NAVIN PANDYA | 22 Dec 04:16 2012

Can We Stall Elections Under Bogus Representation of Peoples Act, 1950-51?

Dear Friends,


Elections to Mumbai Hsg Fed stalled is significant victory.

Can we have grand victory by stalling Elections under bogus Representation of Peoples Act, 1950-51 which speaks only of elections & nothing about representation process?

If we can become victorious in stalling Elections under the above Act, which is conspiracy against Democracy since independence, we will have betters MPs & MLAs & every issue will start getting resolved fast in better, efficient and effective manner.

We must take up this challenge. Awaiting your response.

Best Regards,

Navin Pandya

M.K. Gupta | 21 Dec 03:24 2012

RTI - CIC should have heard RIL in RTI insider trading case:HC

CIC should have heard RIL in RTI insider trading case:HC

Bombay High Court today said Reliance Industries ought to have been heard by the Chief Information Commissioner Satyendra Mishra before directing Sebi to disclose all details related to an insider trading case of 2007 involving Reliance Petroleum.

Mishra, an appellate authority in Central Information Commission(CIC), had on November 6 passed an order directing capital market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) to disclose all details about the case on an appeal filed by RTI activist A K Agarwal.

The case relates to the merger of Reliance Petroleum with Reliance Industries and the short sale of shares in the former by entities related to the latter. The merger between the two companies took place in 2009 and the company has been charged of indulging in insider trading.

The CIC, acting on a petition filed by Agarwal, ordered SEBI on November 6 to disclose the details of investigation in the case or consent order proceedings. However, Sebi approached the high court challenging the CIC order.

A division bench of D Y Chandrachud and Amjad Sayed today, while directing Reliance Industries to file its reply affidavit to the petition by January 21, said,"Wasn't Reliance bound to be heard by CIC before disclosure order was passed?"

"If the disclosure pertains to a third party, in this case Reliance, then the third party should be heard before order is passed. They (Reliance) are entitled to it," Justice Chandrachud said.

Agarwal, however, told the court that as per section 8(2) of the RTI Act, if the information sought is in public interest, then it outweighs protection of the third party. "This is a case of insider trading worth Rs 500 crore. Penalty is up to Rs 1500 crore," Agarwal argued.

In its petition, Sebi said the order was passed by Mishra and not the CIC as a whole, makes it "bad in law" and therefore "null and void and of no effect". Apart from Mishra, the CIC has seven other members.

Reliance Ind has approached Sebi to settle the case through mechanism of consent process where an entity being investigated pays a fine without admitting fault and the regulator drops the case.

Legal queries -

Whether the order issued by Chief IC is really bad in law and null as the same has not been passed by a larger bench.

If the IC is convinced of the prayer made by the appellant without giving hearing to the respondent and issued order for providing information, whether such order is valid or not.

What about the thousands of orders issued by single benches of Information Commissioners?

Whether other public authorities will not challenge the other orders of CIC citing this order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court.

It is not strange that an autonomous body SEBI, is challenging the CIC, another autonomous body, both created to protect the interest of citizens, saying that the order passed by the Chief IC is bad in law and therefore null and void as CIC has seven other members. Can it be construed of taking side with the Reliance, a cash rich corporate house?

Whether this order should be challenged in the Supreme Court.
Syed Tanveeruddin | 19 Dec 16:50 2012

[rti_india] peoples' campaign against bmic project of nicel on thu, december 20, 2012 [2 Attachments]

[Attachment(s) from Syed Tanveeruddin included below]

