Sarbajit Roy | 1 May 06:17 2011
Picon

HJ <at> gg - Education Series

Dear Friends

Starting from 1-May-2011, your kindly moderators have decided that this group shall return to its traditional roots and value systems listed below in order of priority and function strictly in terms therefor:-

a) Keeping up with the latest developments in RTI in India
b) Understanding, Discussing and Researching RTI
c) Collective RTI action
d) Helping RTI "newbies"
e) Advocacy in RTI, Transparency, Accountability (incl. corruption),  Governance, Law. etc
 
Your moderators are resolved that the "tail" (ie. "e") will not be allowed to wag the "dog" (ie. the group).

Members who refuse to align themselves with the objectives of the group shall be expelled without any further notice.

Attached is a PDF file (1 Meg) from the respected magazine Economic and Political Weekly titled "The Anna Phenomenon" which should cause a few of our more vocal members to reassess their views.

Sarbajit

Attachment (The_Anna_Phenomenon_EPW.PDF): application/pdf, 1316 KiB
Chitta Behera | 1 May 09:01 2011
Picon

[rti_india] Fw: PLEASE CLEAR THE AIR IN VIEW OF THE

 

Dear Mr.Bhanot,
Thank you for your instant reaction to my 'misinformation' mail, which you have kindly reproduced in your repost for the perusal and reply by IAC team. As a matter of fact, to the best of my knowledge I have only quoted the relevant excerpts from the JL Bill 2.2 and 'Salient Features of Jan Lokpal Bill' as available on www.indiaagainstcorruption.org and simply juxtaposed the two before commenting on the glaring contradictions between the two. Now, you should before calling my post 'misinformation', should have shown to me and the rest of readers, (1) if and whether and where I have wrongly quoted the text of the JL Bill 2.2 or Salient Features of Jan Lokpal Bill, and (2) where I subjectively read my meaning into the said docs. I don't mind your act of branding of my 'post' a piece of 'misinformation', but the onus now lies on you to prove by way of reference to my post  how it is so.
With regards,
Chitta Behera    
Cuttack , Orissa
Mobile : 9437577546      

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Surendera M. Bhanot <surendera-TLqjO4jNNl4i8rCdYzckzA@public.gmane.org>
To: indiaagainstcorruption.2010-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org; info <at> indiaagainstcorruption.org
Sent: Sat, 30 April, 2011 3:03:10 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] PLEASE CLEAR THE AIR IN VIEW OF THE

Dear Sir,

One Mr.Chitta Behera of Cuttack , Orissa Mobile :             9437577546      is spreading a misinformation about the draft Jan Lokpal Bill quoting the "prodded by the hyperboles fanned out by the IAC team on www.indiaagainstcorruption.org".

The text of the misinformation is reproduced below. It is your bounden duty to clear the air by suitably rebutting the misinformation point-by-point so this misinformation could be checked.

