* The President of India DR. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam’s Speech in Hyderabad. *

Why is the media here so negative?
Why are we in India so embarrassed to recognize our own strengths, our achievements?
We are such a great nation. We have so many amazing success stories but we refuse to acknowledge them. Why?
We are the first in milk production.
We are number one in Remote sensing satellites.
We are the second largest producer of wheat.
We are the second largest producer of rice.

Look at Dr. Sudarshan , he has transferred the tribal village into a
self-sustaining, self-driving unit. There are millions of such achievements but our media is only obsessed in the bad news and failures and disasters.
I was in Tel Aviv once and I was reading the Israeli newspaper. It was the day after a lot of attacks and bombardments and deaths had taken place. The Hamas had struck. But the front page of the newspaper had the picture of a Jewish gentleman who in five years had transformed his desert into an orchid and a granary. It was this inspiring picture that everyone woke up to. The gory details of killings, bombardments, deaths, were inside in the newspaper, buried among other news.

In India we only read about death, sickness, terrorism, crime. Why are we so NEGATIVE? Another question: Why are we, as a nation so obsessed with foreign things? We want foreign TVs, we want foreign shirts. We want foreign technology.

Why this obsession with everything imported. Do we not realize that self-respect comes with self-reliance? I was in Hyderabad giving this lecture, when a 14 year old girl asked me for my autograph. I asked her what her goal in life is. She replied: I want to live in a developed India . For her, you and I will have to build this developed India. You must proclaim. India is not an under-developed nation; it is a highly developed nation.
Do you have 10 minutes? Allow me to come back with a vengeance.

Got 10 minutes for your country? If yes, then read; otherwise, choice is yours.
YOU say that our government is inefficient.
YOU say that our laws are too old.
YOU say that the municipality does not pick up the garbage.
YOU say that the phones don't work, the railways are a joke. The airline is the worst in the world, mails never reach their destination.
YOU say that our country has been fed to the dogs and is the absolute pits.

YOU say, say and say. What do YOU do about it?

Take a person on his way to Singapore. Give him a name - 'YOURS'. Give him a face - 'YOURS'. YOU walk out of the airport and you are at your International best. In Singapore you don't throw cigarette butts on the roads or eat in the stores. YOU are as proud of their Underground links as they are. You pay $5 (approx. Rs. 60) to drive through Orchard Road (equivalent of Mahim Causeway or Pedder Road) between 5 PM and 8 PM. YOU come back to the parking lot to punch your parking ticket if you have over stayed in a restaurant or a shopping mall irrespective of your status identity... In Singapore you don't say anything, DO YOU? YOU wouldn't dare to eat in public during Ramadan, in Dubai. YOU would not dare to go out without your head covered in Jeddah.

YOU would not dare to buy an employee of the telephone exchange in London at 10 pounds (Rs.650) a month to, 'see to it that my STD and ISD calls are billed to someone else.'YOU would not dare to speed beyond 55 mph (88 km/h) in Washington and then tell the traffic cop, 'Jaanta hai main kaun hoon (Do you know who I am?). I am so and so's son. Take your two bucks and get lost.' YOU wouldn't chuck an empty coconut shell anywhere other than the garbage pail on the beaches in Australia and New Zealand .

Why don't YOU spit Paan on the streets of Tokyo? Why don't YOU use examination jockeys or buy fake certificates in Boston??? We are still talking of the same YOU. YOU who can respect and conform to a foreign system in other countries but cannot in your own. You who will throw papers and cigarettes on the road the moment you touch Indian ground. If you can be an involved and appreciative citizen in an alien country, why cannot you be the same here in India?

Once in an interview, the famous Ex-municipal commissioner of Bombay, Mr. Tinaikar, had a point to make. 'Rich people's dogs are walked on the streets to leave their affluent droppings all over the place,' he said. 'And then the same people turn around to criticize and blame the authorities for inefficiency and dirty pavements. What do they expect the officers to do? Go down with a broom every time their dog feels the pressure in his bowels?