Subject: peoples' campaign against bmic project of nicel on thu, december 20, 2012
Siddharthanagar, Mysore-570011 Karnataka
Wednesday, December 19, 2012 7:09:42 PM
The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)
राष्ट्रीय मानवाधिकार आयोग (एनएचआरसी)
ರಾಷ್ಟ್ರೀಯ ಮಾನವ ಹಕ್ಕುಗಳ ಆಯೋಗ
Complainant's Name /
 शिकायतकर्ता का नाम /
 ದೂರುದಾರರ ಹೆಸರು
Syed Tanveeruddin / सैयद/सैय्यद  तनवीरुद्दीन/तन्वीरुद्दीन / ಸೈಯದ್
Complainant's Address /
 शिकायतकर्ता का पता / ದೂರುದಾರರ
, Siddharthanagar, Mysore-570011 Karnataka
, सिद्धार्थनगर, मैसूर-570011 कर्नाटक
, ಸಿದ್ಧಾರ್ಥನಗರ, ಮೈಸೂರು-570011 ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ
Victims' Names / पीड़ितों के नाम
 / ಪೀಡಿತರ / ಸಂತ್ರಸ್ತರ ಹೆಸರು
 / ಹೆಸರುಗಳು
General People of Bangalore Urban and Bangalore Rural
Address /  पता / ವಿಳಾಸ
Bangalore/Bengaluru, Karnataka / बैंगलोर/बेंगलुरु, कर्नाटक
 / ಬೆಂಗಳೂರು, ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ
Place of Incident / घटना की जगह
 / ಘಟನೆಯ ಸ್ಥಳ
NICE Routes/Roads in Bangalore Urban and Bangalore Rural
 (Bangalore/Bengaluru, Karnataka / बैंगलोर/बेंगलुरु, कर्नाटक
 / ಬೆಂಗಳೂರು, ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ)
The complainant (Syed Tanveeruddin) has filed this complaint with the NHRC in his personal / individual capacity only. 
Prayer/Relief Sought:
I. Immediate identification and publishing of the lands required for the BMIC project and dropping of acquisition proceedings in respect of lands falling outside the scope of the BMIC project.
II. Immediate recovery of public property from NICE which is falling outside the scope of the project.
III. Declaration of Peripheral Road and Link Road illegally constructed by NICE as a toll free public amenity.
IV. Investigation & prosecution of corrupt ministers, bureaucrats & industry leaders associated with the project
V. Dropping of false cases against displaced persons and payment of compensation to displaced persons for illegal demolitions and malicious prosecutions.
BMIC (NICE) Viruddha Janandolana
Public Meeting to Rejuvenate Peoples’ Campaign  
Thursday ­ December 20, 2012; 11:00 am to ­ 3:00 pm, Freedom Park ­ Bangalore 
The Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMIC) has been implemented by the Government of Karnataka (GoK) on a PPP basis with Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd. (NICEL) since 1995. Now in its 17th year of implementation, the BMIC project has made little progress. The social injustice meted out in the name of the project is too glaring to be ignored. There have been several campaigns and protests against the injustices of the BMIC project in the past. Now, even as the government shows little sign of support for the people, there is an urgent need to rejuvenate the campaign and continue the fight for justice. This public meeting is being called for to rejuvenate the campaign. Medha Patkar and other prominent leaders will address the gathering. Requesting all of you to attend the meeting in large numbers
Here are the several injustices which are being committed due to this project – 
a. Total extent of land required for the project: 20,193 acres, out of which private land required is 13,237 acres. But private land notified is 20,145 acres! This is in addition to 5,688 acres of government land already handed over to the company; more than 144 villages in full and 52 villages in part and lakhs of people stand to be and are in constant fear of displaced even though their land is not even required for the project
