http://www.petitiononline.com/kmhk2008/ (Kannada)

http://www.petitiononline.com/krti2008/ (English)

http://www.hindu.com/2008/05/10/stories/2008051056860300.htm (My online campaign)

http://www.hindu.com/2008/04/20/stories/2008042057940100.htm

http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/May62008/editpage2008050666567.asp

http://www.thehindu.com/2008/04/14/stories/2008041454550600.htm

http://www.hindu.com/2008/05/19/stories/2008051953620600.htm

http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Apr172008/state2008041763173.asp

http://www.hindu.com/2008/05/10/stories/2008051057300300.htm

http://www.petitiononline.com/savertia/ (National RTI)

The signatures and optional comments may be please made either in English or Kannada or both.

Regards,
Tanveer
Syed Tanveeruddin

Let us show the all BUREAUCRATS that Citizens of INDIA means Business.

IT’S OUR RIGHT. An inalienable right has been conferred on citizens.

`Right to Information Act will empower common people’

The legislative intent is clear; we are entitled to know how our money is spent. The onus is on us to make the Act work.

In effect, therefore, the right conferred on the citizen is an exhaustive one. It allows him to assess and examine every government decision, to study the reasons recorded by the government for taking a particular step, and to utilise information so gathered to ensure that government acts in a transparent and just manner.

Indeed, the preamble to the Act puts it well when it says, “democracy requires an informed citizenry and transparency of information” and adds these “are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to hold Governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed”.

SMS message to send is:

SIC KKM sir,
“Your Malafides proved in amending RTI rules — We demand your resignation to ensure Supremacy of Democracy”

______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ ______________

Karnataka State Information Commissioner for Right to Information Act is   Mr. K. K. Mishra.

The mobile numbers for KKM are:

1.   9448291111 ,
2.    9844491100

Please SMS the above message to SIC KKM.

Please tell your friends to do the same. Send this to as many as possible. So that we can put presurre on SIC  KKM.

______________________________ ______________________________ ______________________________ __________

THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS for this ” SMS CAMPAIGN- RULE 14 “

Please go through the following Statements:

A. On March 15th 2008, In Raichur, SIC K K Mishra as per Hindu article,

______________________________

Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2005 05:13:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: “Venkatappa Kumaraswamy” <vmkumaraswamy@yahoo.com> View Contact Details View Contact Details Add Mobile Alert
Subject: Mother of All Scams, Union Minister Shri Arjun Singh involved in SCIC KKM

To: maja@humanrightsinitiative.org, majadhun@vsnl.com, charmaine@humanrightsinitiative.org, venkatesh@humanrightsinitiative.org, tapasi@humanrightsinitiative.org, sohini@humanrightsinitiative.org, creatorg@sify.com, chriall@nda.vsnl.net.in, ygm_cic@rediffmail.com, charmaine99@hotmail.com, mandakini@humanrightsinitiative.org, kandreaasyan@osieurope.org, manisha@humanrightinitiative.org, jeet@humanrightsinitiative.org

CC: “eKaviUdyoga Samithi” <bhujanga@sancharnet.in>, VMKumaraswamy@yahoo.com

Mother of All Scams:

Union Minister Shri Arjun Singh involved

In appointment of Shri. K. K. Misra,

the Tainted Bureaucrat

As The Karnataka Chief Information Commissioner

An Extract From “AGNI” Kannada Weekly Dated 11^th August 2005 From Bangalore

1. Shri.KK Misra has bagged the appointment as Karnataka State Chief Information Commissioner due to a DEAL arranged by FATHER IN LAW.

2. Shri.KK Misra a native of Uttar Pradesh is married to the daughter of Ex Minister of Uttar Pradesh and Congress Member.

3. Shri.KK Misra’s Father in Law is a close friend of Union Minister Shri.Arjun Singh.

4. Union Minister Shri. Arjun Singh has pressurized Shri. Dhram Singh, Chief Minister of Karnataka to appoint Shri. K . K. Misra as Karnataka State Chief Information Commissioner.

1. There is no evidence of KKM doing any meaningful service to Karnataka.
2. Nor there is any evidence that he used his wisdom for saving Karnataka from many of the crisis it faced.
3. Forget about any service to Karnataka KKM has only given embarrassment to GOK.
4. Getting High Court directive for his prosecution for Filing of false affidavit to High court is the only his crowning blunder.