In America every dog owner has to clean up after his pet has done the job. Same in Japan.
Will the Indian citizen do that here?' He's right. We go to the polls to choose a government and after that forfeit all responsibility.

We sit back wanting to be pampered and expect the government to do everything for us whilst our contribution is totally negative. We expect the government to clean up but we are not going to stop chucking garbage all over the place nor are we going to stop to pick a up a stray piece of paper and throw it in the bin. We expect the railways to provide clean bathrooms but we are not going to learn the proper use of bathrooms.

We want Indian Airlines and Air India to provide the best of food and toiletries but we are not going to stop pilfering at the least opportunity.
This applies even to the staff who is known not to pass on the service to the public.

When it comes to burning social issues like those related to women, dowry, girl child! and others, we make loud drawing room protestations and continue to do the reverse at home. Our excuse? 'It's the whole system which has to change, how will it matter if I alone forego my sons' rights to a dowry.' So who's going to change the system?

What does a system consist of? Very conveniently for us it consists of our neighbours, other households, other cities, other communities and the government. But definitely not me and YOU. When it comes to us actually making a positive contribution to the system we lock ourselves along with our families into a safe cocoon and look into the distance at countries far away and wait for a Mr.Clean to come along & work miracles for us with a majestic sweep of his hand or we leave the country and run away.

Like lazy cowards hounded by our fears we run to America to bask in their glory and praise their system. When New York becomes insecure we run to England . When England experiences unemployment, we take the next flight out to the Gulf. When the Gulf is war struck, we demand to be rescued and brought home by the Indian government. Everybody is out to abuse and rape the country. Nobody thinks of feeding the system. Our conscience is mortgaged to money.

Dear Indians, The article is highly thought inductive, calls for a great deal of introspection and pricks one's conscience too.... I am echoing J. F. Kennedy's words to his fellow Americans to relate to Indians.....

'ASK WHAT WE CAN DO FOR INDIA AND DO WHAT HAS TO BE DONE TO MAKE INDIA WHAT AMERICA AND OTHER WESTERN COUNTRIES ARE TODAY'

Lets do what India needs from us.

Thank you,

Dr. Abdul Kalam

CMP filed against top officials of Finance Depart for forgery and tampering of official records of “One Rank One Pension" File.

Please read our previous post: ‘Join the Legal Battle’

RIPF has filed a criminal case before the Hon’ble Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram against former Finance Principal Secretary Jose Cyriac in the cadre of Addl. Chief Secretary now on central deputation and other top officials of Finance Department for forging and tampering of government records relating to the disposal file leading to 2006 Pension Revision ‘One Rank One Pension’ scheme. The other accused are Finance Pension Wing former Additional Secretary Ponnamma Mathew, Additional Secretary D. Solamon, Deputy Secretary A. R. Ajayakumar, Accounts Officer S.V Kala, and Section Officer V. Ajayakumar.

The Hon’ble Court has initiated enquiry proceedings of the alleged forgery, tampering causing disappearance of evidence,destruction of documents to prevent its production as evidence, and has summoned two IAS officials former Expenditure Secretary Ishitha Roy (now district collectorKannur) former Finance Secretar in charge Sri. Paul Antony (present SC/ST Secretary)who arw witness in the case and who had been in the process of the file leading to 'One Rank One Pension' scheme.

The complaint petition alleged that the accused had manipulated the file pertaining to 'one rank one pension'scheme by tampering with 116 pages of the file with the intention of denying the benefit of the one rank one pension scheme to a section of the pensioners retired in between 1-7-2004 and 31-3-2004.

The case is posted for hearing on the 26th of July 2008.

KERALA AMONG THE THREE HIGHLY CORRUPT STATES IN INDIA

A report brought out by Transparency International India (TI India) and the Centre for Media Studies (CMS) has revealed that Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Kerala are among the highly corrupt states, while only Andhra Pradesh features on the list of moderately corrupt states. The report has categorized various states into alarmingly corrupt, very highly corrupt, highly corrupt and moderately corrupt. Assam, Bihar, Goa, Jammu & Kashmir, Madhya Pradesh and Nagaland are in the category of alarmingly corrupt.

