC Rules provides inter alia:
"1. Subject to the provisions of these rules, a party to any cause,
appeal or matter who has
appeared shall be allowed to search, inspect or get copies of all
pleadings and other
documents or records in the case, on payment of the prescribed fees and charges.
Page 7 of 8
2. The Court, on the application of a person who is not a party to the
case, appeal or matter,
may on good cause shown, allow such person such search or inspection
or to obtain such
copies as is or are mentioned in the last preceding rule, on payment
of the prescribed fees
and charges." (Emphasis added)
On a plain reading of Rules 1 and 2, it appears that citizens shall
have the right to access information
pertaining only to judicial matters i.e. documents/ records in a case.
Rule 1 allows only a party to any
cause, appeal or matter who has appeared to inspect and/ or obtain
copies of information pertaining to
judicial matters. However, Rule 2 allows a person who is not a party
to the case, appeal or matter to
inspect and/ or obtain information relating to judicial matters where
'good cause' is shown. In other
words, where a person is not a party to a case, appeal or matter, she
would be required to demonstrate
'good cause' before the Court before being allowed to inspect and/ or
obtain copies of the information
sought.
As per Section 6(2) of the RTI Act, an applicant making a request for
information under the RTI Act
shall not give any reasons for requesting the information. Under Rule
2, in order to determine what is
'good cause', it is necessary to enquire into the purpose/ reasons for
which an applicant is seeking
information. This is clearly violative of the statutory mandate of
Section 6(2) of the RTI Act.
Moreover, from the use of the word "may" in Rule 2, there appears to
be a certain discretion conferred
upon the Court to determine what amounts to 'good cause', and even
where 'good cause' has been
shown, whether such information shall be provided or not. This is a
clear embargo on the enforcement
of the fundamental right to information of citizens. Citizens would
have to justify any request for
information by demonstrating 'good cause' under Rule 2 and the
ultimate decision whether
information should be provided or not would lie with the Court. Rule 2
appears to create an exemption
in providing the information, which is not envisaged in Sections 8 and
9 of the RTI Act. At this
juncture, it would not be out of place to mention that the SC Rules
neither provide for a specific time
within which information shall be furnished, any appeal procedure, nor
any penalty provisions where
information is not provided.
Therefore, this Commission respectfully disagrees with the
observations of the then Chief Information
Commissioner and holds that Rule 2, Order XII of the SC Rules appears
to impose a restriction on
access to information held by or under the control of a public
authority, which is prima facie
inconsistent with the RTI Act. Therefore, in accordance with Section
22 of the RTI Act, the provisions
of the RTI Act shall override the SC Rules.
Further, as per the reply provided by the PIO, information can be
accessed by the Appellant on the
Supreme Court's website. As per Section 7(9) of the RTI Act,
information shall ordinarily be provided
in the form in which it is sought unless it would disproportionately
divert the resources of the public
authority or would be detrimental to the safety or preservation of the
record in question. The RTI Act
mandates that information shall ordinarily be provided in the form in
which it is sought or requested
for. It may not be out of place to mention that more than 90% of our
country's population does not
have access to computers and even where they do, may not understand
how to access the same.
Therefore, there is a duty cast upon the PIO to ensure that
information sought by an applicant is
provided in hard copy or in the manner requested by the applicant.
Where no specific mention is made
as regards the manner in which information must be furnished, it may
be presumed that the citizen is
seeking information in the form of hard copy. Moreover, even where the
PIO has indicated that the
information may be accessed from the website, the complete link/ web
address at which the requisite
information is available, must be furnished.
Before parting with the instant matter, this Commission has noted that
the Supreme Court, on various
occasions, has ruled that it is incumbent on public sector
institutions to be model employers following
all laws in letter and spirit. This Commission humbly submits that the
Supreme Court should become a
role model in implementation of the provisions of the Right to
Information Act, 2005 in its true letter
Page 8 of 8
and spirit and inspire all public authorities to follow its lead in
transparency. This would certainly
enable better delivery of the citizen's fundamental right to information.
In view of the foregoing arguments, this Commission respectfully
disagrees with the decision of
the then Chief Information Commissioner that the PIO, Supreme Court
may choose to deny the
information sought under the RTI Act and ask an applicant to apply for
information under
Order XII of the SC Rules.
This Bench further rules that all citizens have the right to access
information under Section 3 of
the RTI Act and PIOs shall provide the information sought to the
citizens, subject always to the
provisions of the RTI Act only.
Where there are methods of giving information by any public authority
which were in existence
before the advent of the RTI Act, the citizen may insist on invoking
the provisions of the RTI Act
to obtain the information. It is the citizen's prerogative to decide
under which mechanism i.e.
under the method prescribed by the public authority or the RTI Act,
she would like to obtain the
information.
The Appeal is allowed. The PIO is directed to provide the complete
information as available on
record in relation to queries 1 to 7 to the Appellant before June 5, 2011.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of
cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
May 11, 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision
number.)(SRG)

