Vikram Simha | 1 May 06:53 2010
Picon

Week End Classic Film

 

Today I Saw An advertisement In Deccan Herald, Bangalore by Loksabha TV That The Film "EK CUP CHYA" , Directors Sumitra Bhave & Sunil Shkanthar , 2009 , 120minutes, Vlor. Marathi -English, Indian Panorama 2009 , Uninterrupted Viewing Film Courtesy NFDC will be Shown on saturday May 1 at 9pm and sunday May 2 at 2pm
This is The Film of An Bus conductors Trails Using RTI
N vikramsimha ,Trustee RTI Study Center & KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
raja bunch | 1 May 07:12 2010
Picon

Re: Re: IPO commision

 

Dear Mr Sarabjit
                         I do not know much about you.You are much burdened with the work of moderating the site.Are you the owner of this site? How much money is spent in all the exercises of this site.?  How much money you incur from your pocket in doing this job?Plz let me have the details of the site.
With best wishes.
Bunch

From: sarbajitr <sroy1947 <at> yahoo.com>
To: rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, 30 April, 2010 8:51:40 PM
Subject: [rti_india] Re: IPO commision

 

Dear Raja

As you know this group is not like other RTI groups. If you want a conventional answer you can read this
http://www.rtiindia .org/forum/ 51331-drafting- right-informatio n-india-post. html

In my view you are a baby. What is worse is that you are a cry baby.
The RTI Rules generally allow you to pay in cash, bankers cheque (ie. D/D, LPO) and now by IPO.

Is there any rule / law which says that IPOs of all denominations must always be in stock at each and every post office of the country? In the absence of any statutory obligation of the Post Office to keep IPOs of each and every denomination available just so that people like you c an file RTIs from any post office in India, it is always open to you to use one of the other forms of payment if you have a problem with IPOs.

The charging a Rs 1 commission per IPO is perfectly reasonable. The Postal dept incurs a cost of Rs 3 for every small denomination IPO it sells. So the more RTIs Mr Raja Bunch files the greater is the burden on honest taxpayers and responsible RTIers.

The Court fee example is irrelevant. Virtually all small value court fee stamps in the country are fake (Telgi) and go directly into the pocket of the vested interests.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogrou ps.com, raja bunch <bunch_raja <at> ...> wrote:
>
> Friends
> Today I went to buy a few IPOs of Rs 10/ for RTI at IC Colony PO.
> Were not available.Only for Rs 2/ were available.Asked when did the last stock come, was told,Feb 2/10. Shocking aspect was this that we have to pay a comm of Re 1. whereas the printing is only Re.0.50. Even if you buy IPO worth Re/1 comm is Re 1/ For any Denomination.
> When we buy any Court Fee stamp or any stamp from the vendor we need not pay any comm. Is their any regulation in this. ie. If I want to file an RTI and only Re 1/ denomination IPO is available,I have to pay Rs20/
>
> Regards
> Bunch
>

Dear Mr

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
sarbajitr | 1 May 08:31 2010
Picon

Re: IPO commision

 

Dear Bunch

1) I am not burdened by moderating this site. In fact thanks to the cooperation of the members recently, there is hardly any moderation involved. In any case, we are an unmoderated group where nobody is censored and everyone can post freely.

2) This is a free group. The owner is Yahoo. I pay nothing. BTW, you can also start your own group - Yahoo groups, Google groups, Nabble groups, etc etc. are the sites. Use google search to locate the home pages of these sites.

3) Finally, I have never taken even a single paise (in any currency) from anyone for the social services I do.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, raja bunch <bunch_raja <at> ...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr Sarabjit
>I do not know much about you.You are much burdened with the work of moderating the site.Are you the owner of this site? How much money is spent in all the exercises of this site.? How much money you incur from your pocket in doing this job?Plz let me have the details of the site.
> With best wishes.
> Bunch
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
sarbajitr | 1 May 11:09 2010
Picon

RTI as an undemocratic construct

 

The reason why RTI is not working in India is because the concept of RTI itself is alien to democracy and is actually borrowed from Marxism-Leninism (as interpreted by the great helmsman). We all saw the recent spectacle (farce) of the BJP sponsored cut-motion (supported) by Communists in Parliament.

I wonder how many of us would agree with these words of a famous international leader on this issue below. Can you identify the leader without using google or another search engine :-) ???