Sri. Hameed Ansari, Vice President, while releasing the report said that “corruption is pervasive and cancerous, eating at the very root of the social fabric of society.” Across the country, the total amount paid as bribes by rural BPL households in the last one year to avail the benefit of the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS) has been estimated at Rs.71.5 million. The study said that more than half the households paid bribes directly to the concerned government staff.

The police top the chart in terms of monetary contribution to corruption. The second highest among the surveyed services is land records and registration. The BPL households in India have paid a whopping Rs.9,000 million to avail the basic and need based public services. Five basic services – the public distribution system, hospital, school education electricity and water supply – and six need based services – NREGS, land records and registration, forest, housing, banking and police service – came under the purview of the study.

Chairman of the Centre for Media Studies N. Bhaskara Rao said that the RTI Act, social auditing and e-governance had helped significantly to bring down the level of corruption.

Please see our post ‘Success Story’

After having published the short-list of candidates to the post of assistants on 9 – 10 – 2007 in response to our RTI application dated 6 – 8 – 2007 and the RTI appeal dated 9 – 9 – 2007 the Kerala University (K U) has gone ahead with the interview of 2114 persons for selection for the 400 vacancies during November 15 to December 20. K U Vice-Chancellor informed the media on 26 – 10 – 2007 that the total marks for the test and interview will be on a 75:25 ratio (against the norms of 20 marks fixed by the PSC) after analyzing factors like academic performance and extra-curricular activities and hand-writing, and the members of the interview board were picked strictly in accordance with the rules. The interview board consists of Vice-Chancellor M.K Ramachandran Nair and syndicate members (all of the CPM fellow-travelers and office bearers) B.S Rajiv, A.A Rasheed, K.A Andrew and M.P Russel. The mark for the written test was 100, but the selection committee decided to revise it to 75. So marks scored by the candidates have been proportionately reduced. This would mean that the marks for the interview would come to around 33.33 percent of the marks for written test. Those who scored upto 64 marks out of 100 in the written test were called for interview. The highest mark scored was 91. 150 appointments will be made in the first phase. One of the allegations was that some applicants with high marks in the written test were eliminated in the interview process.
After the selection process were completed one-third of 200 candidates who were selected for appointments to the post of assistants are either close relatives or associates of CPM link party men - daughter-in-laws, daughters, brothers, two children of pro-CPM private teachers organization AKPCTA, son and daughter of CPM local committee Secretary. One of the notable inclusions in the list is the daughter of the present opposition leader’s special private secretary’s daughter. Of the first 160 rank-holders in the list, 110 are from Thiruvananthapuram 15 are from the native place of a syndicate member, two are the neighbors of the VC and one is the nephew of the Pro-VC.
Flouting all the norms, the KU syndicate had authorized the VC to do the tabulation work of the assistant test which was done in the personal computer of VC. According to sources, the tabulation of the marks was personally monitored by him. The usual practice was to tabulate the marks of such examinations in the confidential room of the Registrar under his supervision. Now the UPA Lokayukta came out heavily on the KU for failing to produce OMR answer sheets and other related documents of the selection process and also suo moto included Pro-VC as the third accused in the case before it filed by a senate member of KU. The VC and the Registrar are the first and the second accused.

Suggestions by RIPF

There has been continuous knee-high flooding during the rainy season for the last fifteen years at Thampannoor, Pazhavangadi and East-Fort. Crores of rupees had been spent by our political masters and engineers to prevent the water-logging problem of the Capital City. The last one being the elevation of roads levels up to 3 Meters at Thampannoor, Power-house road and Pazhavangzdy culverts beyond the rail lines under which the canal flows ignoring the principle of “Thana Nilathe Neerodu”, the result of which was water-logging and flooding beyond knee-high at Pazhavangadi & Thampannoor during short duration intense rainfall.

