Te has ganado 750,000.00 libras esterlinas en Promo B.P.O. enviar

--

Nombre ...
País ...
Tel ...

SAI UTSAV - 2012

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

Forward email This email was sent to rtihelpmail@gmail.com by saiutsav2012@gmail.com |   Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. SaiUtsav2012 | Pedavadlapudi Village | Pedavadlapudi | India | 522024 | India

Changes to Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service

				Is this email not displaying properly? View it in your browser.
Dear Google user, We're getting rid of over 60 different privacy policies across Google and replacing them with one that's a lot shorter and easier to read. Our new policy covers multiple products and features, reflecting our desire to create one beautifully simple and intuitive experience across Google. We believe this stuff matters, so please take a few minutes to read our updated Privacy Policy and Terms of Service at http://www.google.com/policies. These changes will take effect on March 1, 2012.
One policy, one Google experience
Easy to work across Google Our new policy reflects a single product experience that does what you need, when you want it to. Whether you're reading an email that reminds you to schedule a family get-together or finding a favorite video that you want to share, we want to ensure you can move across Gmail, Calendar, Search, YouTube, or whatever your life calls for with ease.		Tailored for you If you're signed into Google, we can do things like suggest search queries – or tailor your search results – based on the interests you've expressed in Google+, Gmail, and YouTube. We'll better understand which version of Pink or Jaguar you're searching for and get you those results faster.		Easy to share and collaborate When you post or create a document online, you often want others to see and contribute. By remembering the contact information of the people you want to share with, we make it easy for you to share in any Google product or service with minimal clicks and errors.
Protecting your privacy hasn't changed Our goal is to provide you with as much transparency and choice as possible, through products like Google Dashboard and Ads Preferences Manager, alongside other tools. Our privacy principles remain unchanged. And we'll never sell your personal information or share it without your permission (other than rare circumstances like valid legal requests).		Got questions? We've got answers. Visit our FAQ at http://www.google.com/policies/faq to read more about the changes. (We figured our users might have a question or twenty-two.)
Notice of Change March 1, 2012 is when the new Privacy Policy and Terms will come into effect. If you choose to keep using Google once the change occurs, you will be doing so under the new Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. Please do not reply to this email. Mail sent to this address cannot be answered. Also, never enter your Google Account password after following a link in an email or chat to an untrusted site. Instead, go directly to the site, such as mail.google.com or www.google.com/accounts. Google will never email you to ask for your password or other sensitive information.

Full Text of High Court Allahabad judgement quashing anti-RTI notifications of U.P. Government

eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System (Judgment/Order in Text Format) This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Deputy Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH (Reserved) Writ Petition No. 6993 (M/B) of 2009 PIL National Alliance of People's Movements and another versus State of U.P. and others And Writ Petition No. 10875 (M/B) of 2011 PIL Awadesh Kumar Tripathi versus State of U.P. Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J. Hon'ble D.K.Upadhyaya, J. (Delivered by Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J.) Heard Sri S.N.Shukla and Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri J.N.Mathur, learned Additional Advocate General, for the State. These petitions, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, have been filed challenging the two notifications issued by the State Government, viz. notification no. 980/43-2-2009 dated 7th June, 2009 and 254/Chhappan-2008-15-05 dated 25th March, 2008. By means of the notification dated 7.6.2009, his Excellency the Governor of U.P., in exercise of the powers under sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005), read with Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (Act No. 10 of 1897) and in supersession of Government Notification No. 966/43-2-2009 dated June 02, 2009 excluded certain works allotted to Confidential Section-I of the Government of U.P from the purview of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005), hereinafter referred to as the RTI Act, and by notification dated 25.3.2008, in exercise of powers under sub-section (4) of Section 24 of 'The RTI Act' specified the operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the State Government and excluded them from the applicability of 'The RTI Act'. The aforesaid notification dated 25.3.2008 reads as under: "No. 254/LVI-2008-15-05 Dated Lucknow, March 25, 2008 WHEREAS the operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the Government of Uttar Pradesh are the Security Organisations established by the State Government as it inter alia functions to operate and maintain the Government aircrafts for transport of the Ministers and high functionaries of the State, requiring special precautions of thereof: Now, THEREFORE in exercise of powers under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the Right to Info0rmation Act, 2005 (Act no. 22 of 2005), the Governor is pleased to specify the said units i.e. the operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the State Government to which the provisions of the said Act shall not apply. By order, SHAILESH KRISHNA, Pramukh Sachiv." The notification dated 7.6.2009 reads as under: "No. 980/43-2-2009 Lucknow: Dated: June 07, 2009 In exercise of the powers under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005), read with section 10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (Act No. 10 of 1897) and in supersession of Government Notification No. 966/43-2-2009, dated June 02, 2009, the Governor is pleased to direct that the following works allotted to Confidential Section-1 according to distribution of work between Sections/ Departments of Uttar Pradesh Secretariat shall be excluded from the purview of the said Act:- 1.Appointment of the Governor, 2.Appointment of Ministers/State Ministers/Deputy Ministers, 3.Code of Conduct for Ministers, 4.Providing materials for Monthly Demi Official letter to be sent to the President of India on behalf of the Governor, 5.Appointment of Hon'ble Judges of the High Court. Notification No. 966/43-2-2009, dated 02 June, 2009 of Prashasanik Sudhar Anubhag-2, U.P. Government is cancelled with immediate effect. By order, (K.K.Sinha) Principal Secretary." In regard to the notification dated 7.6.2009, Sri J.N.Mathur, learned Additional Advocate General very fairly conceded that the same could not have been issued by the Governor in exercise of powers under sub-section (4) of Section 24 of 'The RTI Act' and is, therefore, bad in law. Sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the RTI Act is reproduced below: "(4) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence and security organisations, being organisations established by the State Government, as that Government may, from time to time, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify: Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under this sub-section: Provided further that in case the information sought for is in respect of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall only be provided after the approval of the State Information Commission and, notwithstanding anything contained in Section 7, such information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of the receipt of request." The above provision does not give any authority to the State Government to issue such a notification which does not fall within the ambit of the aforesaid provision, that is to say, what can be excluded from operation of 'The RTI Act' is certain 'organizations', established by the State and not the 'works'. The notification dated 7.6.2009 is, therefore, per se illegal, without authority and void ab initio. So far as the notification dated 25.3.2008 is concerned, the same plea has been raised by the counsel for the petitioners that it transgresses the powers of the Governor conferred under sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the RTI Act as the operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the State Government, neither being intelligence nor security organization established by the State Government nor having been notified as such, cannot be exempted from the provisions of 'The RTI Act'. To elaborate the aforesaid submission, attention of the Court was drawn to the Second Schedule under the RTI Act, where intelligence and security organizations have been named, which stand exempted from the operation of 'The RTI Act', but where also the proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 24 creates an exemption, namely, giving of information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations, but the present notification does not prescribe even any such exemption and rather, it forbids any type of information being given by the aforesaid Units. RTI Act itself excludes corruption and human rights violations from the exemptions granted under 'The RTI Act' even in the intelligence and security organizations, which have been named under the Second Schedule. Further argument is that the Operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the State Government, are not independent security organizations, but they are units of Civil Aviation Department of the Government of U.P and that when the Civil Aviation Department itself is not a security organization, its units cannot be taken to be security organizations independently or as units of any security organization. In response, Sri J.N.Mathur, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that it is not necessary that the entire organization should be a security organization for the purposes of exemption under 'The RTI Act', but there may be units in an organization itself which deal with such matters and perform such functions, which require strict security, therefore, can be exempted from the operation of 'The RTI Act' by issuing notification in exercise of powers under sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the Act. He submitted that the movements of the Ministers and high functionaries of the State require special precautions and security and giving information regarding their flight schedule etc. cannot be made known to the public in general as the same will put the security and safety of the high dignitaries to risk. Justifying the action of the State Government, he further submitted that by virtue of the Police (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2001, the expression 'civil aviation personnel' has been defined as follows: "The expression 'civil aviation personnel' shall mean such officers and employees of the Civil Aviation Department posted in the maintenance, security and general administration wing of the Civil Aviation Directorate, Uttar Pradesh immediately before the commencement of the Police (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2001, as may be specified in this behalf by the State Government by notification, and shall include any person appointed as a civil aviation personnel after such commencement." The consequence of the aforesaid definition and the inclusion of the civil aviation personnel to the police force has been given in sub-section (2) of Section 2-A of the aforesaid Act, which reads as under: "(2) On and from such date as the State Government may, by notification appoint in this behalf, the entire civil aviation personnel employed immediately before that date shall, for the purpose of this Act, become members of a police force and shall be formally enrolled in accordance with the provisions of section 8-A and any new such members shall, thereafter, be appointed in such manner, as shall from time to time, be ordered by the State Government: Provided that any civil aviation personnel employed before the said date may, by notice addressed to the Director General, Civil Aviation, Uttar Pradesh served within a period of thirty days from the said date, intimate his option not to become a member of the said police force, and upon receipt of such notice, the post in the Civil Aviation Department held until then by him shall stand abolished and his services shall stand terminated and he shall be paid an amount equivalent to his three months salary as compensation." Sub-section (4) of Section 2-A, reads as under: "(4) The civil aviation personnel shall discharge such duties as may be specified by general or special orders of the State Government from time to time pertaining to maintenance of aircraft belonging to, or hired by, the State Government, security at the Airport at Lucknow or at any other airport specified by a general or special order of the State Government and other duties incidental thereto or connected therewith." Sub-section (4) aforesaid makes it very clear that the civil aviation personnel shall discharge such duties as may be specified from time to time pertaining to maintenance of aircraft belonging to, or hired by, the State Government, security at the Airport at Lucknow or any other airport specified by a general or special order of the State Government and other duties incidental thereto or connected therewith. This means that the maintenance of aircraft and the security of the airport are the functions which are to be performed by the civil aviation personnel. There cannot be any exclusion from the applicability of the RTI Act otherwise by issuance of a notification under sub-section (4) of Section 24 unless the matter relates to the intelligence and security organizations, established by the State. Even if the civil aviation personnel has been included in the police force of the State, that will not be sufficient to exempt operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the State Government, when the police department itself is not exempted. The State Government exercises delegated powers under the aforesaid provisions of the Act; therefore, it cannot issue a notification which runs beyond the scope of such delegation. In the case of State of Bihar and another versus Bal Mukund Sah and others, (2000) 4 SCC 640, the Apex Court has held that no rule or law made by the delegatee can supersede or override the powers exercised or the law made by the delegator of power, the sovereign legislature. 'The RTI Act' has been enacted to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and State Informations Commissions and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The basic object of 'The RTI Act' is to empower the citizens, promote transparency and accountability in the working of the Government, contain corruption and make our democracy work for the people in real sense. It goes without saying that an informed citizen is better equipped to keep necessary vigil on the instruments of governance and make the government more accountable to the governed. The RTI Act is a big step towards making the citizens informed about the activities of the Government. Section 3 of 'The RTI Act' talks about right to information and reads as under: "3. Right to information.- Subject to the provisions of this Act, all citizens shall have the right to information." The impugned notification has not even been placed before the State Legislature, which was the requirement under sub-section (5) of Section 24 of the RTI Act and which says that every notification issued under sub-section (4) shall be laid before the State Legislature, which enables only the intelligence and security organizations established by the State Government and specifically notified as such and none else for exemption from the applicability of the Act. Right to information is a part and parcel of the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression as contained in Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. 'The RTI Act' gives statutory safeguard to the Freedom of Speech and Expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g), which cannot be curtailed except with reasonable restrictions provided under Article 19(2) of the Constitution, in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign State, public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence only and the impugned notification does not fall in any of the categories enumerated under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. The reasonable restrictions as envisaged under Article 19(2) of the Constitution cannot be imposed by executive action and can only be done by duly enacted law. (See Express Newspaper Pvt. Ltd. and others versus Union of India (UOI) and others (1986) 1 SCC 133 (para 76), Bijoe Emmanuel and others versus State of Kerala and others (1986) 3 SCC 615 (para 16), Romesh Thapper versus The State of Madras AIR 1950 SC 124 (para 10) and Kharak Singh versus The State of U.P. and others AIR 1963 SC 1295 (para 5). Therefore, the restriction imposed is excessive and beyond the powers of the State, which cannot be done by issuance of the impugned notifications. Civil aviation department not being an intelligence or security organization, established by the State, its operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit cannot be taken to be intelligence and security organizations established by the State so as to bring them within the scope of sub-section (4) of Section 24 of 'The RTI Act'. For the aforesaid reasons, the notification dated 25.3.2008 also cannot be saved as it falls outside the scope of sub-section (4) of Section 24 of 'The RTI Act'. However, any information relation to security of airports or matters connected thereto, if stands exempted under Section 8 of the RTI Act, can be refused but the information, which is not covered by Section 8 of the RTI Act, cannot be denied. It is also to be noticed that the impugned notification dated 25.3.2008 does not create any exemption with respect to information regarding corruption and human rights violations in either of the aforesaid units of the civil aviation department though under the proviso appended to sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the Act, even the intelligence and security organizations are not immune from giving information regarding corruption and human rights violations. The notification thus gives a blanket exemption with respect to information regarding corruption and human rights violations, which is in direct conflict with the provision contained in Section 24(4) of 'The RTI Act', hence cannot be saved. The notification aforesaid exempts the operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the State Government and does not say that this exemption shall not be applicable in the matters of corruption and human rights violations. This makes the notification bad and per se illegal being grossly in violation of the provisions of the Act. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are allowed and both the notifications dated 7.6.2009 and 25.3.2008 (contained in Annexures 1 and 2 to Writ Petition No.6993 (M/B) of 2009) being invalid are hereby quashed. January 25th, 2012 LN/- Judgment is pronounced under Chapter VII Rule 1(2) of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952.