b. Illegal demolitions of private property by henchmen of NICE with police protection is common place and false cases are foisted by NICEL against displaced persons and those opposing their illegal actions. Landowners are being prevented from cultivating or from putting up constructions on their own lands.  Violent attacks against displaced persons by henchmen of NICE leading loss of life & property are common place. 
c. Small farmers, labourers, house owners and entrepreneurs have lost their homes as well as their only source of livelihood. Government has not taken up any measures to rehabilitate such persons. 
d. Apart from the private land, 5688 acres of Government land already handed over to NICE. Forests such as BM kaval, Handigundi, lakes such as Gottigere, Begur, Madwara and 13 others, and community lands, not falling within the scope of the BMIC project are taken over and have been destroyed. This is in complete violation of the plans which were submitted for Environmental clearance
e. Bangaloreans are deprived of a toll free peripheral road courtesy manipulations of official records by NICE and Government officers. Peripheral road is constructed by NICE on an alignment earmarked for the construction of a Peripheral Road by the BDA. Even though this road is now complete, lands on both sides of this alignment illegally usurped by NICEL are notified for large scale real estate development. Peripheral Road which was to be constructed by NICEL as a part of the BMIC project sanctioned by the Karnataka State Government is not at all constructed. 
f. Expressway to Mysore is on paper while NICE engages in large scale real estate in & around Bangalore. 
g. Lands of corporate houses and politicians are unlawfully excluded. They make windfall gains at public expense. Politicians across party lines, bureaucrats, industry leaders now face serious charges of corruption. 
i. Lastly, the compensation amount fixed for notified lands is atrociously low
h. Several public inquiries and debates on the issue have been thwarted by NICEL on one pretext or another
In order to set right the social injustice, we now demand the following – 
I. Immediate identification and publishing of the lands required for the BMIC project and dropping of acquisition proceedings in respect of lands falling outside the scope of the BMIC project. 
II. Immediate recovery of public property from NICE which is falling outside the scope of the project
III. Declaration of Peripheral Road and Link Road illegally constructed by NICE as a toll free public amenity
IV. Investigation & prosecution of corrupt ministers, bureaucrats & industry leaders associated with the project 
V. Dropping of false cases against displaced persons and payment of compensation to displaced persons for illegal demolitions and malicious prosecutions
We request you all to raise your voice against this injustice and attend the public meeting on this issue. 
Campaign Supported by : Dalit Sangharsha Samiti (Samyojaka), Environment Support Group (ESG), Karnataka Rajya Raitha Sangha (KRRS), National Alliance of Peoples Movements (NAPM), Nyayakkaagi Naavu Jothegoodi Neevu, Dalit-Muslim Suraksha Samiti, Praja Vimochana Chaluvali (PVC), Samata Sainik Dal (SSD), Karnataka Pranthya Raitha Sangha (KPRS)
#122/4, Infantry Road, Bangalore- 560001; Ph :9945716052, 9880595032, 9845451679, 9449154597
Peoples' Campaign in English against Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor (BMIC) Project of NICEL on December 20, 2012
Tanveer / तन्वीर / ತನ್ವೀರ್
Syed Tanveeruddin / सैयद तन्वीरुद्दीन / ಸೈಯದ್ ತನ್ವೀರುದ್ದೀನ್
Mysore, Karnataka / मैसूर, कर्नाटक / ಮೈಸೂರು, ಕರ್ನಾಟಕ