Now it is the turn of the Cabinet Sub-committee to resolve a permanent solution to this water-logging. But Alas, in its first meeting they have again decided to constitute a technical committee involving top officials and engineers of PWD, Irrigation & LSGD to collate and study the proposals of various departments both urgent/temporary and long-term action. Trivandrum citizens know the inability of our engineers to find a solution to the flow of water in Thampannoor-Pazhavangadi-Thakaraparampu-Kannammoola-Amayizhanajn canal which passes through the heart of the city. This is the single major reason for the regular flooding. Is it again an attempt of a criminal waste of public money by our engineers, as in the past?

While the widening and improvement of the Thampannoor – Over bridge Road and the M.G. Road (PMG Melepazhavangady sector) and its drains & culverts are in progress, though at a snail’s pace, any temporary measures to prevent the flooding would become wastage of money. The City citizens are now in a mood to tolerate the ill deeds of the authorities. So think only about a permanent solution! Hence RIPF proposes the following suggestions:

CO-ORDINATION OF THE RAILWAYS:
Thiruvananthapuram Division of Southern Railway recorded the highest ever earning of Rs.611 crore for the year 2007-08 which is 21% more than the previous year and the major share is from Trivandrum station. Thampannoor railway station and its yard also faces flooding situation. The Thampannoor-Pazhavangady canal passes under the railway lines. The blunder of elevating the rail lines cannot be possible. So widening of the existing canal under rail-lines will be the first priority. State Government cannot tress-pass into the railway area and executes this work. So the Railways have enough funds to execute the work.

OUTSIDE HELP THROUGH CONSULTANCY / TECHNICAL EXPERTS:
So as to ensure smooth and free flow of water through the Amaizhanchan canal during the rainy season as well as the other season so as to prevent the water-logging problem and to find a way to remove pollutants from the water government will have look into the following issues:

1. A permanent solution is still to be evolved to deal with the pollution in Parvathy Puthanar to which the Amayizhanthan Thode is connected. (The sewage discharge from Valiathura to Parvathy Puthanar is posing a threat to water body and the high levels of pollution have created unsanitary conditions for the people.)

2. Evolve proper management of surface water drainage programme. (During the 60’s and 70’s there were the NMR system under PWD for the surface water drainage.) Long-term contracts for improvement and maintenance of the drains may be considered.

3. Outsourcing of periodical cleaning of the drains and cuverts of city roads to voluntary agencies like the FRAT and its supervision by the local resident associations. (Almost all the hotels (big & small) and multistoried institutions and flats releasing waste water into the drains. They had punchered the side of the drains to discharge the water.)

4. Stop illegal construction under the shadow of road – widening which affects the drains on road sides.

5. Avoid inordinate delay in execution of flood-management works because of the nexus between engineers and the contractors, resulting in massive cost over-run, stressing the need to evolve technologies which are low-cost.

6. Time bound (daily) programme for collection and removal of solid waste from the township area. (Dumping of waste results in unpleasant odour and air pollution; generation of leacha to polluting ground water and surface water and fly mosquito breeding.)

7. Implementation of the works in a transparent and accountable manner. The expenses would be put under the scanner by the implementation committee consisting of representatives of people, trading community, members of FRAT, Finance Inspection wing and the PWD Secretary and a social auditing considered to see that the contractors and engineers adhered to the best practices and that these practices were made transparent and accountable.

PRESCRIBE PUNITY MEASURES IN ADVANCE.

The citizens of Trivandrum need quality benchmarks and quality assurance, like the one as we have for the N.H. So Government would set certain guidelines so as to avoid irregular tender excess. Punity measures planned by Government against officials and Contractors who were responsible for cost – escalation in total disregard of the programmes should be prescribed in advance. Sincere efforts on the part of the officials and contractors will be rewarded. The past expenses, a day light robbery and blamed the collusion between unscrupulous contractors and corrupt bureaucrats. Prescribe initiation of criminal proceedings against delinquent engineers and contractors (prima facie found responsible) for their irregular dealing causing loss to the exchequer before effecting final payment. The amount will have to be recovered from the officials and contractors equally, giving no scope for a vigilance enquiry.

TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE IMPLEMENTATION:

We are all concerned about the fact that we invest crores every year in city road construction, improvements and maintenance and yet every monsoon our city roads get worn out. A major reason for the poor quality of road works was corruption. The City Roads Improvement Programme (CRIP) had come three years ago. However, the much heralded projects with sugar – coated assurances died a slow painful death owing entirely to the laxity of the authorities.