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Friday 13 May, 2011

First phase of Victory against the Corruption

Dear all ,

It's a VICTORY.

It's First phase of Victory against the Corruption

We , the Indians have made it happen .

The Indian government has finally ratified the UN Convention against
Corruption. This means that now the government has an obligation to
make its anti corruption laws more stricter with a clear-cut view to
Broaden the scope of the definition of corruption under Indian law ,
Put in place an asset recovery law so that ill gotten gains of the
corrupt can be seized , put private companies under the corruption
laws for their corruption in India or abroad n so on so forth.

Now our fight should focus on proposing stringent amendments to the
Prevention of Corruption Act to make it practically stronger and Put
forward an effective Asset Recovery Law for India.
Take Action! We have to remember that India is the 87th most corrupt
country in the world and the fight shall not be that easy.
This ratification will certainly accelerate the fight against
corruption but as concerned citizens, we must not relax our vigil.


--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Efforts of RTI activists materialise in providing Video-Conferencing facility to Uttar Pradesh info seekers

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/lucknow/Now-RTI-cases-to-be-settled-through-video-conferencing/articleshow/8283931.cms

Now, RTI cases to be settled through video conferencing
TNN | May 13, 2011, 04.10am IST

LUCKNOW: The UP State Information Commission ( UPSIC) will dispose of
its RTI cases through video-conferencing in days to come. The
commission has written to National Informatics Centre (NIC) in this
regard.

The appeals and complaints filed from all over the district will be
attended to through video conferencing. This will do away with the
physical presence of the Public Information Officers (PIOs) and RTI
seekers in the commission.

For a time being, the video-conferencing centre set-up at Yojna Bhawan
will be connected to video conferencing rooms in the districts on an
experimental basis, UP chief information commissioner Ranjit Singh
Pankaj said. If the experiment turns out to be successful, the video
conferencing centre will be set up at the commission. "Most of the
cases are from outside districts. Facility will offer respite to RTI
seekers from far-off districts," he said.
--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Thursday 12 May, 2011

Bad Banks

Hi rtiact2005india4u.aishwaryaj,

I just wrote to the banks funding the Jaitapur reactor park in Maharashtra not to support the project.

Please read the mail below and take action.

Regards,



Dear friends,

28,000 signatures opposing the Jaitapur nuclear plant are being faxed to the Prime Minister and Maharastra chief minister Prithviraj Chavan's office. The pressure is evident with the CM's office asking us to stop faxing.

The proposed nuclear plant in Jaitapur, Maharashtra uses technology which is still under review [1] and lies in an earthquake-prone zone.[2] However our government plans to go ahead with this dangerous technology.[3] Following the nuclear accident at Fukushima in Japan there is unprecedented public attention on the risks of nuclear energy, and countries world over are rethinking their nuclear plans.[4]

We also need to increase the pressure on our government. May 11 marks the two month anniversary of the Fukushima disaster. On this day we are asking the two foreign banks funding Jaitapur :HSBC and BNP Paribas, not to finance the unsafe reactor park. May 11 is also the Strategic day at HSBC and Annual General meeting for BNP Paribas and the board will be taking major decisions for this year.

Write to these foreign banks asking them not to support the Jaitapur reactor park.

http://greenpeace.in/take-action/stop-dangerous-nuclear-power-in-jaitapur/mail-the-banks.php

While we ask the government to stop this plant, we also need to gather more voices opposing this project. Growing opposition to the project from different quarters will make it difficult for the government to ignore it. Sending our concerns on this day will help warn these banks about the unpopularity of the Jaitapur project in the country.