TEXT OF THE MISNFORMATION BY Mr.Chitta Behera of Cuttack

Dear Mr.Thakur,

Thanks for your candid response approving of the fact that there exists a big hiatus between what most people innocuously think about Jan Lokpal Bill prodded by the hyperboles fanned out by the IAC team on www.indiaagainstcorruption.org and what actually transpires to a studious reader after he or she seriously goes through the weird letters of its bare text. To recapitulate, the last mail ‘Jan Lokpal Bill – can it rein in a corrupt government servant?’ strived to drive home the queer provisions made in the Bill, thanks to which Lokpal would never be able to fix any allegedly corrupt official even at the investigation stage, let alone penalize him by way of fine, disciplinary action or imprisonment. Now, let us see if Jan Lokpal has any teeth whatsoever to bite a corrupt politician. In order not to be judgmental in our probe into this all-important question, we need first of all to recapture the very rationale made out by the protagonists of the alternative Bill vis-à-vis the official Bill in the founding meeting held on 10 August 2010 at Delhi, which was attended among others by Justice Santosh Hegde, Mr.Prashant Bhushan and Mr.Arvind Kejriwala the 3 civil society members of the present Joint Drafting Committee. After critiquing the existing anti-corruption regime, the said meeting had envisaged that the would-be Lokpal of their genre (now called Jan Lokpal), unlike today’s CVC which is merely an advisory body and that too with a limited jurisdiction over bureaucrats only, can get its decisions enforced against corrupt bureaucrats and politicians as well. Further, the would-be Lokpal they envisaged would be an independent and autonomous powerhouse unlike today’s CBI, which has though teeth to bite both politicians and bureaucrats, takes instruction from its political bosses as to whom to bite, when and to what degree. (vide Minutes of Meeting). A catchy brochure ‘The Salient Features of Jan Lokpal Bill’ hung on the website of www.indiaagainstcorruption.org, which is so to say the much touted manifesto of the proposed Jan Lokpal Bill, assures us as follows, “Investigations in any case will have to be completed in one year. Trial should be completed in next year so that the corrupt politician, officer or judge is sent to jail within two years . . . the loss that a corrupt person caused to the Government will be recovered at the time of conviction”. And mind you, this is the kernel of the new illusion that instantly mobilized millions of people across the country to rally behind Anna Hazare’s clarion call for enactment of a strong anti-corruption law in the shape of Jan Lokpal Bill. But as irony would have it, in the heat of euphoria most of the people who either supported the Bill or opposed it at that point of time didn’t care to read its provisions, let alone scan or critique the same. 

Now that the phase of frenzied hullabaloo has visibly waned for various reasons beyond the control of anybody, the moot question arises, do the provisions made in the Jan Lokpal Bill fall in sync with the assurances dished out by IAC Team? To start with we need too ascertain whether the much trumpeted Bill has any teeth to bite any politician, be he Prime Minister, a Ministers, a Member of Parliament or such constitutional functionaries as President, Vice President or Speaker of Loksabha.

Firstly, the proviso to Section 18 (8) says, “Provided that the provisions of this section shall not apply to the Prime Minister”. The Section-18 is captioned as ‘Provisions relating to complaints and investigations’. Thus, going by the above proviso, no complaint can be lodged against the Prime Minister nor any enquiry or investigation whatsoever made into his conduct by the would-be Jan Lokpal.

Secondly, the Section 18(8) says that even if the allegation of corruption against a Minister is substantiated and he should therefore not continue to hold that post, ‘Lokpal shall make such recommendation to the President, who shall decide either to accept such recommendation or reject it within a month of its receipt”. In case the President rejects the recommendation of Lokpal for removal of the concerned Minister, Lok Pal is left with no option to do anything about it.

 

Thirdly, as per Section 28B (2), “For an allegation against a Member of Parliament that he has taken a bribe for any conduct in Parliament, including voting in Parliament or raising question in Parliament or any other matter, a complaint could be made to the Speaker of Lok Sabha or the Chairperson of Rajya Sabha, depending upon the House to which that member belongs”. Then it is said that a complaint of such nature shall be forwarded to the Ethics Committee within a month of its receipt, and then “The Ethics Committee shall, within a month, decide whether to . .”.  It is interesting to know that the last line is still an incomplete sentence conveying no meaning whatsoever. Is it a grammatical slip or a moral slip? What is striking above all is that there is no mention of the word ‘Lokpal’ in the entire provision. It clearly implies that Lokpal has no power to receive, let alone dispose of a complaint of corruption against a Member of Parliament in respect of his conduct in Parliament.

Fourthly, the sub-section (2) of Section 17 says, “Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorising the Lokpal to investigate any action which is taken by or with the approval of the Presiding Officer of either House of Parliament”. Thus not only any alleged act of corruption by the Speaker or Chairman of Rajya Sabha himself, but also that of any Minister, MP or official who are in league with the Speaker of Loksabha or Chairman of Rajya Sabha shall enjoy immunity from the investigative scanner of Lokpal.  

Fifthly, the definition of ‘Public Servant’ as provided under Section 2(11) is not inclusive of such constitutional authorities as President, Vice-President and Speaker of Lok Sabha, and as such these politicians in the guise of constitutional authorities remain outside the jurisdiction of Lokpal.

Sixthly, though Section -15 (Making a complaint to the Lokpal) in its sub-section (1) says inter alia that “any person may make a complaint under this Act to the Lokpal”, the sub-section (1) of Section 8 (Functions of Lokpal) provides no scope to Lokpal for receiving complaints against Judges or Minister/MPs.