To prevent time and cost over-runs the work of prevention of water logging in the Capital City, Government may explore the possibility of entrusting the work with outside technology through the formation of a “Special Purpose Vehicle” (SPV) under public – private partnership on a priority basis.

Regional Seminar on RTI jointly organized by MEDIACT, MICCI &FES-INDIA on 30-31 March, 2008, Hotel Horizon, Thiruvananthapuram Presentation by the Secretary, RIPF

31-3-2008

The Information Commissions are the custodian of RTI Act. People appeal to the Commission against the difficulty in getting access to the official information and the Commission is the powerful tool to break the iron curtain of the official non-cooperation. An informed citizen is a better judge of the leadership. So the Commission has to maintain transparency and accountability in its decisions on the complaints and appeals. But we can see that in the past 27 months functioning of Kerala State Information Commission (KSIC), lacking transparency and accountability in its decisions.

Section 4 of the RTI Act,2005 makes it obligatory for pro-active disclosure of the particulars of 1) Commission’s organization, functions and duties 2) the procedure followed in the decision making process, including channels of supervision and accountability, and 3) the norms set by it for the discharge of its functions. The Central Information Commission and all the other State Information Commissions have such rules of procedure. They have published such pro-active information envisaged under sec. 4 of RTI Act and have posted on their websites.

RTI application by RIPF Jerks the State Information Commission (SIC)

In the three issues of the Kerala Information Commission’s Quarterly Journal “Kerala Information Reporter” it can be seen that in all the orders included in the reporter the authenticity of such decisions are not given. The details of appellants/complainants and the respondents are given but at what levels and by which Information Commissioner(s), have taken such decisions are not given.

In KSIC, an appeal or a complaint or categories of appeals and complaints are being heard and decided by its promoters, a Single information Commissioner or a Division Bench of two Information Commissioners or a Full Bench of four Information Commissioners. So the people who read the “Kerala Information Reporter” must know the details about the promoter(s) of each and every decision and thereby the KSIC must maintain the possibility of transparency and accountability, obtained through Right to Information by the citizens.

So the KSIC, which is to hear appeals and to administer the RTI Act, is lacking transparency and accountability in its functioning and the facts obtained from the Commission’s file under RTI applications are bewildering and reveals how they have throttled the transparency Act.

To an RTI application of RIPF about the “Rules of Procedure” in KSIC’s decision making and work distribution among the Information Commissioners of KSIC, the Commission by its letter Nos. 7554/SIC-PIO/2007 dated 20-11-2007 and 28-12-2007 has informed that ‘the KSIC hasn’t have such rules of procedures and have not issued any orders on work distribution among the Information Commissioners’
But such decisions available with the web site: ‘www.infokerala.org.in’ of the Commission, reveals that there are such rules of procedure and work distribution. So the Commission is lying and has given false and misleading information to RIPF.

The following judgments disseminated in the Commission’s website ‘www.infokeral.org.in’ reveals that the KSIC has its own Rules of Procedure and work distribution:
Decisions of KSIC
Date Title
20-04-2007 Decision in AP number 57/2007/SIC filed by Shri. Sijo Abraham

20-04-2007 Decision in CP no: 130/2007/SIC filed by Smt. V.Santhanavally

20-04-2007 Decision in AP no: 161/2006/SIC filed by K.P. Vijayakumari

20-04-2007 Decision in AP number 74/2006/SIC filed by Shri.B.V.Kakkillaya

The first one (appeal No. 57/2007/SIC) was heard and decided by the Division Bench of the Commission consisting of S/Sri. Palat Mohandas (CIC) and V.V. Giri (IC). The second one (appeal No. 130/2007/SIC) by the single bench Sri. P.N. Vijayakumar (IC). The third one (161/2006/SIC) by the Full Bench consisting of CIC and 3 ICs. The fourth one (appeal No.74/2006/SIC) by Division Bench consisting of S/Sri. Palat Mohandas (CIC) and Sri. P.N. Vijayakumar (IC)

This web site of KSIC is not available now in the site. Instead a new web site ‘www.keralasic.gov.in’ has been opened. In this new web site also they have not included the pro-active disclosure about the procedure followed in the decision making process by the Information Commissioners and its transparency and accountability as envisaged under sec.4 of the RTI Act. The important decisions taken by the Commission are also not posted in the site.