A new study by the (IPCC) says that renewable energy can power the world.[5] HSBC and BNP Paribas need invest in clean and safe renewable energy instead of unsafe nuclear power. Tell them now!

http://greenpeace.in/take-action/stop-dangerous-nuclear-power-in-jaitapur/mail-the-banks.php

Thanks a billion!


Karuna Raina,
Nuclear Campaigner,
Greenpeace India.


Sources:

1. 20 years, 92 quakes: Ground trembles beneath Jaitapur's feet, Times of India, March 16, 2011
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/20-years-92-quakes-Ground-trembles-beneath-Jaitapurs-feet/articleshow/7714776.cms

2. Why should Jaitapur be made a guinea pig for untested reactors, DNA, March 17, 2011
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/comment_why-should-jaitapur-be-made-a-guinea-pig-for-untested-reactor_1520843-all

3. Jaitapur plant to go ahead with greater compensation, Times of India, April 27, 2011
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jaitapur-plant-to-go-ahead-with-greater-compensation/articleshow/8095503.cms

4. Japan crisis forces rethink of the nuclear option, The Telegraph, UK, March 19, 2011
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8392636/Japan-crisis-forces-rethink-of-the-nuclear-option.html

5. Renewable energy can power the world, says landmark IPCC study, Guardian, May 9, 2011
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/09/ipcc-renewable-energy-power-worldrtimahilamanchup@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.

Wednesday 11 May, 2011

भूखंड आवंटन में गड़बड़ी और भ्रष्टाचार : will uttar pradesh government wake up ????????...........

http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/epaper/article/index.php?page=article&choice=print_article&location=37&category=&articleid=111710736780466184

एलडीए के पूर्व संयुक्त सचिव गिरफ्तार

http://in.jagran.yahoo.com/epaper/index.php?location=37&edition=2011-05-06


लखनऊ, 5 मई (जासं): भूखंड आवंटन में गड़बड़ी और भ्रष्टाचार के तीन मामलों
में लिप्त पाए गए सेवानिवृत्त पीसीएस अधिकारी व लखनऊ विकास प्राधिकरण के
पूर्व संयुक्त सचिव श्रीपाल वर्मा को गुरुवार सुबह सतर्कता अधिष्ठान की
टीम ने गिरफ्तार किया है। श्री वर्मा पूर्व सांसद पूर्णिमा वर्मा के पति
हैं। अदालत ने श्री वर्मा को 14 दिन की न्यायिक हिरासत में जेल भेज दिया
है। शासन ने इस घोटाले की जांच के आदेश 18 नंवबर 1997 में दिए थे और
सतर्कता विभाग की टीम ने वर्ष 1998 में कैसरबाग कोतवाली में भूखंड
घोटालों व सरकारी धन का गबन करने के संबंध में धोखाधड़ी के तीन मुकदमे
दर्ज कराए गए थे। श्रीपाल वर्मा, तत्कालीन संयुक्त सचिव और वर्तमान में
निदेशक समाज कल्याण मिश्रीलाल पासवान समेत अभियंताओं व कर्मचारियों पर
आरोप था कि उन लोगों ने सीतापुर रोड योजना सेक्टर-सी में पार्क की जमीन
पर बिना प्राधिकरण बोर्ड व शासन की अनुमति के भूखंड आवंटित कर दिए थे। 15
भूखंडों की रजिस्ट्री कर दी गई थी, लेकिन नक्शा व्यावसायिक श्रेणी के लिए
पास किया गया था। वर्ष 1987 से 1992 के मध्य फर्जी दस्तावेजों व कूटरचना
कर उक्त भूखंडों का आवंटन किया था, जबकि योजना के मूल आवंटियों ने पार्क
के सामने भूखंड पाने के लिए अतिरिक्त चार्ज प्राधिकरण में दिया था। जांच
में श्रीपाल वर्मा तीनों मामलों में दोषी पाए गए। सतर्कता अधिष्ठान, लखनऊ
सेक्टर की पुलिस अधीक्षक दीपिका गर्ग के निर्देश पर गुरुवार को सतर्कता
विभाग के निरीक्षक आरडी यादव व सिपाही इश्तियाक खां ने अलीगंज स्थित
पूर्व संयुक्त सचिव श्रीपाल वर्मा के आवास से उन्हें गिरफ्तार कर लिया।
सतर्कता निरीक्षक आरडी यादव ने बताया कि 13 आरोपियों में नौ को दोषी पाया
गया था। इसमे संयुक्त सचिव से लेकर अभियंता व लिपिक भी हैं। दो को छोड़कर
शेष का मामला अदालत में विचाराधीन था। श्री वर्मा की गिरफ्तारी के बाद
तत्कालीन संयुक्त सचिव व वर्तमान में निदेशक समाज कल्याण के पद पर तैनात
मिश्रीलाल पासवान की गिरफ्तारी के लिए शासन को पत्र भेजा गया है। उधर,
अदालत ने मामले की सुनवाई के लिए 7 मई की तिथि नियत की है।
निजता नीति | सेवा की शर्तें | आपके सुझाव