Seventhly, Section 18(iii) says, “The conduct of an investigation under this Act against a public servant in respect of any action shall not affect such action, or any power or duty of any other public servant to take further action with respect to any matter subject to the investigation”. It plainly means that the very alleged act of corruption by a public servant, be he a Minister, MP, Officer or a Judge, into which Lok Pal may be investigating, shall continue in force as before and that too with the unfettered continuance of the impugned act by all other concerned public servants.

Eighthly, in a similar vein Section 18(iv) says, “If, during the course of a preliminary inquiry or investigation under this Act, the Lokpal is prima facie satisfied that the allegation or grievance in respect of any action is likely to be sustained either wholly or partly, it may, through an interim order, recommend the public authority to stay the implementation or enforcement of the decision or action complained against, or to take such mandatory or preventive action, on such terms and conditions, as it may specify in its order to prevent further harm from taking place”. Here the word ‘action’ as defined in Section 2(1) may include an alleged act of corruption by any public servant, be he a politician, bureaucrat or a judge. Then it goes on to say, “The public authority shall either comply with or reject the recommendations of Lokpal under this sub-section within 15 days of receipt of such an order”. If the concerned public authority rejects such recommendation, which is very much likely to happen, a nonplussed Lokpal, “if it feels important, may approach appropriate High Court for seeking appropriate directions to the public authority”. Thus, any small or big public authority has been privileged with the discretion to reject Lok Pal’s recommendation, and alternatively, once the case moves on to High Court at the instance of Lok Pal himself, there is no predictability about the time-limit or ultimate outcome of the case so lodged in the High Court, since either party, who might lose at the level of High Court, may move the Supreme Court to vindicate his position vis-à-vis that of the opposite party.    

Ninthly, the Jan Lokpal Bill in its Section 18(vii) says, “The Lokpal may, at any stage of inquiry or investigation under this Act, direct through an interim order, appropriate authorities to take such action as is necessary, pending inquiry or investigation.- (a) to safeguard wastage or damage of public property or public revenue by the administrative acts of the public servant; (b) to prevent further acts of misconduct by the public servant; (c ) to prevent the public servant from secreting the assets allegedly acquired by him by corrupt means.” Then like in some previous instances, the public authority is privileged with the discretion to ‘comply with or reject the recommendations of Lokpal . . . within 15 days of receipt of such an order’. In the event of rejection of such recommendation, Lokpal, as in earlier instances, ‘if it feels important, may approach appropriate High Court for seeking appropriate directions to the public authority’, thus leading to endless lingering of the case at different levels with the public servant being enabled to carry on his acts of misappropriation of public wealth, misconduct and stashing of black money in safe havens.

Tenthly, the Section 8(1) describes the types of complaints that ‘Lokpal shall be responsible for receiving’. Though it includes a specific mention of complaints against misconduct by Government servants as receivable by the Lokpal, it refrains from making a specific mention of complaints against politicians like Minister or MP   

To sum up, the Jan Lokpal Bill leaves no scope for any citizen to lodge a complaint against any person of the ruling political tribe, be he a Member of Parliament, Minister or Prime Minister, or Speaker, Vice-President and President, not to talk of penal action against then in two years of the receipt of the complaint. This is the stark reality of Jan Lokpal Bill as against the diehard myth built around it by IAC team.    

Looking forward to your informed response, 

With regards,

Chitta Behera
Cuttack , Orissa
Mobile :             9437577546      



--
"Our biggest competition is never with the others.
Instead, it is always within ourselves.
It doesn't matter if where we end up - first or at last.
If we do our best to do better than before, we've won"

Warm Regards


Surendera M. Bhanot
- President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh
- Youth for Human Rights International YHRI - South Asia
- CEO, Avis Software, Chandigarh 
- Convener & Life Member, Consumers Association Chandigarh
- Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
- Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
- Member, RTI Activist Federation, Punjab, Chandigarh
No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
Mob: +91-9888-810-811
PHONE: +91-172-2780838
FAX: 0871 266 8523 
Mail Me


DISCLAIMER: You have received this email because you any one time contacted me through mail or otherwise gave your mail-id. This e-mail is intended to be sent to the persons on my regular mail-list. In case you think this mail infringes your privacy or otherwise you do not want to receive this mail anymore, please reply with the word 'UNSUBSCRIBE" in the body of the mail. Please do not disturb the Subject line. I am sorry to see you go. But please mention the reason why you want to go. It will help me improve my services in future. Thanks

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
    .