Full Text of High Court Allahabad judgement quashing anti-RTI notifications of U.P. Government

eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System
(Judgment/Order in Text Format)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic
copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake,
please bring it to the notice of Deputy Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

(Reserved)
Writ Petition No. 6993 (M/B) of 2009 PIL

National Alliance of People's Movements and another
versus
State of U.P. and others
And

Writ Petition No. 10875 (M/B) of 2011 PIL

Awadesh Kumar Tripathi
versus
State of U.P.

Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J.
Hon'ble D.K.Upadhyaya, J.

(Delivered by Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J.)

Heard Sri S.N.Shukla and Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel
for the petitioners and Sri J.N.Mathur, learned Additional Advocate
General, for the State.
These petitions, in the nature of Public Interest Litigation, have
been filed challenging the two notifications issued by the State
Government, viz. notification no. 980/43-2-2009 dated 7th June, 2009
and 254/Chhappan-2008-15-05 dated 25th March, 2008.
By means of the notification dated 7.6.2009, his Excellency the
Governor of U.P., in exercise of the powers under sub-section (4) of
Section 24 of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005),
read with Section 10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (Act No. 10 of
1897) and in supersession of Government Notification No. 966/43-2-2009
dated June 02, 2009 excluded certain works allotted to Confidential
Section-I of the Government of U.P from the purview of the Right to
Information Act, 2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005), hereinafter referred to as
the RTI Act, and by notification dated 25.3.2008, in exercise of
powers under sub-section (4) of Section 24 of 'The RTI Act' specified
the operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General
Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the State
Government and excluded them from the applicability of 'The RTI Act'.
The aforesaid notification dated 25.3.2008 reads as under:
"No. 254/LVI-2008-15-05
Dated Lucknow, March 25, 2008

WHEREAS the operation Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General
Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation Department of the Government
of Uttar Pradesh are the Security Organisations established by the
State Government as it inter alia functions to operate and maintain
the Government aircrafts for transport of the Ministers and high
functionaries of the State, requiring special precautions of thereof:

Now, THEREFORE in exercise of powers under sub-section (4) of section
24 of the Right to Info0rmation Act, 2005 (Act no. 22 of 2005), the
Governor is pleased to specify the said units i.e. the operation Unit
and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the
Civil Aviation Department of the State Government to which the
provisions of the said Act shall not apply.
By order,
SHAILESH KRISHNA,
Pramukh Sachiv."