Attachment(s) from Syed Tanveeruddin

2 of 2 File(s)

Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:

    NAVIN PANDYA | 9 Dec 12:28 2012

    Plan to Prevent Corruption & other Democratic Evils

    Dear All,

    My Plan to Prevent Corruption & all other Democratic Evils:

    1. Replace bogus Representation of Peoples Act, 1950-51 with new JanPratinidhi Act enacted with     public suggestions.
    2. Introduce Voters Education & Protection.
    3. Scrap UPSC/State PSCs & create more institutions to qualify Public Servants with Public Spirit.
    4. Reserve Rajya Sabha entirely for Civil Society to balance Politics Vs Civil Society.
    5. Create Regulator for Political Parties like Regulators for other organisations.
    6. Enact excellent Corporate Laws purely in national/public interest.
    7. Strengthening Right to Information Act, 2005 for excellent public accountability & transparency.

    8. Enacting & Enforcing Excellent Citizens Charter for Excellent Public Service.

    9. Reviewing & Scrapping present laws unsuitable to Democracy.

    10. Holding Constitutional Heads, ie, President & Governors of States responsible for better Governance.

    Are citizens ready and willing to work for this plan?

    Best regards,

    Navin Pandya







    Pradip Pradhan | 7 Dec 19:38 2012

    Irresponsible Act of Information commissioner Sri Jagadananda towards Appellant/Complainant


    Dear friends 

    During appointing any person  as State Information Commissioner, the government  should arrange  proper training and conduct  examination of the Information Commissioners before their appointment to the post of Information Commissioner because it is being observed that the Information commissioner Sri Jagadananda is not at all aware of the rules, Act of the RTI, for example in Second Appeal 439 of 2011 dated 09th Feb 2012 , the commissioner has reflected my(Appellant) character  falsely that I am involved in court cases and criminal activities without any proof  because the PIO  of Health department has mentioned the same in his reply by showing some news papers cuttings (for your kind information On 28th Jun 2011 I have handed over one Sub-inspector Kashinath Dash of Town Police Station, Puri, Odisha to Vigilance Bhubaneswar as the Sub-Inspector was caught by vigilance  officers while taking bribe Rs 20,000/- from me near Hospital square, Puri at 10:30 AM on 28th June 2011 hence a lot corrupt police officer in Puri and some fake journalists are behind me to fix me in false cases).

     This type of immature, brainless, careless, irresponsible act is not at all expected from one matured, highly responsible and intelligent person who is appointed as Information Commissioner by the Governor of Odisha.

    Mr. Jagadananda ha got no right to do so, he is not being appointed by the Governor of Odisha to defame the complainant/ Appellant and reflect the same in his decision, instead of taking disciplinary action against the PIO for doing so. One Appellant / Complainant is appealing or registering a complaint / appeal to get information and to get justice from the Information Commissioner, if the complainant/ Appellant is being defamed and insulted by the Information commissioner himself then what we can expect from the Public Information officers and First appellate authorities! This type of activity of Information Commissioner Jagadananda will certainly discourage any RTI activist who is fighting against corruption and corrupt government servants.

    Hence after going through the decision on Appeal 439 of 2011, I have objected and wrote a letter to Sri Jagadananda on 19.5.2012 by Speed Post as well as by email by condemning his decision but so far I have not received any reply to my condemnation. If this type of irresponsible act has happened by mistake then Sri Jagadananda should have asked apology but he has not asked any apology to me after doing this blunder mistake. It shows that how serious he is towards the RTI Act!  

    I request all the citizens to go through the Appeal 439 of 2011 and my reply dated 19.5.2012 to Sri Jagadananda(Scan copy of the Appeal and the reply is given in Attachment) because this type of incident can happen with any citizen.   


    suresh nangia | 6 Dec 10:12 2012
    M.K. Gupta | 4 Dec 09:14 2012


    Shri Basant Seth, Central Information Commissioner issued a show cause notice to the CPIO & Asstt. Director, Deptt. Of Posts on 23.8.2012 directing him to furnish his submissions whether he had any reasonable cause for not providing complete/timely information. In case of failure, Commission may consider imposing penalty on him. 

    The PIO has given his reply on ___ (date not mentioned in reply) Sept. 2012. Not hearing anything from the CIC, I filed an RTI application on 10.10.2012 and obtained a copy of the reply of the PIO. But Shri A.K. Jha, Dy. Secy. & Dy. Registrar, CIC has not given any information on the 9i) present status of the case, (ii) whether the CPIO will be granted any hearing on the matter and (iii) if yes, whether I will also be given an opportunity to attend the same and present my submissions or an opportunity to make submissions on the CPIO’s reply.  Dy. Secy. CIC has replied that this information is not covered u.s. 2(f) of the RTI Act and therefore cannot be provided.

    Reply of the CPIO of the Postal Department is unsatisfactory and appears an eye wash. In such circumstances, what an applicant should do so that the case is not buried under the carpet without a fair trial as per provisions of the RTI Act? 
    Mohit Goel | 4 Dec 07:35 2012