    __,_._,___
    C K Jam | 1 May 09:39 2011
    Picon

    Re: HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    Mr Moderator,

    Today is 1st May 2011.
    You made this post at 09:47 Hrs.
    It lists out 5 value systems.

    And then, in the same post, you go on to attach a pdf document from the Economic & Political Weekly.

    Can you please indicate to which of the 5 value systems does it relate to ?

    If the Moderator himself violates the value systems listed out, that too on the first day itself, how do you expect members to adhere ?

    By posting this article you are just encouraging others to respond and again go off on a tangent !

    RTIwanted

    From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
    To: humjanenge <humjanenge <at> googlegroups.com>
    Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2011 9:47 AM
    Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    Dear Friends

    Starting from 1-May-2011, your kindly moderators have decided that this group shall return to its traditional roots and value systems listed below in order of priority and function strictly in terms therefor:-

    a) Keeping up with the latest developments in RTI in India
    b) Understanding, Discussing and Researching RTI
    c) Collective RTI action
    d) Helping RTI "newbies"
    e) Advocacy in RTI, Transparency, Accountability (incl. corruption),  Governance, Law. etc
     
    Your moderators are resolved that the "tail" (ie. "e") will not be allowed to wag the "dog" (ie. the group).

    Members who refuse to align themselves with the objectives of the group shall be expelled without any further notice.

    Attached is a PDF file (1 Meg) from the respected magazine Economic and Political Weekly titled "The Anna Phenomenon" which should cause a few of our more vocal members to reassess their views.

    Sarbajit


    sandeep kumar | 1 May 13:01 2011
    Picon

    Wrong guidelines issued by DOPT interpreting Section 6(3) of the RTI act wrongly

    To
    Sh KG Verma, Director, RTI,
    DOPT, New Delhi
    Sir,
    Vide Part IV, Section 5(3) of guide to RTI act circulated by DOPT vide
    its number No. 1/4/2009-IR dated 5.10.2009, it has been directed that
    under section 6(3) of the RTI act, the application under RTI is to be
    transferred to only one public authority.
    The justification has been given that sub-section (3) refers to
    'another public authority' and not to 'other public authorities' and
    that use of singular form in the Act in this regard is important to
    note.
    The section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 states as under
    13. Gender and number.-
    In all (Central Acts) and Regulations, unless there is anything
    repugnant in the subject or context.- Words importing the masculine
    gender shall be taken to include females, and words in the singular
    shall include the plural, and vice versa.
    
    Thus the term authority mentioned in RTI act means authorities as well.
    It is requested to immediate make necessary corrections in the
    guidelines issued by DOPT keeping in view the submissions made above.
    Thanking you,
    Yours sincerely,
    Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
    1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
    Phone: 91-99929-31181
    
    
    Sarbajit Roy | 1 May 18:34 2011
    Picon

    Re: HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    Dear Mr Karira

    It relates to the tails (ie. "civil society") attempt to wag this group for the last 1 month, and to show that your moderators won't tolerate attempts by remote controlled ("programmed") authority figures / babas / maulvis etc to be propagated on this RTI group as "the moral economy of the (middle class) crowd".

    Sarbajit

    On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 1:09 PM, C K Jam <rtiwanted-/E1597aS9LQAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
    Mr Moderator,

    Today is 1st May 2011.
    You made this post at 09:47 Hrs.
    It lists out 5 value systems.

    And then, in the same post, you go on to attach a pdf document from the Economic & Political Weekly.

    Can you please indicate to which of the 5 value systems does it relate to ?

    If the Moderator himself violates the value systems listed out, that too on the first day itself, how do you expect members to adhere ?

    By posting this article you are just encouraging others to respond and again go off on a tangent !