The notification dated 7.6.2009 reads as under:
"No. 980/43-2-2009
Lucknow: Dated: June 07, 2009
In exercise of the powers under sub-section (4) of section 24 of the
Right to Information Act, 2005 (Act No. 22 of 2005), read with section
10 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (Act No. 10 of 1897) and in
supersession of Government Notification No. 966/43-2-2009, dated June
02, 2009, the Governor is pleased to direct that the following works
allotted to Confidential Section-1 according to distribution of work
between Sections/ Departments of Uttar Pradesh Secretariat shall be
excluded from the purview of the said Act:-

1.Appointment of the Governor,
2.Appointment of Ministers/State Ministers/Deputy Ministers,
3.Code of Conduct for Ministers,
4.Providing materials for Monthly Demi Official letter to be sent to
the President of India on behalf of the Governor,

5.Appointment of Hon'ble Judges of the High Court.
Notification No. 966/43-2-2009, dated 02 June, 2009 of Prashasanik
Sudhar Anubhag-2, U.P. Government is cancelled with immediate effect.
By order,
(K.K.Sinha)
Principal Secretary."
In regard to the notification dated 7.6.2009, Sri J.N.Mathur, learned
Additional Advocate General very fairly conceded that the same could
not have been issued by the Governor in exercise of powers under
sub-section (4) of Section 24 of 'The RTI Act' and is, therefore, bad
in law.
Sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the RTI Act is reproduced below:
"(4) Nothing contained in this Act shall apply to such intelligence
and security organisations, being organisations established by the
State Government, as that Government may, from time to time, by
notification in the Official Gazette, specify:
Provided that the information pertaining to the allegations of
corruption and human rights violations shall not be excluded under
this sub-section:
Provided further that in case the information sought for is in respect
of allegations of violation of human rights, the information shall
only be provided after the approval of the State Information
Commission and, notwithstanding anything contained in Section 7, such
information shall be provided within forty-five days from the date of
the receipt of request."

The above provision does not give any authority to the State
Government to issue such a notification which does not fall within the
ambit of the aforesaid provision, that is to say, what can be excluded
from operation of 'The RTI Act' is certain 'organizations',
established by the State and not the 'works'. The notification dated
7.6.2009 is, therefore, per se illegal, without authority and void ab
initio.
So far as the notification dated 25.3.2008 is concerned, the same plea
has been raised by the counsel for the petitioners that it
transgresses the powers of the Governor conferred under sub-section
(4) of Section 24 of the RTI Act as the operation Unit and the
Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil
Aviation Department of the State Government, neither being
intelligence nor security organization established by the State
Government nor having been notified as such, cannot be exempted from
the provisions of 'The RTI Act'. To elaborate the aforesaid
submission, attention of the Court was drawn to the Second Schedule
under the RTI Act, where intelligence and security organizations have
been named, which stand exempted from the operation of 'The RTI Act',
but where also the proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 24 creates an
exemption, namely, giving of information pertaining to the allegations
of corruption and human rights violations, but the present
notification does not prescribe even any such exemption and rather, it
forbids any type of information being given by the aforesaid Units.
RTI Act itself excludes corruption and human rights violations from
the exemptions granted under 'The RTI Act' even in the intelligence
and security organizations, which have been named under the Second
Schedule.
Further argument is that the Operation Unit and the Maintenance,
Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil Aviation
Department of the State Government, are not independent security
organizations, but they are units of Civil Aviation Department of the
Government of U.P and that when the Civil Aviation Department itself
is not a security organization, its units cannot be taken to be
security organizations independently or as units of any security
organization.
In response, Sri J.N.Mathur, learned Additional Advocate General
submitted that it is not necessary that the entire organization should
be a security organization for the purposes of exemption under 'The
RTI Act', but there may be units in an organization itself which deal
with such matters and perform such functions, which require strict
security, therefore, can be exempted from the operation of 'The RTI
Act' by issuing notification in exercise of powers under sub-section
(4) of Section 24 of the Act. He submitted that the movements of the
Ministers and high functionaries of the State require special
precautions and security and giving information regarding their flight
schedule etc. cannot be made known to the public in general as the
same will put the security and safety of the high dignitaries to risk.
Justifying the action of the State Government, he further submitted
that by virtue of the Police (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2001, the
expression 'civil aviation personnel' has been defined as follows:
"The expression 'civil aviation personnel' shall mean such officers
and employees of the Civil Aviation Department posted in the
maintenance, security and general administration wing of the Civil
Aviation Directorate, Uttar Pradesh immediately before the
commencement of the Police (Uttar Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2001, as may
be specified in this behalf by the State Government by notification,
and shall include any person appointed as a civil aviation personnel
after such commencement."