The KSIC is not supposed to change the fundamentals of RTI Act. But KSIC has illegally jacked up its enquiry proceedings to fatten the bureaucracy. Such kind of collusion will do incalculable harm to citizenry rights. There is enough evidence and materials on record which justifies an enquiry by His Excellency the Governor of Kerala, under section 17 of RTI Act, about the 27 months’ functioning of the Kerala State Information Commission.

N. Rajendran
Secretary (RIPF)

“Citizen has the right to know Cabinet decision”

Print media reports are there on 02-03-2008 in the ‘Indian Express’ and the ‘Hindu’ that the State Information Commission in a complaint by T.Asafali, president of the Thalasserry based People’s Council for Civil Rights, ordered that a copy of the Cabinet decision with relevant notes sought by the citizen should be given to him within 15 days.

Indian Express reports that, “when a complaint against the rejection was lodged, the public information officer of the Home Department, K.K. Ramani was summoned by the State Information Commissioner. The Commissioner found that the rejection of information under sec. 8(1) (i) of the RTI Act was not justifiable. The Commissioner found that PIO of Home Department is responsible for the disposal of the request and ordered to supply a copy of the Cabinet decision with relevant notes to the citizen who made the request for information.

Which Information Commissioner did it?

But the name of the Commissioner who issued such an order / directive has not seen mentioned in the media reports. On an informal inquiry with the Commission officials it is told that such an order was passed against a complaint No. CP 456/2006 registered with the Commission, but they are reluctant to disclose the name of the Information Commissioner.

Why such a secrecy?

The Commission’s Quarterly journal “Kerala State Information Reporter” Vol I (issues I, II & III) contains important orders issued by the Commission. In all these orders included in the Reporter, the details of appellants and the respondents are given but by which Information Commissioner(s) and at what level(s); whether by a single bench/division bench/Full bench; have taken such decisions have not seen mentioned. The Annexure V to the Annual Report2006-2007 also do not have such details. So the decisions of the Commission are lacking transparency and accountability in the administration of RTI Act. Such decisions of the Commission without the authenticity of its promoters throttle the RTI Act.

But in the case of 4 decisions of SIC in their website (www.infokerala.org.in)it can be seen that the 1st (AP No.57/2007/SIC) and the $th (AP No.74/2006/SIC)were decided by the Division Bench of two Information Commissioners, the 2nd (CP No.130/2007/SIC)by a single Information Commissioner and the 3rd (AP No. 161/2006/SIC)by the Full Bench of 4 Information Commissioners and also the names of the Information Commissioners are seen mentioned in the web-copy of decisions.

The Commission is the custodian of RTI Act. People appeal to the commission against the difficulty in getting access to the official information and the commission is the powerful tool to break the iron curtain of the official non-cooperation.An informed citizen is a better judge of the leadership. Secrecy leads to misunderstanding; and misunderstanding leads to misinterpretation of facts.ACCOUNTABILITY and its exercise is central to healthy functioning of any system. The Commission is rather sick in this regard.

(Section 4 of the RTI Act, 2005 provides for pro-active disclosure of the particulars of 1) Commission’s organization, functions and duties 2) the procedure followed in the decision making process, including channels of supervision and accountability, and 3) the norms set by it for the discharge of its functions.)

This provision is equally applicable to State Information Commissions also. The other State Commissions and the Central Information Commission have such pro-active disclosure. We demand transparency and accountability in SIC decisions and effective usage of RTI through e-governance.

However, RIPF put such kind of orders / directives of the Information Commissioner in disguise, to give access to Cabinet Notes to the citizens in the ‘HALL OF FAME’. Please read this and if you also have more about such kind of valuable decisions, put it in the hall of fame and offer your comments.