——— Forwarded message ———-
From: “Shailesh Gandhi” <shaileshgan@ gmail.com>
To:all RTI@yahoogroups. com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:42:01 +0530
Subject: Maharashtra Chief Minister’s Relief Fund
After a 27 month RTI saga the Chief Minister has conceded that
the Maharashtra CM’s fund will come under RTI scrutiny. But the path to
reach here has been a long and chequered one. On 26 October, 2005 I asked
for some simple details about the money spent from the CM’s relief fund
which was refused by the PIO, on the grounds that it is a Registered Trust
with no Government controls, hence not a Public Authority. A first appeal on
21 February 2006, by me arguing that this was a Public authority in all
senses, prompted the first appellate authority to give a decision it would
be a breach of Legislative privilige! A second appeal was filed to the
Information Commission on 10 April, 2006, and the Single Commissioner held a
hearing on 1 June, 2006, but did not issue any order. I argued that if the
Legislative assembly chose not to ask questions on a particular matter, it
could not supercede my Right to Information. After repeated questioning
about this by Citizens and media, the full bench of the Maharashtra
Commission was called on 7th December, 2007. Four Commissioners- one each
from Nagpur, Aurangabad and Pune met in Mumbai with the Chief Commissioner
in Mumbai,- for the hearing. After I made my opening argument for a minute
the State lawyer said they wanted to make a written submission and that the
Advocate General would place the State’s arguments, hence the matter should
be adjourned by six weeks. I protested that the State could have presented
its submissions earlier and the Advocate General could not be the only
person in the State to present arguments. Besides, if at all an adjournment
was desired, the State should have asked for it earlier. After the full
bench had assembled, the State was only flexing its muscle and devaluing the
Commission by insisting on an adjournment. The Commission however was
willing to agree to the State’s demand, and the next hearing was fixed on
7th January, 2008. On that day, again the four Commissioners assembled in
Mumbai and the Advocate General presented the same arguments which the PIO
and the First Appellate authority had presented. I also argued that the CM’s
relief fund trust had 12 members- six ministers and six secretaries who were
all Public servants, and every paper or telephone of the CM’s relief fund
was Citizen’s money, apart from the argument of the disclosure being a
breach of legislative privilige being completely illogical. The Advocate
General also told the Commission that they had recently written to the
Legislature to elicit their opinion. My protests notwithstanding the
Commission again gave in to the State’s diktat and decided on another
hearing on 29 Jaunary, 2008 for giving final orders.

On 29th January, the Advocate General stated that they felt it was
necessary to give their arguments made on 7th January in writing to
‘crystallise’ what they had said. My protests that the Commission was
allowing the State to denigrate the Commission and thereby the RTI Act fell
on deaf ears. The decision has still not been given by the Commission. In
the meantime I asked the Charity Commissioner for details of the Trust and
got information that apart from the initial filing of details in 1967, no
details had been filed! Media had also been highlighting all this and on
27th February, 2008 the CM displaying sagacity announced that the details of
the CM’s fund would be disclosed under RTI.

The same cannot be said about the senior officers in the State who
doggedly refused to give information in a show of arrogance. The Advocate
General also does not appear to have been keen to advise in the letter and
spirit of the law, but was only concerned with defending what he perhaps
perceived as his clients, ” the Government officers”. I wish the Advocate
General would understand the RTI act better since he will have to give an
opinion in future as well on a matter which has become very important for
Citizens. The Information Commission also appears to be willing to be taken
around the mulberry bush by the State, and this will result in a devaluing
of the position of the Commission and concomitantly the RTI Act. I am hoping
the Commission will display wisdom and give its reasoned order atleast now.

In one sense however, this is a true triumph of democracy with RTI being
the tool to bring accountability; Citizens and media highlighting a gross
mistake; and the CM at some point acknowledging that the State had been in
error, and taking corrective action. On this count I would thank the CM for
not sticking to an arrogant position, and graciously accepting the Right to
Information.

shailesh gandhi

28 February, 2008

PS.: As per the CIC’s order on 15 March, 2008, details of PM’s Relief fund
have to be given under RTI. However my RTI application asking:

As of 31st March, 2007 I want the details of the amounts deposited in banks
or any other place, in the following format:

Name of bank or Institution where

Money is deposited
Interest rate at which money deposited

Has been rejected, on 4 January, 2008 refusing to give even this
information, saying it may amount to ‘disclosure of information including
commercial confidence, trade secrets or disclosure of intellectual property
the disclosure of which would harm the competitive position of third
parties’! There is also another still more obfuscating reason given,
claiming fiduciary relationship of the officers holding the information.
There is a balance of over 1400 crores, and my first appeal has also been
rejected without any reasons. At the current disposal rates of the CIC, the
second appeal I have filed might be heard after the present Shri Habibullah
retires.
Love
shailesh
All my emails are
in Public Domain.
www.satyamevajayate .info
Mera Bharat Mahaan…
Nahi Hai,
Per Yeh Dosh Mera Hai

I am a social worker and works for right to information. Through use
of RTI I have unearthed many irregularities of social welfare
department of uttar pradesh. Today at around 11:47 AM sri A. K. Bajpai
principal G. B. Pant Polytechnic Mohan Road Lucknow made a phone call
to me and gave me life threats and said that he alongwith Pawan Kumar
Mishra and K. K. srivastava will implicate my husband in so many cases
that our life will become hell if I don’t stop using RTI against all
of them.