    RTIwanted

    From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
    To: humjanenge <humjanenge <at> googlegroups.com>
    Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2011 9:47 AM
    Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    Dear Friends

    Starting from 1-May-2011, your kindly moderators have decided that this group shall return to its traditional roots and value systems listed below in order of priority and function strictly in terms therefor:-

    a) Keeping up with the latest developments in RTI in India
    b) Understanding, Discussing and Researching RTI
    c) Collective RTI action
    d) Helping RTI "newbies"
    e) Advocacy in RTI, Transparency, Accountability (incl. corruption),  Governance, Law. etc
     
    Your moderators are resolved that the "tail" (ie. "e") will not be allowed to wag the "dog" (ie. the group).

    Members who refuse to align themselves with the objectives of the group shall be expelled without any further notice.

    Attached is a PDF file (1 Meg) from the respected magazine Economic and Political Weekly titled "The Anna Phenomenon" which should cause a few of our more vocal members to reassess their views.

    Sarbajit



    Mathre Rangarajan | 1 May 17:40 2011
    Picon

    Re: HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    I fully agree and endorse your view - Moderator should appologise

    From: C K Jam <rtiwanted-/E1597aS9LQAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
    To: "humjanenge-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org" <humjanenge-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org>
    Sent: Sun, 1 May, 2011 1:09:06 PM
    Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    Mr Moderator,

    Today is 1st May 2011.
    You made this post at 09:47 Hrs.
    It lists out 5 value systems.

    And then, in the same post, you go on to attach a pdf document from the Economic & Political Weekly.

    Can you please indicate to which of the 5 value systems does it relate to ?

    If the Moderator himself violates the value systems listed out, that too on the first day itself, how do you expect members to adhere ?

    By posting this article you are just encouraging others to respond and again go off on a tangent !

    RTIwanted

    From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb <at> gmail.com>
    To: humjanenge <humjanenge-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org>
    Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2011 9:47 AM
    Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    Dear Friends

    Starting from 1-May-2011, your kindly moderators have decided that this group shall return to its traditional roots and value systems listed below in order of priority and function strictly in terms therefor:-

    a) Keeping up with the latest developments in RTI in India
    b) Understanding, Discussing and Researching RTI
    c) Collective RTI action
    d) Helping RTI "newbies"
    e) Advocacy in RTI, Transparency, Accountability (incl. corruption),  Governance, Law. etc
     
    Your moderators are resolved that the "tail" (ie. "e") will not be allowed to wag the "dog" (ie. the group).

    Members who refuse to align themselves with the objectives of the group shall be expelled without any further notice.

    Attached is a PDF file (1 Meg) from the respected magazine Economic and Political Weekly titled "The Anna Phenomenon" which should cause a few of our more vocal members to reassess their views.

    Sarbajit


    Surendera M. Bhanot | 1 May 10:25 2011

    Re: HJ <at> gg - Education Series

    Dear Sarabjit,

    To add to what the attached article says, every institution of the government is so implicit in the corrupt and shoddy deals that this has become the order od the day. Even the startling things are going above the heads of the people. No body bothers, so long one is getting his livelihood (if he is honest) and about his share in the booty (if one is practicle, as they call ti). Is there any end to it??

    The recent Revelations are:
    Purulia Arm drop case
    Air India surrendering the Prime Routs
    Recruitment of Pilots scam
    Land Scams
    and many  many more

    being uncovered by RTIians and some awakened citizens.






    On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
    Dear Friends

    Starting from 1-May-2011, your kindly moderators have decided that this group shall return to its traditional roots and value systems listed below in order of priority and function strictly in terms therefor:-

    a) Keeping up with the latest developments in RTI in India
    b) Understanding, Discussing and Researching RTI
    c) Collective RTI action
    d) Helping RTI "newbies"
    e) Advocacy in RTI, Transparency, Accountability (incl. corruption),  Governance, Law. etc
     
    Your moderators are resolved that the "tail" (ie. "e") will not be allowed to wag the "dog" (ie. the group).

    Members who refuse to align themselves with the objectives of the group shall be expelled without any further notice.

    Attached is a PDF file (1 Meg) from the respected magazine Economic and Political Weekly titled "The Anna Phenomenon" which should cause a few of our more vocal members to reassess their views.