इस पृष्ठ की सामग्री जागरण प्रकाशन लिमिटेड द्वारा प्रदान की गई है
कॉपीराइट © 2007 याहू वेब सर्विसेज़ इंडिया प्राइवेट लिमिटेड सर्वाधिकार सुरक्षित
कॉपीराइट / IP नीति

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Tuesday 10 May, 2011

corruption in uttar pradesh social welfare : Scheduled Caste Students being deprived of quality technical education

dear all ,

Government G.B.Pant Polytechnic Mohan Road Lucknow is the only
polytechnic in the country that is being run since 1965 to provide
education to SC/ST/OBC students only. While all other polytechnics of
the state are run under technical education department , this
polytechnic is run under social welfare department of Uttar pradesh
so that interests of SC/ST/OBC students can be safeguarded . Due to
prevailing corruption in social welfare department , the situation is
worse than expected. the feature in magazine around the india april 11
issue unearths it all . the concerned article is attached and is
available at given links also

http://file1.hpage.com/002342/62/bilder/around_the_india_april_11_page_22.jpg

http://file1.hpage.com/002342/62/bilder/around_the_india_april_11_page_23.jpg

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

corruption in uttar pradesh social welfare : Scheduled Caste Students being deprived of quality education

dear all ,

Government G.B.Pant Polytechnic Mohan Road Lucknow is the only
polytechnic in the country that is being run since 1965 to provide
education to SC/ST/OBC students only. While all other polytechnics of
the state are run under technical education department , this
polytechnic is run under social welfare department of Uttar pradesh
so that interests of SC/ST/OBC students can be safeguarded . Due to
prevailing corruption in social welfare department , the situation is
worse than expected. the feature in magazine around the india april 11
issue unearths it all . the concerned article is attached and is
available at given links also

http://file1.hpage.com/002342/62/bilder/around_the_india_april_11_page_22.jpg

http://file1.hpage.com/002342/62/bilder/around_the_india_april_11_page_23.jpg

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Friday 6 May, 2011

यांत्रिक बूचड़खानों के खिलाफ है मेरा आमरण अनशन: मैत्रीप्रभ सागर

http://ahimsasangh.net/wp/?p=1196

यांत्रिक बूचड़खानों के खिलाफ है मेरा आमरण अनशन: मैत्रीप्रभ सागर
Posted on May 4, 2011 by Sampadak
बड़ौत :जैन मुनि श्री मैत्रीप्रभ सागर का अनशन यांत्रिक बूचड़खानों के
खिलाफ है। ये मेरठ, मुरादाबाद, सहारनपुर, झांसी, लखनऊ, कानपुर, अलीगढ़,
आगरा में खुलने जा रहे हैं। बड़ौत में कोई बूचड़खाना नही खुलने जा रहा
है। यह अनशन मेरठ में होना था लेकिन लोगों ने साथ नही दिया। मुनि
मैत्रीप्रभ सागर ने विशेष बातचीत में यह जानकारी दी।
बड़ौत के पाण्डुक शिला मैदान में वे 8 दिनों से आमरण अनशन पर बैठे हैं।
कहते हैं, मेरा आमरण अनशन केवल प्रदेश में नए खुलने जा रहे 8 यांत्रिक
बूचड़खानों के विरोध में है। उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार ने मेरठ के घोसीपुरा
सहित सहारनपुर, मुरादाबाद, लखनऊ, झांसी, कानपुर, अलीगढ़, आगरा में नए
यांत्रिक बूचड़खानों के लिए लाईसेंस जारी कर दिए हैं। एक यांत्रिक
बूचड़खाने में प्रतिदिन 10-20 हजार पशुओं का वध किया जाएगा। यानि इन सभी
बूचड़खानों में 80 हजार-1.5 लाख पशु प्रतिदिन काटे जाऐंगे। जिससे प्रदेश
के साथ साथ देश में पशुओं की संख्या तेजी से घटेगी तथा दूध का अकाल पैदा
हो जाएगा। जैन संत कहते हैं, मैं केवल इन बूचड़खानों का विरोध कर रहा
हूं। दूध की जरूरत हर धर्म के लोगों को है साथ ही और पशुपालन भी देश में
हर धर्म के लोग करते हैं।