The New
Indian Express Kochi

SIC fails to redress grievance
Monday March 10 2008 11:10 IST

Manu Bharat
KOCHI: The Right to Information Act has undoubtedly proved to be a powerful weapon to bring transparency to the administration. But unfortunately, the implementing authority, the State Information Commission (SIC), doesn’t seem to address the grievance of the appellants satisfactorily.

The Right to Information Protection Forum (RIPF), an organization fighting for the right to information, has alleged that the Commission lacks the spirit of the rule in its functioning. As a justification for the allegations, the personal experience of the forum’s secretary has been pointed out.

The secretary of the forum N Rajendran filed an application under RTI Act seeking information on a government order relating to `One-Rank One-Pension’. Though the application was filed on May 5, 2006, he hasn’t yet received the required information.

``The Principal Information Officer of the Finance Department and the appellate authority gave me incorrect, incomplete and misleading information withholding 116 pages of the document and tampering with page numbers,’’ Rajendran said. The second appeal was filed by him before the Commission on August 23, 2006. The appeal No 99/2006/SIC was heard by the division bench of the Commission on November 7, 2006. The division bench, which found that the authorities had misled the appellant, issued directions to the department to provide him the missing pages. The order said that failure to comply with the direction would invite action under penal clause Section 20(1) of RTI Act.

``Ignoring the findings of the division bench and without informing the two commissioners who headed my case, another commissioner, who had not even been present at the hearing, dismissed the appeal,’’ said Rajendran. He later filed a Special Leave Petition on the matter which is still pending before the Commission.

To an RTI application filed by the RIPF about the `Rules of Procedure’ in decision-making and work distribution among the Information Commissioner, the Commission through a letter (No:7554/SIC-PIO/2007 dt 28.12.2007) informed that the ``SIC doesn’t have such procedures and has not issued any such orders’’.

``If the Commission fails to elicit the necessary information for the public from top bureaucrats, then the existence of such an authority itself is irrelevant,’’ he said.

The Supreme Court directs Centre, State,UTs to consider plight of undertrials.
The Supreme Court, considered the plight of about 375 undertrials languishing in jails of India without trial for a long time, directed that those prisioners who have already served more than the maximum sentence shall be immediately released.

Kerala tops the list with 57 undertrials in its jails, without trial due to administrative negligence.
Interestingly Bihar has NIL, while West Bengal has 49 such victims of callousness of the administration.

The Right to Information Act, a silent revolution, became effective from 15-06-2005. The law grants a right to the citizens to question their governments, inspect government records, take copies thereof and participate in day-to-day governance. There is no secrecy anymore in governance, except the exempted information (Sec.8 & 9)

Right to Information Protection Forum (RIPF) is an independent not for profit NGO registered in Kerala under the Charitable Societies Act. To facilitate citizens file correct RTI application, a Help Desk has been set by RIPF.

Contact:
e-mail : ripfkerala@gmail.com
SMS / call : 9447345122 / 0471 2531159
By Post : Secretary, RIPF
TC-10/1068 (1), ARA 100
Vilabhagom Gardens
Mannanthala, Thiruvananthapuram 695015

Procedure for seeking information

I. The application procedure

1. Apply in writing to the SPIO, specifying the particulars of information sought for.
2. Reasons for seeking information are not required to be given.
3. You should deposit Rs. 10/- as application fee.
4. There is no prescribed form of application. The application can be made on plain paper. The applicant should, however, have the name and complete postal address of the applicant.
5. The information that you ask for should be very precise. If you ask vague questions you will get vague answers.

II. What is Information?

Information is any material in any form. It includes records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in an electronic form. It also includes information relating to any private body which can be accessed by the public authority under any law for the time being in force.