    Sarbajit



    --
    "Our biggest competition is never with the others.
    Instead, it is always within ourselves.
    It doesn't matter if where we end up - first or at last.
    If we do our best to do better than before, we've won"

    Warm Regards


    Surendera M. Bhanot
    - President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh
    - Youth for Human Rights International YHRI - South Asia
    - CEO, Avis Software, Chandigarh 
    - Convener & Life Member, Consumers Association Chandigarh
    - Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
    - Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
    - Member, RTI Activist Federation, Punjab, Chandigarh
    No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
    Mob: +91-9888-810-811
    PHONE: +91-172-2780838
    FAX: 0871 266 8523 
    Mail Me


    DISCLAIMER: You have received this email because you any one time contacted me through mail or otherwise gave your mail-id. This e-mail is intended to be sent to the persons on my regular mail-list. In case you think this mail infringes your privacy or otherwise you do not want to receive this mail anymore, please reply with the word 'UNSUBSCRIBE" in the body of the mail. Please do not disturb the Subject line. I am sorry to see you go. But please mention the reason why you want to go. It will help me improve my services in future. Thanks

    Surendera M. Bhanot | 1 May 16:49 2011

    Re: Comments on Mr. surendera's Comments

    Dear Mr. Padhan,

    Thank you for your mail.

    As you have mentioned that

    "the IAC Team  in their website http://www.lokpalbillconsultation.org/   has sought  suggestions, comments, opinions on Jan Lokpal Bill. Keeping it in view, to suggestion  to IAC,   we the activists, academicians, experts,  lawyers, Civil Society Groups  of Orissa working  under the banner  of "Orissa Against Corruption"  have formed a drafting committee  headed by Justice Choudhury Pratap Kumar  Misra, retired Judge, Orissa High Court in which Mr. Chitta Behra is the member."

    In this case Mr. Bahera should has mamde the suggestion directly to the IAC instead of airing the same in the public forums and in a manner that is criticle to the ongoing initiatives. I don't think it is proper way to do it. Rather it seemed that he is just playing in the hands of those who are bent upon to stop the JLPB, at any cost. You see how important is the timing and the presentation.

    If the message goes to me is wrong, you may imagine how the ordinary people will think about the civil Scoiety. How it is being belittled in their eyes.





    On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Pradip Pradhan <pradippradhan63-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
    Dear Mr. Surendera Bhanot

    I came across your mail  on Chitta Behera's critique  on Jan Lokpal Bill  terming it  as misinformation. To justify it, you have also written that " as no body contributed, suggested or participated in drafting the JLPB while it was in the drafting stage. Now when it is on the negotiating table, every body is making comments to suit their own convenience. By doing so we are strengthening the hand of only those who are interest in not having this legislation at all." 

    In fact, this is not true.  During drafting stage, the IAC team  has neither  invited any public opinion nor organised  any  consultation  on Jan Lokpal Bill. If it had been so, you could have got the opportunity  to give our comments on it. Secondly, the IAC Team  in their website http://www.lokpalbillconsultation.org/   has sought  suggestions, comments, opinions on Jan Lokpal Bill. Keeping it in view, to suggestion  to IAC,   we the activists, academicians, experts,  lawyers, Civil Society Groups  of Orissa working  under the banner  of "Orissa Against Corruption"  have formed a drafting committee  headed by Justice Choudhury Pratap Kumar  Misra, retired Judge, Orissa High Court in which Mr. Chitta Behra is the member. Mr. Behera  is a  social activist as well as lawyer  and expert  on RTI  and gives guidance to activists  on legal issues. In a state level seminar organised at Bhubaneswar on 23.4.2011, the members presented  their views and raised  issues relating to rough drafting of Jan Lokpal Bill. In Orissa common question  is also haunting  everybody who has drafted  this Bill. Is it an individual or a team. If it is a team  who are these people. So that we can directly interact with  them  to bring changes  in the draft.

    Very soon, we are planning  to synthesize   all  the comments  and   send the final recommendation  for changes in Jan Lokpal Bill. 