यूपी से नहीं रहा खास ताल्लुक
बड़ौत। मैत्री प्रभ सागर ने बताया कि मेरा उत्तर प्रदेश से पहले कोई खास
ताल्लुक नहीं रहा है। मैं गुजरात से बीते 22 मार्च को मेरठ आया था। वहां
मैने समाचार पत्रों में पढ़ा कि उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार ने 8 शहरों में
यांत्रिक बूचड़खाने खोलने के लिए लाईसेंस जारी किए हैं। वहीं से मैने
विरोध की ठानी। मेरठ में ही आमरण अनशन का निर्णय ले चुका था, लेकिन वहां
के लोगों ने साथ नही दिया। वहीं मुझे बड़ौत के सज्जन मिले और उन्होने
सहयोग करने की अपील की। इससे पहले मैं दस माह गुजरात में रहा। मेरी
कर्मभूमि राजस्थान रही है।
कौन हैं मैत्रीप्रभ सागर:

नाम- मुनि मैत्रीप्रभ सागर

मूल निवास- खड़गपुर, जिला मिदनापुर, पश्चिम बंगाल

पिता-स्वर्गीय श्री विक्रम चंद्र जी

गुरु- आचार्यश्री मणिप्रभ सागर जी
-
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Campaign against slaughter houses in U.P.

Dear all ,

Please click the given link .

if the campaign against slaughter houses in uttar pradesh appeals to
you convincing enough to act , please act atonce n be a part of this
movement from barbarism to humanity.

regards

urvashi


http://ahimsasangh.net/wp/?p=1205

Campaign against slaughter houses in U.P.
Posted on May 4, 2011 by Sampadak
How you can support us?

"Scrap the Slaughter House Policy"

Dear All,

With the U. P. Government is giving licenses to new abattoirs in the
state, there's simply no way that we can ignore the cries of the Lakhs
of innocent animals who fall victim to this barbaric cruelty and mass
butchering. All the proposed ultra modern slaughter houses will have
capacity to butcher 10,000-20,000 animals per day and the meat will be
exported out of India. Enough is enough.

You all are aware that U.P. Govt has issued licenses to 8 new
Slaughter Houses. These slaughter houses are against the humanity and
means of destroying animal wealth of the state. In protest, Jain Monk
Munishri Maitriprabh Sagarji has started his fast unto death from 26th
April 2011 at Baraut, Distt. Baagpat, Uttar Pradesh. Locals from the
surrounding area and various organisations have given their support to
the Honorable saint but nothing fruitful has been achieved till date.
Local administration there has imposed section 144 in the city and
disrupting the non violence agitation for no good reason and adopting
tactics to discourage the public.

We all know that the slaughter house licenses have been given for the
benefit of few companies. Neither the Uttar Pradesh nor the country
will benefit in any way by opening of such cruel and barbaric
slaughter houses. See our article on 'benefits from animal wealth:
http://ahimsasangh.net/wp/?p=1118.

We're standing up against the mandate of Government of U. P. State by
any means necessary in support of Jain Monk Munishri Maitriprabh
Sagarji, and we need your help to stop these horrible projects of
animal slaughter for good.

Here are 5 ways that you can take action and spread the word to all
your friends and family:

1. Start Group Prayers ( 1-2 hours Paath of Namokar Mantra/ Gayatri
Mantra/ Hanuman Chalisa/ Ramayan/Bhaktamar Stotra/ Gurwani Kirtan etc)
in your nearest Temple/Gurudwara or Community Hall for the success of
campaign against slaughter houses and better health of Muni Shri
Maitri Prabh Sagarji.