The consequence of the aforesaid definition and the inclusion of the
civil aviation personnel to the police force has been given in
sub-section (2) of Section 2-A of the aforesaid Act, which reads as
under:
"(2) On and from such date as the State Government may, by
notification appoint in this behalf, the entire civil aviation
personnel employed immediately before that date shall, for the purpose
of this Act, become members of a police force and shall be formally
enrolled in accordance with the provisions of section 8-A and any new
such members shall, thereafter, be appointed in such manner, as shall
from time to time, be ordered by the State Government:

Provided that any civil aviation personnel employed before the said
date may, by notice addressed to the Director General, Civil Aviation,
Uttar Pradesh served within a period of thirty days from the said
date, intimate his option not to become a member of the said police
force, and upon receipt of such notice, the post in the Civil Aviation
Department held until then by him shall stand abolished and his
services shall stand terminated and he shall be paid an amount
equivalent to his three months salary as compensation."

Sub-section (4) of Section 2-A, reads as under:
"(4) The civil aviation personnel shall discharge such duties as may
be specified by general or special orders of the State Government from
time to time pertaining to maintenance of aircraft belonging to, or
hired by, the State Government, security at the Airport at Lucknow or
at any other airport specified by a general or special order of the
State Government and other duties incidental thereto or connected
therewith."

Sub-section (4) aforesaid makes it very clear that the civil aviation
personnel shall discharge such duties as may be specified from time to
time pertaining to maintenance of aircraft belonging to, or hired by,
the State Government, security at the Airport at Lucknow or any other
airport specified by a general or special order of the State
Government and other duties incidental thereto or connected therewith.
This means that the maintenance of aircraft and the security of the
airport are the functions which are to be performed by the civil
aviation personnel. There cannot be any exclusion from the
applicability of the RTI Act otherwise by issuance of a notification
under sub-section (4) of Section 24 unless the matter relates to the
intelligence and security organizations, established by the State.
Even if the civil aviation personnel has been included in the police
force of the State, that will not be sufficient to exempt operation
Unit and the Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of
the Civil Aviation Department of the State Government, when the police
department itself is not exempted.
The State Government exercises delegated powers under the aforesaid
provisions of the Act; therefore, it cannot issue a notification which
runs beyond the scope of such delegation. In the case of State of
Bihar and another versus Bal Mukund Sah and others, (2000) 4 SCC 640,
the Apex Court has held that no rule or law made by the delegatee can
supersede or override the powers exercised or the law made by the
delegator of power, the sovereign legislature.
'The RTI Act' has been enacted to provide for setting out the
practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access
to information under the control of public authorities, in order to
promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public
authority, the constitution of a Central Information Commission and
State Informations Commissions and for matters connected therewith or
incidental thereto. The basic object of 'The RTI Act' is to empower
the citizens, promote transparency and accountability in the working
of the Government, contain corruption and make our democracy work for
the people in real sense. It goes without saying that an informed
citizen is better equipped to keep necessary vigil on the instruments
of governance and make the government more accountable to the
governed. The RTI Act is a big step towards making the citizens
informed about the activities of the Government. Section 3 of 'The RTI
Act' talks about right to information and reads as under:
"3. Right to information.- Subject to the provisions of this Act, all
citizens shall have the right to information."

The impugned notification has not even been placed before the State
Legislature, which was the requirement under sub-section (5) of
Section 24 of the RTI Act and which says that every notification
issued under sub-section (4) shall be laid before the State
Legislature, which enables only the intelligence and security
organizations established by the State Government and specifically
notified as such and none else for exemption from the applicability of
the Act.
Right to information is a part and parcel of the Right to Freedom of
Speech and Expression as contained in Article 19(1)(g) of the
Constitution. 'The RTI Act' gives statutory safeguard to the Freedom
of Speech and Expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g), which
cannot be curtailed except with reasonable restrictions provided under
Article 19(2) of the Constitution, in the interest of sovereignty and
integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with
foreign State, public order, decency or morality or in relation to
contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence only and the
impugned notification does not fall in any of the categories
enumerated under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. The reasonable
restrictions as envisaged under Article 19(2) of the Constitution
cannot be imposed by executive action and can only be done by duly
enacted law. (See Express Newspaper Pvt. Ltd. and others versus Union
of India (UOI) and others (1986) 1 SCC 133 (para 76), Bijoe Emmanuel
and others versus State of Kerala and others (1986) 3 SCC 615 (para
16), Romesh Thapper versus The State of Madras AIR 1950 SC 124 (para
10) and Kharak Singh versus The State of U.P. and others AIR 1963 SC
1295 (para 5). Therefore, the restriction imposed is excessive and
beyond the powers of the State, which cannot be done by issuance of
the impugned notifications.
Civil aviation department not being an intelligence or security
organization, established by the State, its operation Unit and the
Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit cannot be taken
to be intelligence and security organizations established by the State
so as to bring them within the scope of sub-section (4) of Section 24
of 'The RTI Act'.
For the aforesaid reasons, the notification dated 25.3.2008 also
cannot be saved as it falls outside the scope of sub-section (4) of
Section 24 of 'The RTI Act'. However, any information relation to
security of airports or matters connected thereto, if stands exempted
under Section 8 of the RTI Act, can be refused but the information,
which is not covered by Section 8 of the RTI Act, cannot be denied.
It is also to be noticed that the impugned notification dated
25.3.2008 does not create any exemption with respect to information
regarding corruption and human rights violations in either of the
aforesaid units of the civil aviation department though under the
proviso appended to sub-section (4) of Section 24 of the Act, even the
intelligence and security organizations are not immune from giving
information regarding corruption and human rights violations. The
notification thus gives a blanket exemption with respect to
information regarding corruption and human rights violations, which is
in direct conflict with the provision contained in Section 24(4) of
'The RTI Act', hence cannot be saved.
The notification aforesaid exempts the operation Unit and the
Maintenance, Security and General Administration Unit of the Civil
Aviation Department of the State Government and does not say that this
exemption shall not be applicable in the matters of corruption and
human rights violations. This makes the notification bad and per se
illegal being grossly in violation of the provisions of the Act.
For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petitions are allowed and both the
notifications dated 7.6.2009 and 25.3.2008 (contained in Annexures 1
and 2 to Writ Petition No.6993 (M/B) of 2009) being invalid are hereby
quashed.