    It is good  that  you have written to IAC Team  to clarify  on the issues raised  by  Mr. Chitta Behera. we have  also  directly  sent  these comments  to IAC Team.  Till yet, they have not come out with clarification not even posted in IAC website.

    Regards
    Pradip Pradhan
    RTI Activist
    Member of Orissa Against Corruption.





    --
    "Our biggest competition is never with the others.
    Instead, it is always within ourselves.
    It doesn't matter if where we end up - first or at last.
    If we do our best to do better than before, we've won"

    Warm Regards


    Surendera M. Bhanot
    - President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh
    - Youth for Human Rights International YHRI - South Asia
    - CEO, Avis Software, Chandigarh 
    - Convener & Life Member, Consumers Association Chandigarh
    - Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
    - Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
    - Member, RTI Activist Federation, Punjab, Chandigarh
    No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
    Mob: +91-9888-810-811
    PHONE: +91-172-2780838
    FAX: 0871 266 8523 
    Mail Me


    DISCLAIMER: You have received this email because you any one time contacted me through mail or otherwise gave your mail-id. This e-mail is intended to be sent to the persons on my regular mail-list. In case you think this mail infringes your privacy or otherwise you do not want to receive this mail anymore, please reply with the word 'UNSUBSCRIBE" in the body of the mail. Please do not disturb the Subject line. I am sorry to see you go. But please mention the reason why you want to go. It will help me improve my services in future. Thanks

    Sarbajit Roy | 1 May 18:53 2011
    Picon

    Re: Wrong guidelines issued by DOPT interpreting Section 6(3) of the RTI act wrongly

    Dear Sandeep

    This is exactly the kind of RTI discussion we are looking forward to having on this group. Please accept my compliments for your analysis / post.

    Now you may wait for about 3 or 4 working days. After that email a copy marked as subject"PUBLIC GRIEVANCE" (see my examples [posted to this group]) and send it to Mr Rajeev Kapur JS-AT&A at DoPT - he is the nodal Public Grievance officer. Wait 1 week after that - and if you do not receive an acknowledgement you should file it on the online pgportal.gov.in complaining that DoPT has CORRUPTLY refused to accept and.dispose of your Public Grievance. Then wait patiently for 2 months.

    Sarbajit

    On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 4:31 PM, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
    To
    Sh KG Verma, Director, RTI,
    DOPT, New Delhi
    Sir,
    Vide Part IV, Section 5(3) of guide to RTI act circulated by DOPT vide
    its number No. 1/4/2009-IR dated 5.10.2009, it has been directed that
    under section 6(3) of the RTI act, the application under RTI is to be
    transferred to only one public authority.
    The justification has been given that sub-section (3) refers to
    'another public authority' and not to 'other public authorities' and
    that use of singular form in the Act in this regard is important to
    note.
    The section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 states as under
    13. Gender and number.-
    In all (Central Acts) and Regulations, unless there is anything
    repugnant in the subject or context.- Words importing the masculine
    gender shall be taken to include females, and words in the singular
    shall include the plural, and vice versa.

    Thus the term authority mentioned in RTI act means authorities as well.
    It is requested to immediate make necessary corrections in the
    guidelines issued by DOPT keeping in view the submissions made above.
    Thanking you,
    Yours sincerely,
    Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
    1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
    Phone: 91-99929-31181

    Surendera M. Bhanot | 1 May 20:08 2011

    INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 6(3) OF THE RTI ACT 2005 IN THE CONTEXT OF SECTION 13 OF GENERAL CLAUSES ACT 1897



    INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 6(3) OF THE RTI ACT 2005 IN THE CONTEXT OF SECTION 13 OF GENERAL CLAUSES ACT 1897

     

    To


    Sh. K.G. Verma,

    Director,

    RIGHT TO INFORMATION,
    Department of Personnel and Training, 

    Government of India

    New Delhi

    India


    Sir,



    Please refer to Part IV, Section 5(3) of Guide to RTI Act 2005 circulated by DoPT vide its Number No. 1/4/2009-IR dated 5.10.2009.


    it has been directed that under section 6(3) of the RTI act, the application under RTI is to be transferred to only one public authority. The justification has been given that sub-section (3) refers to 'another public authority' and not to 'other public authorities' and that use of singular form in the Act in this regard is important to note. 