"Political struggle that results in the victory of a candidate with, for example, 51 per cent of the votes leads to a dictatorial governing body in the guise of a false democracy, since 49 per cent of the electorate is ruled by an instrument of government they did not vote for, but which has been imposed upon them. Such is dictatorship. Besides, this political conflict may produce a governing body that represents only a minority. For when votes are distributed among several candidates, though one polls more than any other, the sum of the votes received by those who received fewer votes might well constitute an overwhelming majority. However, the candidate with fewer votes wins and his success is regarded as legitimate and democratic! In actual fact, dictatorship is established under t he cover of false democracy. This is the reality of the political systems prevailing in the world today. They are dictatorial systems and it is evident that they falsify genuine democracy.

Parliaments are the backbone of that conventional democracy prevailing in the world today. Parliament is a misrepresentation of the people, and parliamentary systems are a false solution to the problem of democracy. A parliament is originally founded to represent the people, but this in itself is undemocratic as democracy means the authority of the people and not an authority acting on their behalf. The mere existence of a parliament means the absence of the people. True democracy exists only through the direct participation of the people, and not through the activity of their representatives. Parliaments have been a legal barrier between the people and the exercise of authority, excluding the masses from meaningful politics and monopolizing sovereignty in their place. People are left with only a facade of democracy, manifested in long queues to cast their election ballots.

To lay bare the character of parliaments, one has to examine their origin. They are either elected from constituencies, a party, or a coalition of parties, or are appointed. But all of these procedures are undemocratic, for dividing the population into constituencies means that one member of parliament represents thousands, hundreds of thousands, or millions of people, depending on the size of the population. It also means that a member keeps few popular organizational links with the electors since he, like other members, is considered a representative of the whole people. This is what the prevailing traditional democracy requires. The masses are completely isolated from the representative and he, in turn, is totally removed from them. Immediately after winning the electors' votes the repr esentative takes over the people's sovereignty and acts on their behalf. The prevailing traditional democracy endows the member of parliament with a sacredness and immunity which are denied to the rest of the people. Parliaments, therefore, have become a means of plundering and usurping the authority of the people. It has thus become the right of the people to struggle, through popular revolution, to destroy such instruments - the so-called parliamentary assemblies which usurp democracy and sovereignty, and which stifle the will of the people. The masses have the right to proclaim reverberantly the new principle: no representation in lieu of the people.

If parliament is formed from one party as a result of its winning an election, it becomes a parliament of the winning party and not of the people. It represents the party and not the people, and the executive power of the parliament becomes that of the victorious party and not of the people. The same is true of the parliament of proportional representation in which each party holds a number of seats proportional to their success in the popular vote. The members of the parliament represent their respective parties and not the people, and the power established by such a coalition is the power of the combined parties and not that of the people. Under such systems, the people are the victims whose votes are vied for by exploitative competing factions who dupe the people into political circuses that are outwardly noisy and frantic, but inwardly powerless and irrelevant. Alternatively, the people are seduced into standing in long, apathetic, silent queues to cast their ballots in the same way that they throw waste paper into dustbins. This is the traditional democracy prevalent in the whole world, whether it is represented by a one-party, two-party, multiparty or non-party system. Thus it is clear that representation is a fraud."

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
veeresh kumar | 2 May 17:10 2010
Picon

Re: RTI as an undemocratic construct

 

Dear Mr Sarbjit

Whoever the international leader was, it is a brilliant analysis of
fake, eyewash
Parliamentary democracy. I think these are Adolf Hitler's words ! Is that why
no one on this list disagrees.

Veeresh Kumar

>The reason why RTI is not working in India is because the concept of RTI itself
>is alien to democracy and is actually borrowed from Marxism-Leninism (as
>interpreted by the great helmsman). We all saw the recent spectacle (farce) of
>the BJP sponsored cut-motion (supported) by Communists in Parliament.
>
>I wonder how many of us would agree with these words of a famous international
>leader on this issue below. Can you identify the leader without using google or
>another search engine :-) ???

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
sarbajitr | 3 May 09:16 2010
Picon

Re: RTI as an undemocratic construct

 

No, it was not Adolf Hitler, but a world leader who has been in power for a very long time and is well known for thumbing his nose at Western super-powers. He shares a set of initials with Mahatma Gandhi.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, veeresh kumar <v4veeresh <at> ...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr Sarbjit
>
> Whoever the international leader was, it is a brilliant analysis of
> fake, eyewash
> Parliamentary democracy. I think these are Adolf Hitler's words ! Is that why
> no one on this list disagrees.
>
> Veeresh Kumar
>
> >The reason why RTI is not working in India is because the concept of RTI itself
> >is alien to democracy and is actually borrowed from Marxism-Leninism (as
> >interpreted by the great helmsman). We all saw the recent spectacle (farce) of
> >the BJP sponsored cut-motion (supported) by Communists in Parliament.
> >
> >I wonder how many of us would agree with these words of a famous international
> >leader on this issue below. Can you identify the leader without using google or
> >another search engine :-) ???
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
C K Jam | 3 May 19:05 2010
Picon