2. Spread the word about "Scrap the Slaughter House Policy" and help
expose Government's shameful secret through emails, sms, blogs,
websites etc. You can also send us your Support Letter (Samarthan
Patra) on the letterhead of your group/organisation/society or
community on our email: pashuraksha@gmail.com; this will be of immense
help.

3. Do you have 10 minutes to save animals? Share this film on animal
killings: economic loss to India, which reveals the true facts about
the massacre and the loss of taxpayer money each year.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmATxnfygE8

4. No religion in this world supports killing of animals. Watch
ABKHVS's vegetarian quotes video and then share it on Facebook and
anywhere else! http://ahimsasangh.net/wp/?page_id=44

5. Have you seen what happens to cows in India? Watch this shocking
video that will open your eyes to India's cruel cow slaughter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZGMpAyWmZ8

OUR TARGET 500 EMAILS DAILY TO MISS MAYAWATI, CM OF UTTAR PRADESH:

Please help us keep the pressure on Government of Uttar Pradesh and
the Central Government – write emails/fax/post cards to UP Govt.
officials / start Signature Campaign in your locality/area to and tell
them to scrap the Slaughter House Policy.

Following are the target email ids:
Chief Minister, Uttar Pradesh: cmup@nic.in
PR Department: CM office, Uttar Pradesh: upinformationdeptt@gmail.com
Directorate of Environment, Uttar Pradesh: doeuplko@yahoo.com
Standard format for post card letter/fax/email:

To,

Ms. Mayawati, Chief Minister, U.P.

Respected Madam,

Your Government has issued licenses for establishment of new slaughter
houses in the state of Uttar Pradesh. I believe that the complete
facts have not been given to you on the issue else you would have not
given your approval. Therefore, I would like to put some concern
before you:

No economic benefits can be derived by killing of innocent animals by
the people or the Govt except the Company, which is involved. I would
rather say that your Government can earn 5-10 times more benefits by
the conservation of these creatures of the God in comparison to export
of their meat (kindly analyze the data release by Central Statistical
Organisation, GOI, 2009) . Cattle are the life line of villagers, they
give milk, dung for fuel, manure for farming, and transportation for
villagers, conservation of environment etc. They are useful in many
other ways.

Moreover, slaughterhouses are big threat to the environment. The whole
world has accepted this fact and moving towards greener path and
adopting vegetarian die to control Global warming. Many nations have
started closing of slaughter houses; India is the land of Mahavira,
Gautam Buddha, Ram-Krishna, who taught us the lesson of Ahimsa. Jain
Munishri Maitriprabh Sagarji is on his Fast unto death at Baraut,
Baagpat since last 8 days in protest of licenses to new slaughter
houses, you should be aware. I am aware that you have great respect
towards sadhus and Indian culture of Ahimsa/jeevdaya.

We request you to look into the matter and ask the concerned
department to reconsider their decision and withdraw it. Please cancel
the new licenses of slaughter houses with immediate effect. I am sure
that your stand to promote Ahimsa/Jeevdaya will bring you greater
support and honour from the Aam Aadmi.

Regards,

Name/Place/Email:

You can start sending Post cards/ fax to:
1. Ku. Mayawati,
Chief Minister, U. P.
Office of the Chief Minister,
Lucknow, U. P.
Office: 0522-2236181, 2239296, 2215501
Residence: 2236838, 2236985
Fax to CM-0522-2235733, Governor- 0522-2225995


Permanent address:
C- 57, INDRAPURI, NEW DELHI – 110 012
Phone no. 011-23356363, 23356565
2. Director,
Department of Information & Public Relations,
Government of Uttar Pradesh,
Suchna Bhawan, Park Road
Lucknow – 226001
3. Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain "Aditya"
Union Minister of State, Rural Development
Permanent Address:
52, Gusain Pura, Jhansi,
Uttar Pradesh
Tels. (0510) 2440030
Cell no. 09871103294
Present Address:
78, Lodhi Estates,
New Delhi -110 003
Tels. (011) 23388879 (O), 24644994 (R)
Fax. (011) 24644996 (R) 23388827 (O)

--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Wednesday 4 May, 2011

Arrest

Hi rtiact2005india4u.aishwaryaj,

I just sent a fax to PM, Manmohan Singh and Maharashtra CM, Prithviraj Chavan asking them to respect public opinion on the Jaitapur issue.