I have informed the matter to Sri S. K. Verma , Director Social
welfare Uttar pradesh by telephone ON HIS MOBILE at 15:55PM and he has
assured me to take action in this matter.

These persons are law breakers and one of them namely pawan kumar
mishra is a registered fraud .I have exposed darker side of their
characters and activities through use of RTI so they are threatening
me so that I should not go to State Information Commission to pursue
cases against them.Even after repeated orders of Honb’le Chief State
Information Commissioner J. Sri M. A. Khan , A K . Bajpai repeatedly
sends P. K. Mishra to information commission only to threaten me.

The life of my family is in danger so please at the earliest possible
institute a high level enquiry taking into consideration all the
frauds of these persons to punish the real culprits so that only
truth should win and I and my family should breathe in a fearless
environment.
Thanking you

yours truly

URVASHI SHARMA
F-2108, RAJAJIPURAM
LUCKNOW – 226017 , UTTAR PRADESH
M- 09305463313
__._,_.___

The Commission noted this while dismissing an application filed by a Mumbai resident Amin Merchant who had sought information from Finance Ministry as to why certain tariff policy was framed by the Centre.

“..it is not open to citizens to question the government about why a certain matter was handled in a certain way and not differently. The public authority owes him no explanation,” the Information Commissioner A N Tiwari said.

Merchant, in his application to the Ministry had questioned its policy for not issuing exemption notification against certain goods.

“While RTI Act entitles each citizen to seek and receive information from public authorities, it does not allow them any liberty to seek explanations and reasons from it,” the Commission said adding that such “freewheeling questioning” should not be encouraged.

Holding that the RTI Act is not a proper instrument for seeking such explanation from the government, the Commission said, “No explanation is owed to the appellant (Merchant) by the Centre, which pilots the budget before the Parliament and is answerable only to the Parliament and to no one else.”

“If he is not happy with some of the proposals such persons may even petition the appropriate department of the government or the Parliament or agitate the matter before a Court of law,” the Commission said.

http://www.deccanherald.com/Content/Nov112007/national2007111135175.asp?section=updatenews

CHENNAI: An application under the Right To Information (RTI) Act questioning the non-implementation of the directive from the Madras High Court is caught up in a blame game amid the Revenue department, the Tiruvallur District Collectorate and the Avadi Municipality.

Vamshi S Dixit, an advocate, had submitted an application to the Revenue Secretary and the Tiruvallur District Collector in September, 2007, asking for reasons to account for the non-removal of 137 encroachments on six acres of poromboke land (along the MTH Road) near Pattabiram railway station, despite a directive issued by the High Court to do so eight months ago.

The Revenue department first forwarded the application to the Collectorate which, in turn, sent it to the Poonamallee tahsildar, who forwarded it to the Avadi Municipality.

The civic body, on its part, sent it back to the tashildar saying that the removal of encroachments was the duty of the Revenue department.

Since he could not get a reply for his queries within the legally stipulated time of 30 days, the RTI applicant had filed his appeal petitions both before the District Collector and the Revenue Secretary a few weeks ago. However, he did not get a reply from them either.

“If we cannot get any response for the appeals also within the prescribed time limit, we have no other option except to move the State Information Commission,” said R L Saravanan, a resident and a lawyer in Pattabiram.

It may be recalled that for over two decades, the residents in the area had been demanding that a bus terminus be constructed on the said piece of land for which Sriperumbudur MP A Krishnasamy had also allotted Rs 20 lakh from his area development fund.

Many residents in the area were furious with the official callousness. “We never expected the authorities to show such scant regard for a High Court directive, in addition to violating the terms of the Right To Information (RTI) Act,” said T Sadagopan, local resident and office bearer of the Thandurai-Pattabiram Consumer Centre.

———————————————————-
http://www.newindpress.com/NewsItems.asp?ID=IE920071107222315&Page=9&Headline=Application+under+RTI+caught+in+blame+game&Title=Chennai&Topic=0&

Source: http://www.missionnetaji.org/page/ht_ccpadecision.html

Why keep records secret if Bose had died in 1945?: Mission Netaji

Disclosure of Top Secret records will lead to chaos in country: MHA

Matter is of a serious national importance: Central Information Commission

In a major boost for the freedom of information movement in India, the full Bench of Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) must declassify records relating to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose’s reported death.

The CIC set aside the MHA’s contention that disclosure “may lead to a serious law and order problem in the country, especially in West Bengal” as “facile hypothesis” which “seems to be a position repeated without any discernable application of mind”.