Re: Re: RTI as an undemocratic construct

 

Muammar Gaddafi

--- On Mon, 5/3/10, sarbajitr <sroy1947 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:

From: sarbajitr <sroy1947 <at> yahoo.com>
Subject: [rti_india] Re: RTI as an undemocratic construct
To: rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, May 3, 2010, 7:16 AM

 

No, it was not Adolf Hitler, but a world leader who has been in power for a very long time and is well known for thumbing his nose at Western super-powers. He shares a set of initials with Mahatma Gandhi.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogrou ps.com, veeresh kumar <v4veeresh <at> . ..> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr Sarbjit
>
> Whoever the international leader was, it is a brilliant analysis of
> fake, eyewash
> Parliamentary democracy. I think these are Adolf Hitler's words ! Is that why
> no one on this list disagrees.
>
> Veeresh Kumar
>
> >The reason why RTI is not working in India is because the concept of RTI itself
> >is alien to democracy and is actually borrowed from Marxism-Leninism (as
> >interpreted by the great helmsman). We all saw the recent spectacle (farce) of
> >the BJP sponsored cut-motion (supported) by Communists in Parliament.
> >
> >I wonder how many of us would agree with these words of a famous international
> >leader on this issue below. Can you identify the leader without using google or
> >another search engine :-) ???
>


__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Danish Raza | 4 May 14:16 2010

Centre lists its grouses with the right to information

 

Centre lists its grouses with the right to information


The proposal to amend RTI law includes 11 sections that would need to be changed, says a DoPT reply to an information request
Danish Raza | New Delhi | May 03 2010

For the first time, the Centre has listed the sections of the RTI Act 2005 -- 11 in number -- that it finds problematic and the amendments that it deems desirable, mentioning its unease over disclosure of Cabinet papers, "sensitivity" of the office of the CJI, and the need to give "partial exemption to organizations possessing sensitive information".

"Government is examining a proposal regarding amendment to the Act which, in brief, covers... " says Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) in its April 30, 2010 reply to an RTI request from Subhash Chandra Agrawal, before listing 11 sections that have been deemed to require amendments.

"Amendment to Section 7 so as to avoid frivolous and vexatious requests; amendment to Section 8 so as to slightly modify the provision about disclosure of Cabinet papers, to ensure smooth functioning of the government and to take care of the sensitivity of the office of the CJI," says number 3 of the list of areas that, according to the government, need amendment.

It can be recalled that in November last year, outgoing chief justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan wrote a letter to the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh requesting that his office should not come under the transparency law. Later, a communication between Singh and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi also revealed the latter's intention to take CJI's office out of the purview of the RTI Act.
The DoPT reply also lists "amendment to Section 24 so as to incorporate a provision about partial exemption of organization possessing sensitive information," which appears to be a proposal to add more agencies to the list of 22 organisations that are exempted from the Act.

To remove the ambiguity as to "whether a particular NGO be treated as a public authority or not", the government is considering amending Section 2 which defines a public authority that are required by the law to respond to requests for information, says the DoPT reply. Amendment to Section 4 "so as to enlarge the scope of suo motu disclosure" is also under consideration.
Other proposals listed in the DoPT reply are amendments to Sections 12 and 15 to make a provision about "giving the current charge of the post of the chief information commissioner to any information commissioner."

The DoPT reply came on an RTI application that Agrawal filed in March. Agrawal had sought a copy of the proposed changes in the RTI Act. 
It's well known that citizen groups and RTI advocates have been vehemently opposing any proposal to amend the RTI Act.

“We have repeatedly told the government that there is an urgent need for proper implementation of the Act rather than introducing any amendments,” Shekhar Singh, member, National campaign for people’s right to information (NCPRI), told Governance Now.

According to Manish Sisodia, another RTI activist and founder, Kabir, the amendments will result in weakening of the Act. “In the recent past, important information has come out in public domain because of the RTI Act. The government cannot see this happening and want to curb the information flow by introducing amendments. It will be great if they can first fully implement the sections that they want to amend,” said he.


__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
sarbajit roy | 4 May 17:46 2010
Picon

Re: Centre lists its grouses with the right to information

Dear Danish

I regret to again inform you about our Cross-Posting Rules. This is a
Rule which was overwhelmingly voted in a poll / referendum of our
members, so I am not acting as like Mr. Gaddafi on this issue.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/surveys?id=12630484

"Question: To what degree should "Cross Posting" on this list be permitted.