Please read the mail below from Former Chief of Naval Staff of the Indian Navy, Admiral L. Ramdas, and take action. http://greenpeace.in/take-action/stop-dangerous-nuclear-power-in-jaitapur/fax-manmohan-singh.php

Regards,



Dear friends,

I am taking the unusual step of sending this direct request because I believe that the announcement by the PMO on the 25th anniversary of Chernobyl, to continue with the proposed French-built nuclear power park at Jaitapur is a serious mistake with long term implications for our people.[1]

Along with several others I participated in the “Tarapur to Jaitapur” Yatra (march) in Maharashtra, to protest against the proposed nuclear plant in Jaitapur.[2] We did not reach Jaitapur because many of us were detained/arrested for participating in this peaceful protest.[3]

It is well known that the Jaitapur nuclear plant is on an earthquake-prone zone [4] and the French EPR reactors have not yet been tested anywhere in the world.[5] Surprisingly the government has rejected the demands to cancel the project, which will result in the loss of land and livelihoods for many. Further, the government has shown disregard for the views of the many scientists, academics, military and other citizens from the rest of the country calling for a review of its earlier decisions on nuclear power plants.

Apart from announcing the creation of an independent regulatory board to ensure safety standards, the government has taken no action on the widespread demand for a complete fresh review of nuclear energy policy in the country. We need to tell Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that he cannot ignore serious concerns raised by the people of this country. You should send a fax to the PM asking him to stop the Jaitapur nuclear plant.

http://greenpeace.in/take-action/stop-dangerous-nuclear-power-in-jaitapur/fax-manmohan-singh.php

Add your signature to the message and we will fax it to the PM for you. 73,000 petition signatures opposing this plant have already been delivered to the PM.[6] Now a large number of faxes asking him to stop the plant will make it difficult for him ignore the demand.

Safe and clean renewable energy options and energy efficiency can help meet our energy demands, all of which are available and at a much lower cost than nuclear[7]. The government needs to invest in these instead of dangerous nuclear energy. Tell the PM to stop this dangerous plant now!

http://greenpeace.in/take-action/stop-dangerous-nuclear-power-in-jaitapur/fax-manmohan-singh.php

Thank you for taking action!


Admiral L. Ramdas,
Former Chief of Naval Staff,
Indian Navy.


Sources:

1. Jaitapur plant to go ahead with greater compensation, Times of India, April 27, 2011
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Jaitapur-plant-to-go-ahead-with-greater-compensation/articleshow/8095503.cms

2. Tarapur-to-Jaitapur march against n-plant planned, DNA, April 11, 2011
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_tarapur-to-jaitapur-march-against-n-plant-planned_1530544

3. Activists of anti-nuclear plant yatra detained, The Hindu, April 24, 2011
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article1761935.ece

4. 20 years, 92 quakes: Ground trembles beneath Jaitapur's feet, Times of India, March 16, 2011
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/20-years-92-quakes-Ground-trembles-beneath-Jaitapurs-feet/articleshow/7714776.cms

5. Why should Jaitapur be made a guinea pig for untested reactors, DNA, March 17, 2011
http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/comment_why-should-jaitapur-be-made-a-guinea-pig-for-untested-reactor_1520843-all

6. Anti-nuclear protesters march in Indian capital, news.yahoo.com, March 25, 2011
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110325/ap_on_re_as/as_india_nuclear_protest_2

7. Energy Revolution, Greenpeace, March 23, 2009
http://www.greenpeace.org/india/Global/india/report/2009/3/energy-revolution.pdf

Greenpeace provides an alternate energy vision for India, Greenpeace, March 24, 2009
http://www.greenpeace.org/india/en/news/greenpeace-provides-an-alterna/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.

Sunday 1 May, 2011

Arvind Kejriwal appeals for complete transparency in drafting of Lokpal Bill

http://www.dailyindia.com/show/437512.php

Arvind Kejriwal appeals for complete transparency in drafting of Lokpal Bill
From ANI

New Delhi, May 1(ANI): Social activist and member of Lokpal Bill
drafting committee, Arvind Kejriwal, on Sunday appealed for complete
transparency in the Bill drafting.