    In this regard it is submitted that the interpretation of the DoPT that the PIO is not required to transfer the under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005, if the information “which is held by another public authority; or  the subject matter of which is more closely connected with the functions of another public authority”, is not as per the law of the land.


    The interpretation is ‘misconceived’, in the light of Section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, which  refer to Gender and number and says "


    In all (Central Acts) and Regulations, unless there is
    anything repugnant in the subject or context.-
    Words importing the masculine gender shall be taken
    to include females, and words in the singular shall
    include the plural, and vice versa.
    ".

     

    There is absolutely nothing in Section 6 of the RTI Act 2005 to indicate that the legislature intended that the request for information should confine to one subject or one public authority only.”

     

    The only requirement of the Section is that the request shall be in writing and accompanied by prescribed fees and the particulars of the information sought by the applicant are specified. Contrary intention to exclude the operation of the rule that the singular includes the plural cannot be inferred merely because the relevant provision is drafted in the singular. The act has been enacted to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority and casts responsibility on every public authority to provide information unless it is exempt under the act. The interpretation suggested by the commission tends to defeat the very purpose of the act.”


    Moreover, it is the settled law that the instruction, guidelines, directives, orders, rules and regulations must be in consonance with the law of the land (here Section 13 if the General Clauses Act, 1897) and does not have any overriding effect over and above the provisions of law of the land. Any such instruction, guidelines, directives, orders, rules and regulations are ultra-virus and null and void ab-nitio.


    The recent example in this case is the striking down of the Central RTI Regulations by the Delhi High Court, which were found to be having overriding effect over the basic law.


    DoPT has not learnt the lesson from it and has repeated the same mistake by an over enthusiastic officer of the DoPT who looked upon to find novel ways to suppress information or to put the information seekers to a greater difficulty.


    This argument was also lead before the Sh. Kulbir Singh,  Hon'ble State Information Commissioner, Punjab in an Appeal No. AC-141 of 2011 being heard by him. He had been passing the orders as suggested by the DoPT in its above Circular. But in this case he has to reserve the orders after I insisted that the matter argued before him and written submission made to him in this regard may be brought on record.


    It is also pertinent to draw your kind attention that Section 218 of IPC invokes in this case, which reads as under:

    Section 218. Public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture.-Whoever, being a public servant, and being as such public servant, charged with the preparation of any record or other writing, frames that record or writing in a manner which he knows to be incorrect, with intent to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, loss or injury to the public or to any person, or with intent thereby to save, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby save, any person from legal punishment, or with intent to save, or knowing that he is likely thereby to save, any property from forfeiture or other charge to which it is liable by law, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

    The reading of other provisions of IPC Section 181 to Section 221 are also very relevant in this case.

    In view of above, it is requested that the above instruction may please be withdrawn immediately from the retrospective date and all the CIC/SIC may be instructed to reopen and review all such cases wherein the decision/orders were passed n the basis of this erroneous circular of the DoPT.

    Thanking you,

    copies sent to all RTI forums, press and human right NGOs

    --
    "Our biggest competition is never with the others.
    Instead, it is always within ourselves.
    It doesn't matter if where we end up - first or at last.
    If we do our best to do better than before, we've won"

    Warm Regards


    Surendera M. Bhanot
    - President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh
    - Youth for Human Rights International YHRI - South Asia
    - CEO, Avis Software, Chandigarh 
    - Convener & Life Member, Consumers Association Chandigarh
    - Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
    - Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
    - Member, RTI Activist Federation, Punjab, Chandigarh
    No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
    Mob: +91-9888-810-811
    PHONE: +91-172-2780838
    FAX: 0871 266 8523 
    Mail Me


    DISCLAIMER: You have received this email because you any one time contacted me through mail or otherwise gave your mail-id. This e-mail is intended to be sent to the persons on my regular mail-list. In case you think this mail infringes your privacy or otherwise you do not want to receive this mail anymore, please reply with the word 'UNSUBSCRIBE" in the body of the mail. Please do not disturb the Subject line. I am sorry to see you go. But please mention the reason why you want to go. It will help me improve my services in future. Thanks


    Gmane