January 25th, 2012
LN/-

Judgment is pronounced under Chapter VII Rule 1(2) of the Allahabad
High Court Rules, 1952.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/StartWebSearch.do
for more Judgments/Orders delivered at Allahabad High Court and Its
Bench at Lucknow. Disclaimer

Yaishwaryaj Seva Sansthan kickstarts Voter Awareness Drive

http://www.demotix.com/news/1020223/yaishwaryaj-seva-sansthan-kickstarts-voter-awareness-drive

Yaishwaryaj Seva Sansthan kickstarts Voter Awareness

The voter awareness initiative titled "Hundred percent turnout by
conscious voters, that's the only corruption buster.". begins in Uttar
Pradesh, India. 25th January 2012

With a view to increase voter awareness and sensitize the populace on
the need to vote, Lucknow based NGO Yaishwaryaj Seva Sansthan
celebrated National Voter's Day on Jan 25 , Wednesday to encourage the
voters to participate actively in the election process.

A Voter's pledge was administered to strengthen the campaign and a
poster was released.

Speaking on the occasion Urvashi Sharma , Secretary of Yaishwaryaj
Seva Sansthan said that there has been a declining trend in voters
participation over the decades which is somewhere around 55-60 per
cent in the past few elections. There had been gaps in not just
registration but also in participation in elections.
The voter awareness initiative titled "Hundred percent turnout by
conscious voter , that's the only
Corruption buster." Was inaugurated by the veteran social activist Ram
Swaroop Yadav. The campaign is Yaishwaryaj Seva Sansthan's endeavor to
sensitize voters about the importance of voting to ensure a
responsive, accountable and democratically elected government.
There were children from nearby schools , not yet eligible to vote but
were ready to spread the word on the need to exercise that right, and
do so wisely. These children will contribute to the forthcoming
elections in a unique way by asking their family members to move out
to vote .
"We are planning to gather information on candidates from disclosures
made in their affidavits regarding assets, educational qualification
and criminal background, if any and then share these with the voters .
Yaishwaryaj is utilizing youth power & children i.e. the next
generation and the future with it. We are makeing voters aware that
they are the masters and should ask questions from the candidates
instead of being swayed by demagoguery and caste or communal factors.
We are highlighting the doublespeak of the political parties which
take high moral ground when they speak on the issue of corruption but
in practice give tickets to corrupt and criminal elements. Our
campaign is apolitical and against corruption " told Urvashi.
Speaking on the occasion Social activist Prabhuta said that Voting is
compulsory by law in Australia.Russia allows voters to vote "against
all" candidates.India has Rule 49-O of the Conduct of Elections Rules,
1961 of India only which says "If an elector, after his electoral roll
number has been duly entered in the register of voters in Form-17A and
has put his signature or thumb impression thereon as required under
sub-rule (1) of rule 49L, decided not to record his vote, a remark to
this effect shall be made against the said entry in Form 17A by the
presiding officer and the signature or thumb impression of the elector
shall be obtained against such remark".After the voter's electoral
number has been entered in the register and he has been identified,
his signature/thumb impression is against his name in the voters list.
The voter then approaches the presiding officer and informs him of his
decision not to vote in favor of any of the candidates. The officer
makes an entry namely "Refused to Vote" against the name of this voter
in the list. Both the officer and the voter have to provide a
signature/thumb impression against this entry. The numbers of such
entries have to be mandatorily recorded in Form 17-A. ECI has directed
that the entries should be compiled and recorded (Item 3, Part-I of
Form 17C) constituency wise and sent to the Commission. This
information may also be obtained through RTI. She elaborated the
disadvantages of rule 49-O for the elector i.e. Secrecy of the ballot
is violated as the voter has to inform the presiding officer and an
entry is made against his name in the voters list. Such voters are
deemed to have abstained from casting their vote. They are not
included in the counting of votes and candidate securing the maximum
number of votes in the constituency is declared winner irrespective of
the winning margin. She further explained the advantages of rule 49-O
for the voter i.e. It provides an option to the voter to reject all
candidates. It also helps to keep a check on bogus voting as someone
else will not be able to impersonate and vote in place of him in favor
of any candidate. If there are more than 50% no-votes , We can press
our point to have "None of the above" (NOTA) option on EVM more
strongly with the Government .

