NIC is there to support CITIZENS of INDIA and eGovernance of INDIA ! NOT to WORK AGAINST Citizens of INDIA !!! – India lacks co-ordination on e-gov – “Reengineer govt processes before e-gov”
Posted by rtiact2005 on June 22, 2006
|Date:||Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:43:36 -0700 (PDT)|
|From:||"Venkat Kumaraswamy" email@example.com|
|Subject:||NIC is there to support CITIZENS of INDIA and eGovernance of INDIA ! NOT to WORK AGAINST Citizens of INDIA !!! – India lacks co-ordination on e-gov – “Reengineer govt processes before e-gov”|
|CC:||firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com|
June 23rd, 2006
NIC at Delhi and Bangalore,
Mr. B. V. Sharma – CPIO, NIC and NIC Bangalore ?
Dr. R. P Saxena – Appellate Authority and DDG, NIC
Mr. Sarup Datta, Scientist, NIC,
Mr. Ashok Kumar, ? NIC ?
Dr. Kashi Nath, Sr. Technical Director
Ms. Sudha Kumari, Technical Director, NIC,
Mr. A. Venkatesan, Sr. Technical Director, NIC
Sub: Appeal No. 24/ICPB/2006 dated June 5, 2006.
Dear All NIC persons mentioned above,
This is Mr. V. M. Kumaraswamy, MBA.
About eGovINDIA and it's activties
I have supported NIC before against NISG !!.
It is a DISGRACE for you all in NIC to do this !!!
How can you all go and plead infront of Information Commissioners that Mr. N. Anbarsan, Software Vendor from Bangalore is a COMPETITOR to NIC ?
Are you all going CRAZY in NIC ? What has happened to you all in NIC ?
Let us remind you all that NIC's COMPETITION is NISG !! Which you guys can't do a didly thing on NISG. NIC is like MICE infront of NISG.
Here a Citizen of INDIA is asking for information from NIC.
What TRADE SECRET NIC has to DISCLOSE which is against National Security of INDIA to Mr. N. Anbarsan a small time Software Vendor ? Please let me know.
What IPR work NIC has to disclouse against National Security of INDIA to Mr. N. Anbarsan a small time Software Vendor in Bangalore ? Please let me know.
If this small time software vendor is a PROBLEM for NIC, WHAT NIC can do for eGovernance for INDIA.
Did NIC read what National Knowledge Commission gave recomendations to Govt. of INDIA on eGovernance ? If not read the following:
India lacks co-ordination on e-gov
Knowledge panel unveils blueprint for e-governance
E-governance: Panel for implementation soon
How can DDG, Sr. Technical Director, Scientists, Technical Director and CPIO of NIC do these kind of things to go an tell ALL FALSE INFORMATION to Information Commissioners ? How can you all do this ?
NIC stands for something in INDIA. You all bringing down the name of NIC.
NIC has better job to do than this, opposing a small time software vendor.
NIC has lots of things to do for eGovernance of INDIA. NIC still has not learnt it's lesson yet from NISG.
NIC and Information Commissioners should know that: An applicant making request for information shall not be required to give any reason for requesting the information or any other personal details except those that may be necessary for contacting him.
Why do NIC fear of public having such information ? If done in good faith and without negligence, how could the public blackmail NIC ?
YOU all need to read the following about RTI Act 2005.
IT'S OUR RIGHT. An inalienable right has been conferred on Citizens of INDIA.
We can ask any questions and get information we want as long it is not against NATIONAL SECURITY of INDIA.
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
Please read what CIC Wajahat Habibullah has made ruling:
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Appeal No CIC/WB/C/2006/00176
Right to Information Act- Section 19
Name of Appellant: Sri Ramesh Chand Sai
Name of Public Authority: National Institute of Science Communication &
Appellant Shri Ramesh Chand Sai, applied to CPIO Dr RK Verma on October 9,
2005 asking for details under four points on terms and conditions and their
implementation regarding a contract with one M/s Deep Security Services
(Regd.) and the employees deployed by the firm. Dissatisfied with the reply
received on 25/11/'05 he went in first appeal on 23/12/'06 to Shri KY
Kavathekar, Scientist F and Appellate Authority challenging the application
of "sec 8(d)" of the Act to the information sought by the CPIO. The
Appellate Authority upheld the decision of the CPIO with the curious ruling
that, "Under the RTI Act there is no provision of supplying list of
employees". The applicant has therefore come in 2nd Appeal to the
We have examined the file. The Decisions of both CPIO and Appellate
Authority display a total ignorance of the law they have been appointed to
administer. They repeatedly refer to Sec 8(d) of which appellation there is
no clause in the Right to Information Act, 2005. They also refer to a Sec
8(j). The fact that the appellant himself so alludes in no way mitigates the
responsibility of the CPIO and AA, since it is they who have been appointed
to assist an applicant in accessing information, The RTI Act in itself
cannot specify all information that may be accessed. It only refers to
exemptions u/s 8 and 24, in neither of which "list of employees" falls. If
however, the reference of the CPIO and AA is to Sec 8 (1) (d), in the
instant case the appellant had sought information about employees engaged on
contract basis. The question arises whether information submitted by the
supplier can be categorized as 'commercial confidence' as contemplated u/s 8
A contract with a public authority cannot be categorised as 'confidential'
after completion. Even if some confidentiality is involved, public interest
in a matter of the nature of the present case will warrant disclosure. Had
it been a case of quotations, bid or tender or any other information prior
to conclusion of a contract, it could be categorized as trade secret, but
once concluded the confidentiality of such transactions cannot be claimed.
Any public authority claiming exemption must be put to strictest proof that
the exemption is justifiably claimed. This is not so in the present case.
The CPIO, Mr. Verma, will provide the information sought by the appellant
together with the list of employees within fifteen days. The public
authority NISCAIR is also directed to provide its RTI personnel with the
requisite awareness and training necessary for servicing the needs for
accountability and transparency mandated by the Act.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Chief Information Commissioner
Govt agency contracts not confidential: CIC
[ Monday, June 19, 2006 12:57:45 amTIMES NEWS NETWORK ]
NEW DELHI: In an order that could have far-reaching consequences, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled that a contract with a public authority cannot be categorised as confidential.
Government agencies are loath to give information regarding contracts. Government transactions are often kept away from public view under the garb of confidentiality, especially in cases related to defence and national security.
While it is early days yet on whether the order will impact such contracts, the CIC's decision appears to be a step in that direction.
The order issued by chief information commissioner Wajahat Habibullah substantiates this by elaborating that in case of "quotations, bid or tender or any other information prior to conclusion of a contract, it could be categorised as trade secret, but once concluded the confidentiality of such transactions cannot be claimed".
The commission has directed the National Institute of Science Communication and Information (NISCAIR) to furnish information sought by an applicant under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
The appellant, Ramesh Chand Sai, had sought from NISCAIR details of a contract with a firm, Deep Security Services, and the employees deployed by the firm
I hope you all go through this email and respond.
National Informatics Centre “NIC” needs to be more OPEN, TRANSPARENT and ACCOUNTABLE when dealing with Citizens of INDIA.
V. M. Kumaraswamy, MBA
This is Mr. V. M. Kumaraswamy, MBA. About eGovINDIA and it's activties