He was speaking on the sidelines of a rally organized by a
non-governmental organisation, India Against Corruption (IAC) in
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh.

In a bid to gather public support and suggestions in the draft of the
anti-corruption law, the voluntary group is organizing nationwide
rallies at various places in the country.

He said the five-member representatives of the civil society are
trying their best to bring transparency in the drafting process.

"We do not want in this joint committee that we 10 members would sit
inside the room and come up with a law. We rather wish that the whole
process should be transparent. We have requested for a videography of
the meeting, so that the public get to know what was going on inside,"
Kejriwal said.

He also ensured that the people of India would succeed in their
campaign against corruption.

"We are small people. We do not have money or man-power. We are small
people. We have only one thing, our truth and honesty. We have
confidence that at the end only truth wins," he said.

The Central government had issued a notification on April 9 to appoint
a drafting committee of the Bill after five days of indefinite hunger
strike by veteran social activist Anna Hazare.

The panel consists of 10 members, five each from the government and
the civil society, which includes Hazare, Kejriwal, lawyers Shanti and
Prashant Bhushan and former Supreme Court judge Santosh Hegde.

The first sitting of the draft panel of the Bill took place in New
Delhi on April 16.


Copyright Asian News International/DailyIndia.com


--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com

Curb rampant corruption, appoint Lokayukta: Agnivesh to Mayawati

Curb rampant corruption, appoint Lokayukta: Agnivesh to Mayawati

http://twocircles.net/2011may01/curb_rampant_corruption_appoint_lokayukta_agnivesh_mayawati.html


By IANS,

Lucknow: Social activist Swami Agnivesh Sunday hit out at Uttar
Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati for the "rampant corruption" in her
government and asked her to appoint a Lokayukta (ombudsman) in the
state.

Reacting to Mayawati's objection over the absence of any Dalit on the
Jan Lokpal Bill drafting committee, Agnivesh said: "I do welcome her
objection and thank her for raising the issue, but I would also like
to ask the UP (Uttar Pardesh) chief minister to declare whether she
had taken any effective steps to curb the rampant corruption in her
government."

"If she were truly concerned about the plight of poor Dalits, then it
was time that she initiated concrete anti-corruption measures and one
of these could be to pass the new Jan Lokayukta Bill and have a Jan
Lokayukta in place in the country's most populous state," he said,
addressing a press conference with activist Arvind Kejriwal, a civil
society member of the Lokpal Bill drafting panel.

Kejriwal and Agnivesh arrived here Sunday morning along with satirist
Jaspal Bhatti to represent Anna Hazare, whose sudden illness prevented
him from visiting Lucknow to address a public rally Sunday evening.

Replying to questions, Kejriwal said the civil society activists have
"neither allowed any political party to share our forum nor do we have
any intention to associate ourselves with any political outfit in any
manner".

"There are good and bad people in all political parties, just as there
are good and bad people in the bureaucracy and other areas of
governance; therefore, if anyone with a clean reputation comes forward
in his individual capacity to extend support to this movement of the
common masses, we will accept such support," he added.

Reposing a lot of faith in the youth, Kejriwal said he would like to
call upon youth leaders in different political parties to raise the
issue of corruption.

Noting how Anna Hazare's movement had spread throughout the country,
he said: "As I speak here today, thousands of people are voluntarily
taking out marches and demonstrations in different cities of India to
express their support for Anna."

"As many as 6,000 people gathered at the Marina Beach in Chennai this
morning, while several thousands gathered in Mumbai, Pune, Jaipur and
a huge march that was taken out from Jantar Mantar to the Boat Club in
New Delhi to express solidarity with civil society a day before the
second meeting of the Lokpal Bill drafting committee Monday."

The committee comprises five cabinet ministers and five activists.

Earlier in the day, Agnivesh and Kejriwal were joined by leading local
activists including former Allahabad high court judges Kamleshwar Nath
and S.C. Verma, former state director general of police Prakash Singh,
among others for an interaction with intellectuals, professionals,
religious scholars and trade union leaders on the burning issue of
corruption.
--
उर्वशी शर्मा
"सूचना का अधिकार " हेल्पलाइन: 8081898081
yaishwaryaj@gmail.com