"The Conduct of Election Rules, 1961should be amended to specifically
provide for negative / neutral voting. For this purpose, Rules 22
(Form of ballot paper) and 49B (Preparation of voting machine by the
returning Officer) of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 should be
suitably amended adding a provision that in the ballot paper and the
particulars on the ballot unit, in the column relating to names of
candidates, after the entry relating to the last candidate, there
shall be a column None of the above, to enable a voter to reject all
the candidates, if he chooses so. The voter must be able to register a
vote of disapproval/rejection if they are of the opinion that none of
the contesting candidates deserve to be voted for. Right to vote must
also include the vote of disapproval/rejection. "None of the above"
(NOTA) option enables a voter to officially register a vote of
rejection of all contesting candidates available in the election. Even
the ECI has recommended that the NOTA option must be made available on
the electronic voting machine (EVM) for the voter to officially reject
all candidates." Urvashi added.
Urvashi requested all to Cast their vote at the voice of their
conscience and also if they find no suitable candidate in their
constituency, she expressed the need to exercise 49-O.
In the end , 10 year old RTI prodigy Aishwarya Sharma who turned the
famous song " Kolaveri Di " into " Pollaveri Di "with the specific aim
of encouraging the voters to exercise their franchise in Indian polls
, electrified the campaign by her lively performance.

Re: [humanrightsactivist] HC quashes UP govt notifications on RTI Act

For the updation of all RTI Activist, it is submitted that this first notification came into being while Janadhikar Activist Ajay dixit sought information relating to Civil Aviation Department UP after pendency of IInd Appeal in UP Information Commission. People do not understand that as to why this notification was not challenged included by Sandip Pandey Ji while challeging the IInd notification of UP Govt. even after getting copies of the same by one renowned journalist?

But we all are thankful to Advocate Amrendra Tripathi, renowned journalist Arvind Shukla and renowned human rights Activist Ashok Shankram for this social cause.

JANADHIKAR request all to thank above activist.
-----------------------------------------------
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:09:34 +0530 wrote
>




















http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/hc-quashes-up-govt-notifications-on-rti-act/955851.html

HC quashes UP govt notifications on RTI Act
PTI | 10:01 PM,Jan 25,2012
Lucknow, Jan 25 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court today quashed two notifications by Uttar Pradesh government which excluded confidential section under Home and Civil Aviation departments from the purview of RTI Act, saying restrictions imposed were excessive and beyond the powers of the state. The order was passed by a Lucknow bench comprising justices Pradeep Kant and Decvendra Kumar Upadhyaya while allowing two Public Interest Litigations challenging the notifications issued by the state government. On June 7 2009, a notification was issued excluding certain works alloted to conidential sections of the state government from the purview of RTI Act. Prior to this, one more notification was issued on March 25, 2008 which specified that the operation unit, the maintenance, security and general administration unit of the civil aviation department of the state were excluded from the applicability of the RTI Act. The court in its order observed that the
RTI is part and parcel of the right to freedom of speech and ex-pression as contained in the Constitution. Further the RTI Act gives statutory safeguard to the freedom of speech and ex-pression guaranteed in the Constitution, which cannot be curtailed except with resonable restrictions, it said. The court said that therefore restrictions imposed were excessive and beyond the powers of the state, which cannot be done by issuance of the impugned notifications. "For the aforesaid reason petitions are allowed and both the notifications being invalid or hereby quashed," it said

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/hc-quashes-up-govt-notifications-on-rti-act/955851.html





__._,_.___







Reply to sender |

Reply to group |
Reply via web post |
Start a New Topic


Messages in this topic
(1)







Recent Activity:





Visit Your Group






Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest " Unsubscribe " Terms of Use



















.





__,_._,___

Follow Rediff Deal ho jaye! to get exciting offers in your city everyday.

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/hc-quashes-up-govt-notifications-on-rti-act/955851.html   HC quashes UP govt notifications on RTI Act PTI | 10:01 PM,Jan 25,2012 Lucknow, Jan 25 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court today quashed two notifications by Uttar Pradesh government which excluded confidential section under Home and Civil Aviation departments from the purview of RTI Act, saying restrictions imposed were excessive and beyond the powers of the state. The order was passed by a Lucknow bench comprising justices Pradeep Kant and Decvendra Kumar Upadhyaya while allowing two Public Interest Litigations challenging the notifications issued by the state government. On June 7 2009, a notification was issued excluding certain works alloted to conidential sections of the state government from the purview of RTI Act. Prior to this, one more notification was issued on March 25, 2008 which specified that the operation unit, the maintenance, security and general administration unit of the civil aviation department of the state were excluded from the applicability of the RTI Act. The court in its order observed that the RTI is part and parcel of the right to freedom of speech and expression as contained in the Constitution. Further the RTI Act gives statutory safeguard to the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed in the Constitution, which cannot be curtailed except with resonable restrictions, it said. The court said that therefore restrictions imposed were excessive and beyond the powers of the state, which cannot be done by issuance of the impugned notifications. "For the aforesaid reason petitions are allowed and both the notifications being invalid or hereby quashed," it said   http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/hc-quashes-up-govt-notifications-on-rti-act/955851.html