III. What is the fee?

1. Application fee of Rs. 10/- (Rupees ten only)
2. For availing copies
a) Rs.2/- for each page in ‘A4’ size paper
b) actual cost or price for samples or models etc.
c) for inspection of records, no fee fir the 1st hour, and a fee of Rs. 10/-for every subsequent 30 minutes.
d) in diskette or floppy or CD, Rs. 50/- (for each)
The application fee shall be by affixing court fee stamp or by cash remittance in the office of the SPIO or by demand draft/banker’s cheque/pay order or by remittance through Govt. Treasury under the h/a “0070-60-800-42 other items” – Please refer Govt. Notification in No. 11259/Cdn.5/2006 dated9-5-2006.

IV Time limit for getting information

1. 30 days from the date of application
2. 48 hours for information concerning the life or liberty of a person
3. If the interest of a third party are involved then time limit will be 40 days
4. failure to provide information within the specified period is a deemed refusal

V What could be the ground for rejection ?

1. If it is covered by exemption from disclosure. (Sec.8)
2. If it infringes copyright of any person other than the Stat. (Sec.9)

VI Who are State Public Information Officers? (SPIO)

SPIOs are officers designated by the public authorities in all administrative units of offices under Government to provide information to the citizens requesting for information under the Act. Any officer, whose assistance has been sought by the SPIO for the discharge of his or her duties, shall render all assistance and for the purpose of contraventions of the provisions of this act, such officer shall be treated as SPIO.

VII What are the duties of a SPIOs?

 SPIO shall deal with requests from persons seeking information and to render all assistance to such person.
 If the information requested is held by another public authority, the SPIO shall transfer the same, within 5 days, to such public authority and inform the applicant immediately.
 SPIO, on receipt of a request, shall as expeditiously as possible, and in any case within 30 days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of such fee or reject the request for any of the reasons specified in Sec. 8 or Sec. 9.
 If the SPIO fails to give decision within the period specified, he shall be deemed to have refused the request, and the fact intimated to the applicant (i) the reasons for such rejection, and (ii) the particulars of the Appellate Authority with the name and designation.

VIII. First Appeal

If an applicant is not supplied information within the prescribed time of 30 days or 48 hours, as the case may be, or is not satisfied with the information furnished to him, he may prefer an appeal to the first appellate authority who is an officer senior in the rank of SPIO. Such an appeal should be filed within a period of 30 days from the date of which the limit of thirty days of supply of information is expired or from the date on which the information or decision of the SPIO is received. He is to take a decision within 30 days of your filing appeal.

IX. Second Appeal

If you do not get a satisfactory response within 30 days from the first appellate authority or if the appellant is not satisfied with the order, he may prefer second appeal with the State Information Commission within 90 days from the date on which the decision should have been made by the first appellate authority or was actually received by the appellant. Every appeal has to be filed before the Commission with self attested copies of the impugned order and copies of the documents with proper index.

(The Information Commission has also jurisdiction to receive and inquire into complaints under section 18 of the Act, if the applicant face any harassment from the public authorities)

X. Disposal of appeals and complaints by the Commission

The only drawback in the Act is that specific timeframe hasn’t fixed for the disposal of appeals by the Commission.

XI. Mandatory Disclosure by Public Authorities

The Act makes it obligatory for every public authority to make self-disclosure in respect of the particulars of its organization, functions, duties, etc. as required by XVII items under section 4 (1) (b) of the Act. Section 4 (1) (a) of the act requires that the Public Authorities shall maintain all its records duly cataloged and indexed in a manner and form which facilitates the right to information. Some public authorities have published such information and have posted on their websites.

XII. The Punity Sting

The Act provides for punishment including penalty to the State Public Information Officers, Appellate Authorities and other employees of the Public Authorities. The defaulted officers are liable to be fined and are also subject to disciplinary jurisdiction under the concerned Service Rules, subject to adjudication by the Commission, under section 20 of the Act for following offences:

1. not accepting an application;
2. delay in furnishing information without reasonable cause;
3. malafidely denying information;
4. knowingly giving incomplete, incorrect, misleading information;
5. destroying information that has been requested.

According to Section 19 (8) (b) of the Act the State Information Commission has the power to grant certain amount towards compensation, by the officials under the public authority, for any loss or other detriment suffered by a complainant.

-

Don’t pay bribes to do the work for you, keep a check on that. Use Right to Information. Corruption is the misuse of public office for personal gain -