The Bench comprising Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah and Information Commissioners Padma Balasubramanian, AN Tiwari, Dr OP Kejariwal and Prof MM Ansari hammered in that the matter was of “wide public concern and therefore of national importance” and rejected the Home Ministry’s “considered view” to not to “supply the documents relating to various Commissions of Inquiry on disappearance of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose in public interest”.

The documents had been sought in June last year when Sayantan Dasgupta of Mission Netaji requested the MHA to “make available authenticated copies of documents used as exhibits by the Shah Nawaz Khan and GD Khosla panels”.

The idea was to better the understanding about the conclusion drawn by these panels since the Government held their findings true even after receiving the latest report of Justice MK Mukherjee, a top criminal law expert and former judge of the Supreme Court of India. Full Story

]]> http://right2information.wordpress.com/2007/11/03/official-secrets-act-era-gone-disclose-netaji-records-cic-tells-govt/feed/ 0 rtiact2005 http://right2information.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/cauvery-row-lawyers-pocket-rs-22-crresult-big-zero/ http://right2information.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/cauvery-row-lawyers-pocket-rs-22-crresult-big-zero/#comments Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:59:05 +0000 rtiact2005 http://right2information.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/cauvery-row-lawyers-pocket-rs-22-crresult-big-zero/ ]]> CAUVERY ROW: LAWYERS POCKET RS. 22 CR.RESULT: BIG ZERO !

CAUVERY ROW: LAWYERS POCKET RS. 22 CR.RESULT: BIG ZERO !

http://www.starofmysore.com/main.asp?type=news&item=13497

* Govt. furnishes incomplete info on Cauvery Tribunal expenditure.

* Full information on Sept. 27.

It may be recalled that Star of Mysore had written twice earlier in the column Abracadabra about the indifferent and even scandalous manner in which Karnataka’s case was handled and also presented at the Tribunal by a set of advocates who seemed to have focused more on their “personal interest” than on the case. We will be reproducing those Abracadabras shortly. —Ed

* Anil Dewan alone got Rs. 9.66 cr. !

* Javali and Katharki together claimed Rs. 6.5 cr.

* Then comes Nariman with Rs. 2 cr.

Dharwad, June 26 (TRD)- An application filed by an activist under the Right To Information (RTI) Act has exposed may vital information regarding the Cauvery Water Dispute.

The Founder-President of Puraskara Forum, Krishna Joshi, had asked the Chief Secretary of the State to furnish him all the details regarding the delegations sent to represent the State; the lawyers’ fees and the total expenditure incurred by the State Government since the formation of the Cauvery Tribunal.

Later a complaint was lodged with the Information Commission on Apr. 12 as the officers had failed to furnish the information within the deadline to Joshi.

In this background, an enquiry was held on June 21 and the Commission has expressed its displeasure as incomplete information was furnished by the Department of Water Resources. It has called for a final enquiry on Sept. 27.

Lawyers’ fee startling

Out of the many questions raised by Krishna Joshi, the junior officers of the Department of Water Resources, on behalf of the Chief Secretary, have given answers for only two questions. Out of these two, one remains to be incomplete.

As per the information furnished by these officers, in the period since 1990-91 to 28.2.2007, the 10 Advocate Generals, who appeared be fore the Tribunal, claimed Rs. 1.34 crore as fees.

During the same period, fees for the 18 lawyers who appeared for the State is Rs. 22.10 crore.

Out of the 18 lawyers, advocate Anil B. Dewan was paid the highest fee of Rs. 9.66 crore and the lowest in the list was Advocate Ashok Mathur, who was paid Rs. 3,000 only.

The fee for the famous advocate Fali S. Nariman, who argued for the State since the beginning, was paid Rs. 2.08 crore.

Similarly the advocates, who represented the State since the formation of the Tribunal, S.S. Javali and Mohan V. Katharki, are paid Rs. 3.77 crore and Rs. 2.75 crore respectively.

The lawyers’ fee paid by the State Government during 2005-06 is Rs. 5.19 crore and this is the highest payment made in a single financial year.

Visits to Bangalore

The number of visits made by the advocates to Bangalore to hold discussions are also available. The details are as follows:

Mohan V. Katharki has visited Bangalore 193 times, S.S. Javali 158 times, Shambhuprasad Singh 138 times, Anil B. Dewan 46 times, Sayyed Naqvi 26 times, Fali S. Nariman 19 times, Brijesh Kalappa 18 times, Ranvir Singh 14 times and Sanjay R. Heggade 7 times.

“The expenditure incurred on lawyers is startling. In spite of this huge expenditure, I feel the Government has utterly fail0ed in presenting its arguments effectively. My concern is that all the details regarding the dispute be made available to the public,” says Krishna Joshi. “I will continue to fight till all the information is available,” he declared.

Having won his case to make the entire proceedings of the Information Commission to be conducted in Kannada, he insists that the Cauvery Tribunal should publish its verdict in Kannada and there should be clarity in the details.