Responses

Choices                                Votes  %  reply
Freely and without restrictions 1            3%
Members should use own discretion whilst forwarding original content 3
               11%
CP'ing crowds my email box 4                       15%
Very limited degree (Occasionally) 8               30%
Not at all 10          38%
"

The evidence against you

"
FromDanish Raza <danish@...>
torti4empowerment@...,
rti_india@...,
hemant@...,
india_wba <INDIA_WBA@...>
dateTue, May 4, 2010 at 5:46 PM
subject[rti4empowerment] Centre lists its grouses with the right to information
"

On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Danish Raza
<danish@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Centre lists its grouses with the right to information
>
> The proposal to amend RTI law includes 11 sections that would need to be changed, says a DoPT reply to an
information request
> Danish Raza | New Delhi | May 03 2010
>
> For the first time, the Centre has listed the sections of the RTI Act 2005 -- 11 in number -- that it finds
problematic and the amendments that it deems desirable, mentioning its unease over disclosure of
Cabinet papers, "sensitivity" of the office of the CJI, and the need to give "partial exemption to
organizations possessing sensitive information".
>
> "Government is examining a proposal regarding amendment to the Act which, in brief, covers... " says
Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) in its April 30, 2010 reply to an RTI request from Subhash
Chandra Agrawal, before listing 11 sections that have been deemed to require amendments.
>
> "Amendment to Section 7 so as to avoid frivolous and vexatious requests; amendment to Section 8 so as to
slightly modify the provision about disclosure of Cabinet papers, to ensure smooth functioning of the
government and to take care of the sensitivity of the office of the CJI," says number 3 of the list of areas
that, according to the government, need amendment.
>
> It can be recalled that in November last year, outgoing chief justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan wrote a
letter to the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh requesting that his office should not come under the
transparency law. Later, a communication between Singh and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi also revealed
the latter's intention to take CJI's office out of the purview of the RTI Act.
> The DoPT reply also lists "amendment to Section 24 so as to incorporate a provision about partial
exemption of organization possessing sensitive information," which appears to be a proposal to add more
agencies to the list of 22 organisations that are exempted from the Act.
>
> To remove the ambiguity as to "whether a particular NGO be treated as a public authority or not", the
government is considering amending Section 2 which defines a public authority that are required by the
law to respond to requests for information, says the DoPT reply. Amendment to Section 4 "so as to enlarge
the scope of suo motu disclosure" is also under consideration.
> Other proposals listed in the DoPT reply are amendments to Sections 12 and 15 to make a provision about
"giving the current charge of the post of the chief information commissioner to any information commissioner."
>
> The DoPT reply came on an RTI application that Agrawal filed in March. Agrawal had sought a copy of the
proposed changes in the RTI Act.
> It's well known that citizen groups and RTI advocates have been vehemently opposing any proposal to amend
the RTI Act.
>
> “We have repeatedly told the government that there is an urgent need for proper implementation of the
Act rather than introducing any amendments,” Shekhar Singh, member, National campaign for
people’s right to information (NCPRI), told Governance Now.
>
> According to Manish Sisodia, another RTI activist and founder, Kabir, the amendments will result in
weakening of the Act. “In the recent past, important information has come out in public domain because
of the RTI Act. The government cannot see this happening and want to curb the information flow by
introducing amendments. It will be great if they can first fully implement the sections that they want to
amend,” said he.
>
>
> 

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    rti_india-digest@... 
    rti_india-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    rti_india-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

C K Jam | 5 May 07:51 2010
Picon

"National Federation of Information Commissions in India" (NFICI) gets off the ground [2 Attachments]

 
[Attachment(s) from C K Jam included below]


Note to Moderator: There are two attachments to this post. In case not appearing as attachments, please upload in the files section of the group

The "National Federation of Information Commissions in India" (NFICI) has got off the ground.

As per the attached GO issued by the Government of AP, Rs 5 Lakhs have been sanctioned for Membership Fee and another Rs 1.00 lakh for Annual fee for the first year.

Members will recall that a sub-committee of various Information Commissioners had presented a report on various aspects of the implementation of RTI Act and status in 2009. The full report is available here: http://www.apic.gov.in/draftreport.do

The terms of Reference Nr. 6 (TOR-6) was:

"To suggest modalities for creation of a
permanent broad-based body for the purpose
of coordination of various activities of
Central Information Commission and State
Information Commissions…."

A full copy of TOR-6 is also attached to this post.

Are any other members aware of CIC or any other SIC having contributed to the corpus and annual fees of NFICI ?

Must check whether NFICI has a PIO and has made the suo-motu disclosure under Sec 4(1)(b).

RTIwanted

__._,_.___

Attachment(s) from C K Jam

2 of 2 File(s)

Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Gmane