    Re:: Re: Court case of DPS vs CIC and othrs

    Dear mr sarbajit - thanks for your response . I cant engage a advocate right now . Yes i can fight the case on my
    own but need your and member support in getting the argument ready . I have all data with me . Affidavit and re
    joinder have been filled so far and next date of hearing is in april . 
    Please advise if forum is ready to help me in this case . If this case is won them half of delhi school would come
    under rti . sankriti school case was of section 2 f where as mine is section 2 h
    On Tue 4 Dec, 2012 5:06 AM GMT sarbajit roy wrote:
    >Dear Mohit
    >The tragedy of the legal system is that nobody can fight this case
    >except you.
    >You must hire an advocate and at least put up some sort of defence.
    >CIC wont help you, they will simply get their name deleted. The Court
    >knows that you wont fight which is why they brought in the DA Sangh.
    >You see by  this DPS order all the other orders like Poorna Prajna
    >School, Sanskriti School will get washed away.
    >On Dec 4, 9:30 am, Mohit Goel <mr_moh...@...> wrote:
    >> Dear mr sarbajit . I can understand your frustration on me but you know the entire case and how had i fought
    to get this case out of mr gandhi ill intention who at that time was determined to make school out of rti ambit
    as he already had got his share from the school otherwise he would not have adjourn the case for two year and
    would not have lost the file of my case . Anyways i fought and won at cic level .
    >> The case was against cic and others . I could not join the proceedings since i have my jobs
    responsibilities and could not spare time initially .
    >> I have now understood the the ill fate of the case and thats why i approached forum for help to at least take
    this cause forward . I have all arguments - data available with me which i can share -
    >> i hope you all will respond positively
    >> ------------------------------
    >> > of Rs 10 per annum.
    M.K. Gupta | 23 Nov 13:56 2012



    I went to file an RTI application for the Delhi Jal Board at Karkardooma Post Office, Delhi, designated P.O. for accepting RTI applications but was amazed to hear that the post office only accepts RTI applications for the Central Govt. offices and not for Delhi Govt.  For the office of the Delhi Govt., application should be sent to the office directly by speed post etc.  Though this application was not under the Delhi RTI Act but was under the Central Act i.e. RTI Act, 2005. Now, the same will be sent by post tomorrow.  However, post office staff was unable to give any reason for this except stating that they accept application for Central Govt. offices only as per list sent to them by the DoPT.   

    What we should do so that the designated Post Offices also accept application for the offices of the Delhi Govt also?
    M.K. Gupta | 3 Dec 14:43 2012


    I want to file an FIR with Delhi Police against a renowned builder cum promoter who has his corporate office in Gurgaon but Regd. Office in New Delhi for cheating, duping and hoodwinking thousands of customers including me.  Is it possible to file an FIR in a police station in Delhi and if so, in which PS? I am a resident of West Delhi.. I am afraid that the Delhi Police will register a case easily and in case of reluctance, should I send application along with the documents substantiating the fraud to the Commissioner of Police, Delhi.  Also, will it be prudent to send a complaint to the Economic Offence Wing, Delhi by a group of 10-15 investors in the projects of the above builder. .
    I add that I have already filed a case in the Consumer Forum, Gurgaon in my individual capacity against the builder for the refund and interest, as per agreement, on the amount given to him for the purchase of plot in 2005 which has not been delivered so far against the promised period of 3 years. The case in the Forum is of civil nature and now we want to initiate the criminal proceedings against the erring builder.
    Request for suitable guidance.  .
    C K Jam | 2 Dec 09:33 2012

    Is the Cabinet Secretariat out of RTI ?

    From the following order of the CIC, it seems that the Cabinet Secretariat has wrongly sought shelter under Sec 24 of the RTI Act 2005 - and surprisingly, the CIC has agreed !

    We agree with the Appellant that the desired information is very factual
    and ordinary in nature, but the Cabinet Secretariat is not obliged to provide
    even this information under the RTI as it is included in the Second Schedule to
    the RTI Act. As per the proviso to section 24 of the Act, it is supposed to
    disclose information only when it pertains to allegations of corruption or human
    rights violation. The desired information in this case does not fall within either of
    these two categories. Therefore, we cannot direct the CPIO to disclose the
    information. Needless to say, it is for the Cabinet Secretariat to decide if they
    would still like to provide this information outside of the RTI for the sake of the
    past association of the husband of the Appellant with them.

    (NOTE: There cannot be a typo to such a large extent - ie all over the order !)