HC quashes UP govt notifications on RTI Act

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/hc-quashes-up-govt-notifications-on-rti-act/955851.html

HC quashes UP govt notifications on RTI Act
PTI | 10:01 PM,Jan 25,2012
Lucknow, Jan 25 (PTI) The Allahabad High Court today quashed two
notifications by Uttar Pradesh government which excluded confidential
section under Home and Civil Aviation departments from the purview of
RTI Act, saying restrictions imposed were excessive and beyond the
powers of the state. The order was passed by a Lucknow bench
comprising justices Pradeep Kant and Decvendra Kumar Upadhyaya while
allowing two Public Interest Litigations challenging the notifications
issued by the state government. On June 7 2009, a notification was
issued excluding certain works alloted to conidential sections of the
state government from the purview of RTI Act. Prior to this, one more
notification was issued on March 25, 2008 which specified that the
operation unit, the maintenance, security and general administration
unit of the civil aviation department of the state were excluded from
the applicability of the RTI Act. The court in its order observed that
the RTI is part and parcel of the right to freedom of speech and
expression as contained in the Constitution. Further the RTI Act gives
statutory safeguard to the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed
in the Constitution, which cannot be curtailed except with resonable
restrictions, it said. The court said that therefore restrictions
imposed were excessive and beyond the powers of the state, which
cannot be done by issuance of the impugned notifications. "For the
aforesaid reason petitions are allowed and both the notifications
being invalid or hereby quashed," it said.

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/hc-quashes-up-govt-notifications-on-rti-act/955851.html

--
- Urvashi Sharma
Right to Information Helpline 8081898081
Helpline Against Corruption 9455553838
http://yaishwaryaj-seva-sansthan.hpage.co.in/

भ्रष्टाचार का यही निदान , जागरूक वोटर शत प्रतिशत मतदान : poll slogan by 10 year old rti prodigy aishwarya sharma :"Hundred percent turnout by conscious voter , that's the only Corruption buster."

http://youtu.be/PkblUCbaqjs

http://youtu.be/OElCveU1TgA

"भ्रष्टाचार का यही निदान , जागरूक वोटर...... शत प्रतिशत मतदान "

" Bhrashtachaar kaa yahee nidaan , Jagrook Voter ..... shat pratishat matdan."

"Hundred percent turnout by conscious voter , that's the only
Corruption buster."

one of the illegal acts of rajesh chandra the principal of technical education department

http://file1.hpage.com/006525/54/bilder/up32du7803_back.jpg
<img src="http://file1.hpage.com/006525/54/bilder/up32du7803_back.jpg" alt="">

URL to this file: http://file1.hpage.com/006525/54/bilder/up32du7803_front.jpg
HTML code to embed: <img
src="http://file1.hpage.com/006525/54/bilder/up32du7803_front.jpg"
alt="">

--
- Urvashi Sharma
Right to Information Helpline 8081898081
Helpline Against Corruption 9455553838
http://yaishwaryaj-seva-sansthan.hpage.co.in/

voter awareness drive by aishwarya news in amar ujala and i next lucknow

http://epaper.inextlive.com/22481/INEXT-LUCKNOW/18.01.12#p=page:n=4:z=2

http://epaper.amarujala.com/svww_zoomart.php?Artname=20120115a_023163010&ileft=226&itop=376&zoomRatio=130&AN=20120115a_023163010

--
- Urvashi Sharma
Right to Information Helpline 8081898081
Helpline Against Corruption 9455553838
http://yaishwaryaj-seva-sansthan.hpage.co.in/

" POLLAVERI DI " , "WHY NOT VOTEGIRI KEE " , " VOTE SONG " BY 10 YEAR OLD TO AWAKEN VOTERS

vote song LINK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXvN2sCcV40

why not votegiri kee song LINK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcVsGI2SDN4

Pollaveri Di LINK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2UWDNfBlcA

--
- Urvashi Sharma
Right to Information Helpline 8081898081
Helpline Against Corruption 9455553838
http://yaishwaryaj-seva-sansthan.hpage.co.in/

jagnarain sharma has invited you to Boxbe

Hi URVASHI,

Last chance! Just a reminder, jagnarain has invited you to join Boxbe.

Register

This message was sent at the request of dr.jagnarain.sharma@gmail.com. If you would like to opt-out of Boxbe invitations, click here.

Boxbe, Inc. | 2390 Chestnut Street #201 | San Francisco, CA 94123

Reminder about your invitation from Jagnarain Sharma

This is a reminder that on January 5, Jagnarain Sharma sent you an invitation to become part of their professional network at LinkedIn. Accept Jagnarain Sharma's Invitation On January 5, Jagnarain Sharma wrote: > To: URVASHI SHARMA [rtihelpmail@gmail.com] > From: Jagnarain Sharma [dr.jagnarainsharma@gmail.com] > Subject: Invitation to connect on LinkedIn > URVASHI, > > I'd like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn. > > - Jagnarain You are receiving Reminder emails for pending invitations. Unsubscribe. © 2011 LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA.