HC urges SC to expunge ‘some rotten’ remark

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTC8yMDEwLzEyLzA4I0FyMDAxMDc=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom

Publication: The Times Of India Lucknow; Date: Dec 8, 2010; Section:
Front Page; Page: 1

HC urges SC to expunge 'some rotten' remark

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

New Delhi: The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday moved an application
before the Supreme Court requesting it to expunge the "something is
rotten" remark made in a recent judgment raising a question mark over
the integrity of some judges.

The application was filed by advocate Ashok Srivastava after a
full court resolution of the HC judges unanimously decided to seek
removal of the "unwarranted" comments by a Bench of Justices Markandey
Katju and Gyan Sudha Misra.

The HC said the issue for adjudication before the apex court Bench
pertained only to leasing of a plot for setting up a circus which did
not remotely relate to judicial integrity. Hence, the remarks were not
warranted, it said. Bench urged house cleaning

While deciding the appeal filed by one Raja Khan, the SC Bench had
said, "We are sorry to say but a lot of complaints are coming against
certain judges of the Allahabad HC relating to their integrity." It
had gone on to request the HC Chief Justice to take strong "house
cleaning" measures, including recommending transfers of the
"incorrigibles".

The SC had said, "Some judges (of the HC) have their kith and kin
practising in the same court, and within a few years of starting
practice, the sons and relatives of the judge become
multi-millionaires, have huge bank balances, luxurious cars, huge
houses and enjoy a luxurious life.

This is a far cry from the days when the sons and other relatives
of judges could derive no benefit from their relationship and had to
struggle at the Bar like any other lawyer."

Quoting Shakespeare's "something is rotten in Denmark" from
Hamlet, the Bench said, "It can similarly be said that something is
rotten in Allahabad High Court."

The HC is the largest in the country with a sanctioned strength of
160 judges. However, it is operating with only 73 judges as there are
87 vacancies.

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTC8yMDEwLzEyLzA4I0FyMDAxMDc=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom

For AOL users: <a
href="http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTC8yMDEwLzEyLzA4I0FyMDAxMDc=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom">http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Repository/ml.asp?Ref=VE9JTC8yMDEwLzEyLzA4I0FyMDAxMDc=&Mode=HTML&Locale=english-skin-custom</a>

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

RIGHT TO INFORMATION FELLOWSHIP

Dear all ,
Please Find below the link of GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT TO INFORMATION
FELLOWSHIP of Government of India.

http://rti.gov.in/rti_fellowship.pdf

on website

http://persmin.gov.in/

the text is given below. Please apply .

thanks n regards

urvashi sharma

TEXT :

GUIDELINES FOR RIGHT TO INFORMATION FELLOWSHIP

RTI Fellowship
The Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT), Ministry of
Personnel, Public Grievances
and Pensions, Government of India, is the nodal Ministry for the Right
to Information Act. It
is  also  administering  a  Plan  scheme  titled  'Improving
Transparency  and  Accountability  in
Government through effective Implementation of the Right to
Information Act'. The primary
goal of the scheme is to contribute towards more accountable and
transparent government
and  it  has  several  components  including  programmes  for
awareness  generation,  training
and e‐governance initiatives for RTI for achieving the purpose.

Under  this  scheme, DOPT proposes  to offer 5  (Five)  short‐term
fellowships  to  researchers
from  the  field  of media  /  Civil  Society  professionals  / RTI
Trainers  to  conduct  field  based
research on  themes  relating  to RTI.  It  is hoped  that  the
research output will enhance our
understanding  of  the  status  of  the  implementation  of  the  act,
including  its  successes,
constraints  in  its  implementation and how  those are being / could
be overcome and what
more needs to be done to help achieve the objectives of the Act.

Who can Apply/
The fellowship is open to professionals in the age group 25 to 40 from
the field of journalism
(newspaper/ magazine/ radio/ TV), Civil Society and research and
training in the field of RTI.
The applicant should have proven credentials in his / her professional
area, have some prior
experience  of work  relating  to  the  Right  to  Information  and
should  have  an  aptitude  for
research.

Suggested Areas of Study and Research Output
RTI  fellowships  would  be  granted  for  researching  any  theme
relating  to  RTI  with  the
objective  of  contributing  towards  better  understanding  of  the
successes  of  RTI  and/  or
constraints  in  its  implementation  and  how  implementation  of
the  Act  could  be
strengthened? Some examples of themes that could be selected are given
below. These are
only in the nature of examples and applicants may choose any theme
relating to RTI as long
as they are able to justify that it would meet the objective of the scheme.

(a) Issues relating to awareness generation and accessibility for
seeking information.
(b) Role of  civil  society  in  strengthening RTI  regime and how
government may  coordinate
with the efforts of the CSOs.
(c) Successes of RTI in improving transparency and accountability.
(d) Issues in functioning of CIC /SICs.
(e) Implementation of provisions regarding pro‐active disclosures.
(f) Best practices from the field.
The  proposal  should  clearly  indicate  the  output  that will  be
delivered  at  the  end  of  the
fellowship. It could be in the nature of a monograph of say 10,000
words which is ready for
publication, or features /news stories /investigative stories that
could be printed / published
as a  journalistic piece  in national /international media or,  in the
case of professionals from
the field of audio‐video media, it could even be short video films or
stories. The copyright of
the research output will vest  in Government of  India who may publish
the research output
and /or may use it in any other way for the purpose of strengthening
the working of the RTI
regime  in  the  country.  GOI  may,  however,  upon  request,  permit
the  Fellow  to  use  the
output  for publication etc.,  if government  itself does not publish
/ make use of the output
within one year.

Duration
The fellowships would be for a duration of three months.

Compensation and funding
a) Selected fellows will each receive a stipend of Rs. 2.00 lakhs
(subject to tax deduction at
source).
b) The fellowship will be disbursed on a monthly basis (Rs. 50,000.00
per month) on receipt
of  satisfactory  progress  report  as  per  the monthly  targets
defined  in  the  proposal.  In

addition, a grant of Rs. 50,000 for books, research material, travel,
printing, production
of  creatives  etc. will be provided.   These  funds will be
sanctioned on  the basis of  the
research proposal and released on production of actual bills
c) Final  payment  of  Rs.  50,000.00  will  be  made  on  the
submission  of  the  final  output
/deliverable and its acceptance.

Selection
RTI  fellows will be  selected on  the basis of appraisal of  the
application and  the  research
proposal and/or  interviews /presentation of the proposal. The
proposals will be evaluated
on the basis of evaluation criteria detailed below.

Application for fellowship should be accompanied by the following documents:
a) A comprehensive proposal (not more than 6‐8 A4 size pages)
outlining the subject to be
researched, the research plan and final deliverable.
b) Curriculum vitae (no more than 3 A4 sheets) along with a photograph.
c) A  brief statement of work done in the field of RTI.
d) Two references from professionals familiar with the applicants
work from his /her
professional field.
e) A no‐objection from the present employer.

Evaluation of Applications will be done by a committee of eminent
persons in the field of
governance, research, Media or Training on the following criteria:
Evaluation criteria  Marks
1  Curriculum vitae  10
2  References   10
3  Professional Experience and achievements 20
4  Proposal

a) Relevance and Importance of Theme
b) Quality of Research Plan
(i) Problem Definition
(ii) Research Methodology
(iii) Expected Deliverable
(iv) Emphasis on field / action research
c)   Innovativeness of the proposal

10
40
10
15
10
5
10
  Total  100

Final Selection
Final  selection  will  be  made  on  the  evaluation  of  the
proposals.  However  the  selection
committee may  call  short‐listed  candidates  for  an
interview/presentation  in Delhi,  before
finalizing the selection.

How to Apply?
5 sets of the application with enclosures  in the enclosed proforma
may be  may be sent to
Under Secretary  (RTI), Department of Personnel and Training,
Government of  India, North
Block, New Delhi‐  110001  by mail. Applications  received by  5  PM,
Monday,  3rd
  January,
2011 only will be considered.

Application Proforma for Right to Information Fellowship

To be submitted with enclosures in Five sets.
The format given below should neatly typed.
Application in an incomplete form will not be entertained. All fields
are mandatory.

Please tick professional field
Journalist  Civil society professional  RTI  Trainer

Government Employee  Yes   No

A. Personal Details
1  Name

2  Age as on 1/01/2011

B.       Correspondence Address
1  Complete postal address

2  Telephone  /  Fax  Nos  (including
STD code)

3  Mobile No
Affix self‐
attested
recent
passport size
photograph

4  E‐mail Address

C       Qualifications
1  Academic Qualifications
a
b
c
2  Professional Qualifications
a
b
c
3  Affiliations  to  professional
bodies

a
b
c
4  Employment  details  (only  last  3
may be mentioned)

a
b
c

D            Documents enclosed  Tick
1  A comprehensive proposal (not more than 6‐8 A4 size pages) outlining the
subject to be researched, the research plan and final deliverable.

2  Curriculum vitae (no more than 3 A4 sheets) along with a photograph.

3  A brief statement of work done in the field of RTI. (1 A4 size page)

4  Two references from professionals familiar with the applicants work from
his /her professional field.

5  A no‐objection from the present employer
(Five sets of application along with all enclosures should be submitted)

Declaration:
I affirm  that the  information given  in this application  is true
and correct to  the best of my
knowledge  and  belief.  I  further  undertake  that  if  at  any
stage  it  is  discovered  that  an
attempt has been made by me, willfully to conceal or misrepresent the
facts, my fellowship
shall be summarily rejected or terminated without any notice.

Date:________________         Signature:
Place:________________         Name of candidate:____________

E.  Instructions to applicants:

1.  Persons working  under  Central/State  Govt.  /Public  Sector
Undertakings  should  submit
their applications  through proper channel. They may, however, send
one advance copy of
the application along with requisite enclosures.
2. Incomplete applications are liable to be rejected.
3. Affix recent passport size photograph on the application.
4. Only Indian Nationals are eligible to apply.
5. Canvassing in any form will lead to disqualification.
6. No interim enquiries or correspondence shall be entertained.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

upsic : court cases 2010 list

Total No. of Results obtained - 41

Judgment Type 'AFR' means Approved for Reporting(i.e. Reportable
Judgments/Orders) Sl. No. Judgments/Orders
1. CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3671 of 2010 at Allahabad :
Ram Sakha Singh Vs. Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, State Chief Information
Commissioner,
Date of Decision - 3/8/2010
Court Number - 10
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Vikram Nath,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Dhirendra Kr. Srivastava
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

2. CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3671 of 2010 at Allahabad :
Ram Sakha Singh Vs. Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, State Chief Information
Commissioner,
Date of Decision - 21/9/2010
Court Number - 10
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Dhirendra Kr. Srivastava
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

3. CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3671 of 2010 at Allahabad :
Ram Sakha Singh Vs. Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, State Chief Information
Commissioner,
Date of Decision - 6/10/2010
Court Number - 10
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Dhirendra Kr. Srivastava
Respondent's Counsel - S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

4. CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 3671 of 2010 at Allahabad :
Ram Sakha Singh Vs. Sunil Kumar Chaudhary, State Chief Information
Commissioner,
Date of Decision - 12/11/2010
Court Number - 10
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Dhirendra Kr. Srivastava
Respondent's Counsel - S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

5. CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4240 of 2010 at Allahabad :
Krishna Kant Mishra Vs. Suneel Kumar Chaudhary, State Information
Commissioner, U.P.
Date of Decision - 6/9/2010
Court Number - 10
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Shashi Kant Gupta,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Amitabh Mishra and Rawati Raman Pathak
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

6. MISC. BENCH No. - 4264 of 2010 at Lucknow : Kisan Sahkari Chini
Mills Ltd.Sultanpur Vs. U.P.State Information Commissioner Lucknow And
Another
Date of Decision - 10/5/2010
Court Number - 1
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Pradeep Kant,J. and Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Pradeep Singh Somvanshi
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

7. MISC. BENCH No. - 5775 of 2010 at Lucknow : Dinesh Kumar Agarwal
Vs. The Chief Information Commissioner Under R.T.I.Act. & Ors.
Date of Decision - 17/6/2010
Court Number - 27
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J. and Hon'ble Yogendra Kumar Sangal,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - D.K.Agarwal
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

8. MISC. BENCH No. - 6370 of 2010 at Lucknow : Ravindra Pratap Singh
Vs. State Information Commissioner, State Information Commission
Date of Decision - 9/7/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Uma Nath Singh,J. and Hon'ble Devendra Kumar Arora,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Mohan Singh
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

9. MISC. BENCH No. - 8712 of 2010 at Lucknow : Vijay Pratap Singh
Vs. State Information Commissioner, U.P., Lucknow & Another
Date of Decision - 3/12/2010
Court Number - 1
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Pradeep Kant,J. and Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - A.R. Masoodi and Pawan Kumar Mishra
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

10. MISC. BENCH No. - 12176 of 2009 at Lucknow : Ramakant Pandey S/O
Sadashiv Pandey Vs. State Information Commissioner,U.P. At Lucknow &
Anr.
Date of Decision - 5/1/2010
Court Number - 1
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Pradeep Kant,J. and Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Dilip Pandey
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

11. MISC. BENCH No. - 6763 of 2009 at Lucknow : Shiv Prasad Rastogi
S/O Sri Asharafi Lal Rastogi Vs. Information Commissioner U.P. And
Others
Date of Decision - 19/8/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Uma Nath Singh,J. and Hon'ble Satish Chandra,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Girish Chandra Verma
Respondent's Counsel - Ram Kumar Maurya
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

12. MISC. BENCH No. - 6763 of 2009 at Lucknow : Shiv Prasad Rastogi
S/O Sri Asharafi Lal Rastogi Vs. Information Commissioner U.P. And
Others
Date of Decision - 26/10/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Uma Nath Singh,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Dixit,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Girish Chandra Verma
Respondent's Counsel - Ram Kumar Maurya
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

13. MISC. BENCH No. - 6763 of 2009 at Lucknow : Shiv Prasad Rastogi
S/O Sri Asharafi Lal Rastogi Vs. Information Commissioner U.P. And
Others
Date of Decision - 10/11/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Uma Nath Singh,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Dixit,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Girish Chandra Verma
Respondent's Counsel - Ram Kumar Maurya
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

14. MISC. BENCH No. - 6763 of 2009 at Lucknow : Shiv Prasad Rastogi
S/O Sri Asharafi Lal Rastogi Vs. Information Commissioner U.P. And
Others
Date of Decision - 23/11/2010
Court Number - 27
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Dixit,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Girish Chandra Verma
Respondent's Counsel - Ram Kumar Maurya
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

15. MISC. SINGLE No. - 3059 of 2010 at Lucknow : Smt.Kiran Dhar [U/A
227] Vs. State Information Commissioner U.P. Lucknow
Date of Decision - 7/7/2010
Court Number - 24
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Manish Mani Sharma
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

16. SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 465 of 2010 at Allahabad : Brahm Singh Vs.
State Information Commissioner, Lucknow And Others
Date of Decision - 2/4/2010
Court Number - Chief Justice's Court
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Amitava Lala,Acting Chief Justice and Hon'ble Ashok
Srivastava,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - N.L. Pandey
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

17. WRIT - A No. - 59233 of 2010 at Allahabad : Waseem Abbas Vs.
Information Commissioner State Information And Others
Date of Decision - 27/9/2010
Court Number - 39
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - T. A. Khan
Respondent's Counsel - C. S. C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

18. WRIT - C No. - 14198 of 2010 at Allahabad : Brahm Singh Vs.
State Information Commissioner & Others
Date of Decision - 18/3/2010
Court Number - 39
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - N.L. Pandey
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

19. WRIT - C No. - 14198 of 2010 at Allahabad : Brahm Singh Vs.
State Information Commissioner & Others
Date of Decision - 22/3/2010
Court Number - 21
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - N.L. Pandey
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

20. WRIT - C No. - 20622 of 2010 at Allahabad : Sri Kant Mishra Vs.
State Information Commissioner Officer & Ors.
Date of Decision - 22/4/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - P.P. Pandey
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

21. WRIT - C No. - 20624 of 2010 at Allahabad : Janaki Sharan Vs.
State Of U.P. Thru. Chief Information Commissioner & Ors.
Date of Decision - 21/4/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Ram Swaroop Singh and Shiva Kant
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

22. WRIT - C No. - 20626 of 2010 at Allahabad : Janaki Sharan Vs.
State Of U.P. Thru. Chief Information Commissioner & Ors.
Date of Decision - 21/4/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Ram Swaroop Singh
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

23. WRIT - C No. - 26252 of 2010 at Allahabad : M/S Singh Cold
Storege And Ice Plant Vs. State Information Commissioner And Others
Date of Decision - 20/5/2010
Court Number - 9
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Vijay Manohar Sahai,J. and Hon'ble Jayashree Tiwari,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - A.K. Malviya
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C. and H.P. Dubey
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

24. WRIT - C No. - 28648 of 2010 at Allahabad : Rameshwar Dutt
Mishra Vs. Chief Information Commissioner, State Information Comm.
Date of Decision - 21/5/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Anil Kumar Mishra
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

25. WRIT - C No. - 31517 of 2010 at Allahabad : S.S.L. Srivastava
Vs. Information Commissioner Central Information Commision & Anr
Date of Decision - 26/5/2010
Court Number - 21
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Pankaj Naqvi
Respondent's Counsel - A.S.G.I.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

26. WRIT - C No. - 31720 of 2010 at Allahabad : Kalash Singh Vs.
State Information Commissioner,Up And Others
Date of Decision - 27/5/2010
Court Number - 36
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J. and Hon'ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Pradeep Kumar and Praveen Kumar
Respondent's Counsel - C. S. C. and Vivek Verma
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

27. WRIT - C No. - 33355 of 2010 at Allahabad : Principal Designated
As State Public Informaiton Officer Vs. U.P. State Information
Commissioner & Others
Date of Decision - 3/6/2010
Court Number - 40
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Krishna Murari,J. and Hon'ble Jayashree Tiwari,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Arvind Kumar Mishra , A.N. Tripathi and R.P.Mishra
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

28. WRIT - C No. - 428 of 2010 at Allahabad : Dr. Kalp Nath Chaubey
Vs. Information Commissioner Central Information New Delhi Ors.
Date of Decision - 21/1/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Final AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Ashok Bhushan,J. and Hon'ble Virendra Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Akhileshwar Singh
Respondent's Counsel - A.S.G.I. and Santosh Kumar Singh
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

29. WRIT - C No. - 43649 of 2010 at Allahabad : Malkiat Singh Bajwa
Vs. Central Information Commissioner And Others
Date of Decision - 28/7/2010
Court Number - 21
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - M.P. Sarraf
Respondent's Counsel - Saurabh Srivastava
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

30. WRIT - C No. - 48536 of 2010 at Allahabad : Sunita Gupta Vs.
Central Information Commissioner And Others
Date of Decision - 13/8/2010
Court Number - 9
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Vijay Manohar Sahai,J. and Hon'ble Ran Vijai Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Mudhukar Roy
Respondent's Counsel - Sanjeev Singh
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

31. WRIT - C No. - 50640 of 2010 at Allahabad : Sanjay Kumar Vs.
Central Information Commissioner And Others
Date of Decision - 23/8/2010
Court Number - 32
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani,J. and Hon'ble Kashi Nath Pandey,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Tarun Verma
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

32. WRIT - C No. - 59739 of 2010 at Allahabad : Raj Kumar Verma Vs.
Chief Information Commissioner And Another
Date of Decision - 29/9/2010
Court Number - 3
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Amitava Lala,J. and Hon'ble Sanjay Misra,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Piyush Srivastava
Respondent's Counsel - Neeraj Tiwari
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

33. WRIT - C No. - 67377 of 2010 at Allahabad : Dinesh Kumar Singh
Vs. State Information Commissioner, U.P. Lucknow And Others
Date of Decision - 19/11/2010
Court Number - 35
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Satya Poot Mehrotra,J. and Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui and Pushkar Srivastava
Respondent's Counsel - H.P.Dube
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

34. WRIT - C No. - 67377 of 2010 at Allahabad : Dinesh Kumar Singh
Vs. State Information Commissioner, U.P. Lucknow And Others
Date of Decision - 24/11/2010
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J. and Hon'ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Mohd. Naushad Siddiqui and Pushkar Srivastava
Respondent's Counsel - H.P.Dube and Pankaj Kumar Shukla
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

35. WRIT - C No. - 69365 of 2010 at Allahabad : National Insurance
Company Limited Vs. The Information Commissioner, C.I.C. And Another
Date of Decision - 30/11/2010
Court Number - 21
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Vivek Kumar Birla
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

36. WRIT - C No. - 14481 of 2009 at Allahabad : Prathma Bank
Moradabad Thru Chairman Vs. Central Information Ocmmission/Information
Commissioner &Anr
Date of Decision - 11/3/2010
Court Number - 21
Judgment Type - Interlocutory AFR
Coram - Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Sanjiv Singh
Respondent's Counsel - V.K. Gupta
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

37. WRIT - C No. - 14481 of 2009 at Allahabad : Prathma Bank
Moradabad Thru Chairman Vs. Central Information Ocmmission/Information
Commissioner &Anr
Date of Decision - 26/3/2010
Court Number - 21
Judgment Type - Interlocutory Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Sanjiv Singh
Respondent's Counsel - V.K. Gupta
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

38. WRIT - C No. - 67827 of 2009 at Allahabad : Raj Kumar Verma Vs.
Chief Information Commissioner & Ors.
Date of Decision - 14/12/2009
Court Number - 2
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble R.K. Agrawal,J. and Hon'ble Jayashree Tiwari,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Ranjeet Singh
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

39. WRIT - C No. - 12502 of 2008 at Allahabad : Accountant General
(A&E) -Ii Thru' Sr. A.G.(Admin) Vs. State Public Information
Commissioner And Others
Date of Decision - 14/9/2010
Court Number - 34
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Prakash Chandra Verma,J. and Hon'ble Ram Autar Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Satish Chaturvedi
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

40. WRIT - C No. - 13332 of 2008 at Allahabad : Prathma Bank
Moradabad (Regional Rural Bank) Vs. U.P. State Information
Commissioner And Others
Date of Decision - 15/9/2010
Court Number - 34
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Prakash Chandra Verma,J. and Hon'ble Ram Autar Singh,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Sanjiv Singh
Respondent's Counsel -
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

41. WRIT - C No. - 9489 of 2007 at Allahabad : Ramesh Chandra Verma
Vs. Chief Information Commissioner And Others
Date of Decision - 21/5/2010
Court Number - 24
Judgment Type - Final Non AFR
Coram - Hon'ble Satyendra Singh Chauhan,J.
Petitioner's Counsels - Kailash Nath Kesharwani
Respondent's Counsel - C.S.C.
Formatted Text - Download (Opens in new window)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
System designed and developed at Computer Centre, High Court, Allahabad.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

The Sunday Indian : RTI : Go girl, go.

http://www.thesundayindian.com/article.php?type=blog&article_id=10599 Don't catch 'em young PUJA AWASTHI | December 3, 2010 16:36 The adage catch them young apparently does not apply to Uttar Pradesh's Information Commission which has decreed that a nine year old is too small to get any information under the much feted Right to Information Act. The case of of Aishwarya Sharma, a student of the City Montessori School whose petition to the chief minister on how a garbage dump could be allowed in front of a school as it was a potential risk hazard, The CM's office in turn had pointed out that it had received no such letter from the 9 year old prompting her to file another RTI application seeking to know how many such letters went missing regularly from the CM's office. While no response was received from the CM's office, the municipal authorities quietly swept away the garbage dump. The case was much flashed in the local and national media as an example of how transparent the Act had made governance. It now appears that Aishwarya was not even eligible to get such information from the state's information Commission. The state's CIC said that the applicant was prima facie a minor and did not come under the definition of Major under the Indian Majority Act to seek information. Interestingly the RTI Act itself makes no such distinction and only calls for an Indian citizen who can pay the Rs 10 requisite fee to get information from a government department. So exactly how old should Aishwarya be before she seeks information? Old enough to vote? Old enough to marry? Old enough to take the civil services exam? Or old enough to fight an election? We mollycoddle our children denying them sex education under the pretext that it will pollute their young minds. Frown on essentially marketing gimmicks such as Valentine's Day, worse still in rural India we pronounce death sentences for them if they dare marry outside the community. The moot question remains how young is too young? And under the garb of age how long will our children be denied the opportunity to express themselves? Meanwhile the feisty Aishwarya, daughter to one of RTI's most vocal Lucknow based activists Urvashi Sharma is not giving up. After she receives a copy of the SIC's order that she has no locus standi to seek information, she will approach the High Court. Go girl, go.    -- Urvashi Sharma RTI Helpmail( Web Based ) aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com Mobile Rti Helpline 8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

The Sunday Indian : Don't catch 'em young

http://www.thesundayindian.com/article.php?type=blog&article_id=10599

Don't catch 'em young
PUJA AWASTHI | December 3, 2010 16:36 The adage catch them young
apparently does not apply to Uttar Pradesh's Information Commission
which has decreed that a nine year old is too small to get any
information under the much feted Right to Information Act.

The case of of Aishwarya Sharma, a student of the City Montessori
School whose petition to the chief minister on how a garbage dump
could be allowed in front of a school as it was a potential risk
hazard, The CM's office in turn had pointed out that it had received
no such letter from the 9 year old prompting her to file another RTI
application seeking to know how many such letters went missing
regularly from the CM's office. While no response was received from
the CM's office, the municipal authorities quietly swept away the
garbage dump. The case was much flashed in the local and national
media as an example of how transparent the Act had made governance.

It now appears that Aishwarya was not even eligible to get such
information from the state's information Commission. The state's CIC
said that the applicant was prima facie a minor and did not come under
the definition of Major under the Indian Majority Act to seek
information.

Interestingly the RTI Act itself makes no such distinction and only
calls for an Indian citizen who can pay the Rs 10 requisite fee to get
information from a government department.

So exactly how old should Aishwarya be before she seeks information?
Old enough to vote? Old enough to marry? Old enough to take the civil
services exam? Or old enough to fight an election?

We mollycoddle our children denying them sex education under the
pretext that it will pollute their young minds. Frown on essentially
marketing gimmicks such as Valentine's Day, worse still in rural India
we pronounce death sentences for them if they dare marry outside the
community.

The moot question remains how young is too young? And under the garb
of age how long will our children be denied the opportunity to express
themselves?

Meanwhile the feisty Aishwarya, daughter to one of RTI's most vocal
Lucknow based activists Urvashi Sharma is not giving up. After she
receives a copy of the SIC's order that she has no locus standi to
seek information, she will approach the High Court.

Go girl, go.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

COPYCAT rticup@googlegroups.com : Convener of RTI Council of Uttar Pradesh copy-paste mails from http://www.rtiindia.org

COPYCAT : Convener of RTI Council of Uttar Pradesh copy-paste mails
from http://www.rtiindia.org

Dear all ,

Please see the link below

http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/ 63890-up-minor-reason-
rejecting-right-information- query.html

the discussion appeared in http://www.rtiindia.org was copied
word-to-word by the
so called convener of the council Akhilesh Saxena jii.

Please see the comments of dr.s.malhotra ji ,
Atul Patankar ji at http://www.rtiindia.org and the mail of Akhilesh
saxena as being forwarded .

This is against the ethics . So I request the so called convener of rti
council of Uttar prdesh , Akhilesh Saxena ji not to indulge in such
unethical acts and have his own views on rti.

I admire dr.s.malhotraji & Atul Patankar ji for their valuable
comments and views that shall help Aishwarya while filing WRIT in high
court.

regards

urvashi sharma

On 12/3/10, Akhilesh Kumar Saxena <akhileshsaxena09@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Urvashi Ji,
>
> In my humble opinion , the CIC of UPSIC is right in his decision . It is
> accepted that if a particular law is silent on some provision , then such
> interpretation can be drawn from other laws prevailing and referring to such
> provisions . RTI Act is silent on " minimum age of the applicant " but other
> laws are not which require a deponent to be a major above 18 years of age ,
> of sound mind .
>
> It has to be kept in mind that Applicant will soon be Appellant and
> Complainant which would require him or her to verify the contents of his
> pleadings in appeals and complaints . Verification of legal or quasi-legal
> documents require knowledge and capacity to take CONSIDERED independent (
> non-tutored) decision - sound mind . A child of tender age can not be
> trusted with such decision making .
> While the law does give one a right , but at the same time it stipulates one
> to use that right judiciously without disrupting the harmony in the system .
> Now consider a wrong or frivolous application , Appeal and Complaint by such
> child . Issue of information is certainly there , but just imagine the
> wastage of time , man-power to the system by some unwise queries . The PIO ,
> AA , Commission shall all be scratching their heads just to make the kid
> understand the wisdom of their decisions ( though most sane people find it
> difficult to understand the wisdom of such decisions many times - just a
> joke ) .
> Just image - kids sending RTI Applications to school asking why mobiles are
> banned in exams , why they have to wear dress , why school does not start
> after they get up at 11 AM and the like ...the list can be mind-boggling .
> But at the same time, I do not underestimate the significance of queries
> raised by some kids . They are capable of raising such issues which can
> shake you no ends because these come from unadulterated minds . In such
> cases some mechanism should be evolved that the issues of kids can be taken
> up suo moto at some level like the Hon'ble High Courts are doing for the
> cause of social justice or the Applications to be entertained through an
> appointed master in the school or the like . How it will work can be debated
> and a mechanism evolved . RTIAct and very basic provisions of IPC , should
> be included in syllabus at 8th class level so that they can start filling
> RTI Apps when they are 14-15 years , DoPT may certify such RTI KIds after
> training them for 2-3 months .
> In nutshell , I would be happiest person if kids just know what is
> corruption and how it is eating into the national resources . They should be
> able to ask - "dad ! how did you purchase the Audi ?"
> Purpose of RTI Act would be full-filled ..
>
> I think we need to separate 2 issue - whether a minor CAN make an
> application under the RTI Act, and whether a KID should be so allowed.
>
> As far as the validity under present law is concerned, I think the law is
> clear enough - section 3 proclaims that All citizens have right to
> Information. As RTI Act does not define 'citizen', we can safely infer that
> it is the citizen as defined under the Citizen Act, 1955. If the legislature
> had intended to confer this right on adults only, it could have very well
> said so clearly in the law itself. Neither courts nor the ICs have any right
> to put words and stipulations into the act where they do not exist.
>
> On the issue of desirability of kids asking questions under RTI, though I
> fully respect your right to hold that view, I disagree with you. About the
> objections raised by you, *please note *that anything starting with 'why' is
> automatically rejected, without reading any further. And there are
> sufficient provisions in the law to protect public authorities to protect
> from 'wrong or frivolous' questions, by children as well as adults.
>
>
> Regard's
>
> Akhilesh Saxena
>
> Convener-*RTI Council of* *U.P.*
>

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Minors cannot use RTI Act, says UP information commission, CIC disagrees

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_minors-cannot-use-rti-act-says-up-information-commission-cic-disagrees_1475597

Minors cannot seek information under the RTI Act, the Uttar Pradesh
information commission has said while dismissing the plea of a fourth
class student who had sought details of missing documents from the
chief minister's office.

Surprisingly, the Right to Information Act does not have any clause
where age is the criterion for filing information seeking
applications. It only mentions that a "citizen of India" can demand
information from public authorities by paying a fee of Rs10.

Chief information commissioner at Central information Commission AN
Tiwari also said that the Act does not limit its use by people above
the age of 18 years.

"There is no restriction of age limit. The Act allows a citizen of
India to file the application," Tiwari said.

The case in point is of a nine-year old Aishwarya Sharma who had
approached chief minister Mayawati's office with a hand written
complaint on a notebook page about a garbage dump in front of her
school.

Seeing no initial action, she sent her RTI application seeking to know
rules under which garbage dumps can be allowed in front of schools.
Faced with such uncomfortable questions, the officials informed her
that the RTI application was not received by the office.

Aishwarya shot off another application seeking to know the number of
such letters that have gone missing from the chief minister's office
and officials responsible for misplacing her letter.

While she was trying to extract information, Lucknow Municipal
Corporation removed the garbage dump but no details about her
questions were provided by the chief minister's office.

When the case reached the state information commission, chief
information commissioner Ranjit Singh Pankaj held that applicant is a
class three student (at the time of filing application) who is
prima-facie minor and does not come under the definition of major in
Indian Majority Act.

Pankaj said any complaint or appeal under the Act is a qasi-judicial
proceeding and any minor person cannot act in the RTI Act. He asked
Aishwarya to present her appeal through her guardian.

Section 22 of the RTI Act says, "Provisions of this Act shall have
effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in
the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being
in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other
than this Act."

"It is clear that rejection of application by the SIC does not stand.
Age is not the criterion to seek information. Second provisions of
Indian Majority Act does not apply because of overriding powers of the
RTI Act," Urvashi Sharma, a civil society worker, said.

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

The Nation : FOI in Pakistan : Access to information

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Regional/Karachi/05-Dec-2010/Access-to-information

Access to information

Access to information is the fundamental right of all citizens, just
as every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression. To
enable this, the Government of Pakistan had established the Freedom of
Information Ordinance 2002, in order to ensure transparency in
government and to hold the federal and provincial governments more
accountable.
The Ordinance allows citizens to have access to public records and to
ask for information as their right, in order to establish good
governance, through the enforcement of the rule of law. At the same
time, the Ordinance makes the functioning of Government more effective
in delivering social and public services, which require constant
monitoring and attention.
The Law also provides a grievance redressal mechanism for those who
have been denied information:
"In case the designated officer of a public body fails to provide the
requested information/record within 21 days, the requester may, in
terms of Section 19 of the Ordinance, file a complaint with the head
of the public body, who shall dispose of the complaint within 30 days
of its receipt."
"In case the competent authority fails to redress the grievance of the
requester, within 30 days of the filing of complaint or refuses to
provide him/her the requested information within time, the requester
may file a complaint with the Wafaqi Mohtasib."
An NGO has used the FoI as an effective tool to obtain information
from cooperative government departments, for their petitions against
illegal buildings and land conversions in the SCoP and the SHC.
The Indian Right to Information (RTI), India's counterpart to our FIO,
is much more comprehensive and powerful and is rated as one of the
best RTI laws in the world. It came into force on 12 October 2005.
Through the above site, ordinary citizen can easily track the progress
of their individual complaints.
The RTI law has become a great tool for the citizens of India, to
strengthen democracy and good governance and as an instrument to
demand their 'right to information' and thus hold the government
accountable.
Unfortunately, in Pakistan, we lack all these laws and the citizens
are either not aware or bothered to use The Freedom of Information
Ordinance to their advantage.
Under the FoI Ordinance, all the information that is being exposed by
our TV channels, is the fundamental right of the citizens and by
muzzling our media, the government is violating our rights. We have
the right to be informed and demand details of RPPs that are being
imported and if they are second hand, as reported and why advance
payment and bank guarantees for payment of rentals are being provided
by GoP?

Keeping this in mind, an NGO had tried to use the Freedom to
Information Ordinance to obtain a copy of the original Privatisation
Agreement and subsequent amendments between NEPRA, KESC and the Abraaj
Group last year.
We had addressed letters to Chairman NEPRA and MD PPIB, who had
admitted that the rental power plants with higher tariffs, were
inefficient, and had requested them to provide us copies of evaluation
reports prepared or the RPPs, the tariff petition filed with NEPRA and
copies of the Agreements of these projects.
We had also requested NEPRA to provide us the copies of the terms of
contract between the importers of the RPPs, who according to reports,
have been given 'extraordinary facilities' to import these plants,
including 17% advance payments and high electric tariffs.
Unfortunately, one year later, we are still being stoned walled by the
relevant departments and despite our repeated requests, we have been
completely ignored. The effective functioning of democracy depends
upon the participation in public life of a citizen that is well
informed and throughout the world, Freedom of Information laws are
changing the workings of governments.
If the FOI Ordinance is made functional in letter and in spirit, then
our TV channels would not have to play the role of local a WikiLeaks
in Pakistan. The wicked WikiLeaks have released a Genii that is
haunting world leaders and rattling the skeletons in their cupboards.
Governments across the world are trying to muzzle the Genii and put it
back in the bottle, but are facing a hard time.
In order to sensitise the FOI Ordinance, NGOs have organised a seminar
in Karachi on 6th December. The objective of this seminar is to make
citizens aware of the importance of the access to information laws and
encourage them to use these laws in accessing information.
email: trust@helplinetrust.org

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

COPYCAT : Convener of RTI Council of Uttar Pradesh copy-paste mails from http://www.rtiindia.org

Dear all , Please see the link below http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/63890-up-minor-reason-rejecting-right-information-query.html the discussion appeared in http://www.rtiindia.org was copied word-to-word by the so called convener of the council Akhilesh Saxena jii. Please see the comments of  dr.s.malhotra ji , Atul Patankar ji at http://www.rtiindia.org and the  mail of Akhilesh saxena as being forwarded . This is against the ethics . So I request the so called convener of rti council of Uttar prdesh , Akhilesh Saxena ji  not to indulge in such unethical acts and have his own views on rti. I admire  dr.s.malhotraji  & Atul Patankar ji for their valuable  comments and views that shall help Aishwarya while filing WRIT in high court. regards urvashi sharma On 12/3/10, Akhilesh Kumar Saxena <akhileshsaxena09@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Urvashi Ji, > > In my humble opinion , the CIC of UPSIC is right in his decision . It is > accepted that if a particular law is silent on some provision , then such > interpretation can be drawn from other laws prevailing and referring to such > provisions . RTI Act is silent on " minimum age of the applicant " but other > laws are not which require a deponent to be a major above 18 years of age , > of sound mind . > > It has to be kept in mind that Applicant will soon be Appellant and > Complainant which would require him or her to verify the contents of his > pleadings in appeals and complaints . Verification of legal or quasi-legal > documents require knowledge and capacity to take CONSIDERED independent ( > non-tutored) decision - sound mind . A child of tender age can not be > trusted with such decision making . > While the law does give one a right , but at the same time it stipulates one > to use that right judiciously without disrupting the harmony in the system . > Now consider a wrong or frivolous application , Appeal and Complaint by such > child . Issue of information is certainly there , but just imagine the > wastage of time , man-power to the system by some unwise queries . The PIO , > AA , Commission shall all be scratching their heads just to make the kid > understand the wisdom of their decisions ( though most sane people find it > difficult to understand the wisdom of such decisions many times - just a > joke ) . > Just image - kids sending RTI Applications to school asking why mobiles are > banned in exams , why they have to wear dress , why school does not start > after they get up at 11 AM and the like ...the list can be mind-boggling . > But at the same time, I do not underestimate the significance of queries > raised by some kids . They are capable of raising such issues which can > shake you no ends because these come from unadulterated minds . In such > cases some mechanism should be evolved that the issues of kids can be taken > up suo moto at some level like the Hon'ble High Courts are doing for the > cause of social justice or the Applications to be entertained through an > appointed master in the school or the like . How it will work can be debated > and a mechanism evolved . RTIAct and very basic provisions of IPC , should > be included in syllabus at 8th class level so that they can start filling > RTI Apps when they are 14-15 years , DoPT may certify such RTI KIds after > training them for 2-3 months . > In nutshell , I would be happiest person if kids just know what is > corruption and how it is eating into the national resources . They should be > able to ask - "dad ! how did you purchase the Audi ?" > Purpose of RTI Act would be full-filled .. > > I think we need to separate 2 issue - whether a minor CAN make an > application under the RTI Act, and whether a KID should be so allowed. > > As far as the validity under present law is concerned, I think the law is > clear enough - section 3 proclaims that All citizens have right to > Information. As RTI Act does not define 'citizen', we can safely infer that > it is the citizen as defined under the Citizen Act, 1955. If the legislature > had intended to confer this right on adults only, it could have very well > said so clearly in the law itself. Neither courts nor the ICs have any right > to put words and stipulations into the act where they do not exist. > > On the issue of desirability of kids asking questions under RTI, though I > fully respect your right to hold that view, I disagree with you. About the > objections raised by you, *please note *that anything starting with 'why' is > automatically rejected, without reading any further. And there are > sufficient provisions in the law to protect public authorities to protect > from 'wrong or frivolous' questions, by children as well as adults. > > > Regard's > > Akhilesh Saxena > > Convener-*RTI Council of* *U.P.* >

आरटीआई में नया पेच: चौथी कक्षा के बच्चे को नाबालिग कह नहीं दिया जवाब

आरटीआई में नया पेच: चौथी कक्षा के बच्चे को नाबालिग कह नहीं दिया जवाब

http://www.bhaskar.com/article/UP-OTH-information-commission-dismissed-the-application-of-fourth-grade-students-1612518.html

लखनऊ सूचना के अधिकार के तहत कोई नाबालिग जानकारी नहीं मांग सकता। यह
कहना है उत्तर प्रदेश सूचना आयोग का। आयोग ने चौथी कक्षा के एक
विद्यार्थी का आवेदन यह कहते हुए खारिज कर दिया।

इस विद्यार्थी ने मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से गायब दस्तावेजों का ब्योरा
मांगा था। यह भी कम आश्चर्यजनक नहीं कि सूचना के अधिकार कानून के किसी भी
प्रावधान में आवेदक की न्यूनतम या अधिकतम उम्र का कोई उल्लेख नहीं है।
इसमें केवल यह लिखा है कि भारत का कोई भी नागरिक दस रुपए की फीस जमा करवा
कर पब्लिक अथॉरिटी से जानकारी हासिल कर सकता है।

केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग में मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त एएन तिवारी का भी यही कहना
है कि इस कानून में कहीं नहीं लिखा है कि इसका इस्तेमाल केवल 18 साल से
अधिक उम्र के लोग ही कर सकते हैं। तिवारी ने कहा कि इसके लिए कोई आयुसीमा
नहीं है।

http://www.bhaskar.com/article/UP-OTH-information-commission-dismissed-the-application-of-fourth-grade-students-1612518.html

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Fwd: नाबालिग नहीं कर सकते आरटीआई का इस्तेमाल!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: abhishek kumar <abhishek.glamartist@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 00:26:37 +0530
Subject: Re: नाबालिग नहीं कर सकते आरटीआई का इस्तेमाल!
To: urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com>
Cc: ashish kumar srivastava <aksri80@gmail.com>, Akhilesh Kumar Saxena
<akhileshsaxena09@gmail.com>, Himanshu Swarnkar
<himan.swarn@gmail.com>, nirajklko <nirajklko@yahoo.com>, rti
nirajlucknow <nirajklko@gmail.com>, alokqr <alokqr@gmail.com>,
patrakarsadan <patrakarsadan@gmail.com>, jusufkabir
<jusufkabir@gmail.com>, IZHAR AHMAD <rti.lucknow@rediffmail.com>,
Izhar Ansari <izharansari@rtiactiongroup.org>, rti youth
<rti.youth@gmail.com>, "mahendra@ PROJECT VIJAY"
<mps.simco@gmail.com>, Anil Jani <aniljani1008@rediffmail.com>, bimal
khemani <bimal.khemani@yahoo.co.in>, Parivartan India
<parivartan_india@rediffmail.com>, neel kamal
<shvfoundation@gmail.com>

मेरी बात आपको बहुत तकलीफ दे रही होगी आपको,मै नहीं चाहता था की मै ऐसा लिखूँ I
मेरी किसी बात से आपको तकलीफ पहुची है तो उसके लिए मै माफ़ी चाहूँगा I मै जो
आपको बताना चाहता था वो आप लोग शायद समझ न पाए या यूँ कहूँ कि मै समझा नहीं
पाया I

एक बच्चा अपने बच्चपन मै सोचता है कि वो बड़ा हो कर क्या बनेगा "वो कभी
सोचेगा डॉक्टर ,तो कभी सोचेगा आर्टिस्ट आदि बहुत कुछ सोचेगा " मै बस चाहता हूँ
कि बच्चा अपना अभी बच्चपन जिए I

जिसको मिल रहा है उस बच्चे का मजाक बना कर रख दिया है ,जिसको जो मिला उस बच्चे
पर अपने बाड़ों कि वर्षा कि I अरे यार कभी तो सोचो बच्चा क्या चाहता हैं ?

आपस कि लड़ाई मे क्रपा करके बच्चे को मत खिचो I

मै एक बार फिर से आप सभी से माफ़ी चाहूँगा ,जो मैंने शब्दों का चयन किया था
वो सायद हो सकता है वो गलत हो ,पर मेरा सोचना गलत नहीं था I

बच्चा भगवान का रूप होता है उसको भगवान समझ कर छोड़ दो I

अखिलेश जी और उर्वशी जी आप लोगो से करबद्ध प्रार्थना है कि व्यंग्यात्मक मेल
मेरे को न करे ,अन्यथा कि स्तिथि मै आपके मेल google spam मे डाल दूंगा I

देश और समाज कैसे अच्छा हो सकता है इसकी बात करेंगे तो मै और मेरे साथ के लोग
आप सभी के साथ रहेंगे I

jai hind

2010/12/4 urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com>

> abhishekji
>
> The language of your mail is uncultured and derogatory to a girl
> child . it amounts to verbal abuse of a girl child for which our
> organization shall raise a complaint with National Commission for
> protection of child rights and national commission for women
> against you.
>
> regards
>
> urvashi sharma
>
>
>
> On 12/4/10, abhishek kumar <abhishek.glamartist@gmail.com> wrote:
> > आप लोग करना क्या चाहते हैं?एक तो आपने सूचना के अधिकार का तमासा बना दिया
> है
> > और दूसरा बच्चे के बचपन का I
> > कृपा करके बच्चे को बच्चपन को छोड़ दे I ये बच्चपन दुबारा नहीं मिलेंगे I
> अध्
> > खिली कली को जबरदस्ती फूल न बनाये I
> >
> > मुझे लगा की आप लोग बहुत समझदार हैं ,पर आप लोंगो की ऐसी हरकत को देख कर
> मुझे
> > रोना आ रहा है I
> >
> > माँ ,बाप जो सपने खुद नहीं पूरा कर पाते हैं , वो सपने अपने बच्चों मे देख
> > कर पूरा करते हैं ,ये human tendency हैं I पर इस कदर सपने पूरा न करें
> ,कि
> > मासूम की मासूमियत भी उस से दूर न हो जाये I name or fame ऐसी चीज है जो शेर
> > कें मुह मे खून लगने के समान हैं,अगर इसकी भूख लग गई तो बच्चा अपने बच्चपन
> को
> > भूल कर नाम पाने की प्रतियोगिता मे कूद पड़ेंगा I अभी तो बहुत अच्छा लग रहा
> पर
> > बात मे यही ज़हर का भी काम करेंगा I इतना मुझे आपसे अनुरोध हैं,कृपा करके
> > बच्चे के बच्चपन को छोड़ दे I
> >
> > करबद्ध प्रार्थना है सभी rti activist से कि बच्चे को लेकर तमाशा न बनाये I
> > बच्चे के बच्चपन को बचाने के लिए सभी प्रार्थना करें I
> >
> > 2010/12/4 ashish kumar srivastava <aksri80@gmail.com>
> >
> >> *आन्धिया हमको डराती है, तो डरा लेने दो *
> >> *हम न छोडेंगे चमन खाक में मिल जाने तक *
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Warm Regards,
> >> Ashish K. Srivastava
> >> Social Activist,
> >> Asha Parivar, NAPM,
> >> Al-Khair credit Cooperative Society
> >> Save Cultural value Foundation,
> >> SAMAR
> >> Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh,
> >> India
> >> Cell. No.
> >> +91-9198864150
> >> +91-9473896465
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2010/12/3 urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com>
> >>
> >>
> http://www.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-minors-cannot-use-rti-act-1612393.html
> >>>
> >>> लखनऊ. सूचना के अधिकार के तहत कोई नाबालिग जानकारी नहीं मांग सकता। यह
> >>> कहना है उत्तर प्रदेश सूचना आयोग का। आयोग ने चौथी कक्षा के एक
> >>> विद्यार्थी का आवेदन यह कहते हुए खारिज कर दिया। इस विद्यार्थी ने
> >>> मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से गायब दस्तावेजों का ब्योरा मांगा था।
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> यह भी कम आश्चर्यजनक नहीं कि सूचना के अधिकार कानून के किसी भी प्रावधान
> >>> में आवेदक की न्यूनतम या अधिकतम उम्र का कोई उल्लेख नहीं है। इसमें केवल
> >>> यह लिखा है कि भारत का कोई भी नागरिक दस रुपए की फीस जमा करवा कर पब्लिक
> >>> अथॉरिटी से जानकारी हासिल कर सकता है।
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग में मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त एएन तिवारी का भी यही कहना
> >>> है कि इस कानून में कहीं नहीं लिखा है कि इसका इस्तेमाल केवल 18 साल से
> >>> अधिक उम्र के लोग ही कर सकते हैं। तिवारी ने कहा कि इसके लिए कोई आयुसीमा
> >>> नहीं है।
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> क्यों जरूरत पड़ी : कोई जवाब न मिलने पर उसने पता किया तो मुख्यमंत्री
> >>> कार्यालय ने बताया कि उसे कोई शिकायत नहीं मिली। तब इस बच्ची ने आरटीआई
> >>> के तहत आवेदन देकर जानना चाहा कि मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से ऐसी कितनी
> >>> शिकायतें गायब हुई हैं तथा इसके लिए कौन जिम्मेदार है।
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> चकरा गया मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय : बच्चे के इस आवेदन पर मुख्यमंत्री
> >>> कार्यालय चकरा गया। उसने जवाब दिया कि उसे कोई आवेदन ही नहीं मिला। लेकिन
> >>> स्कूल के बाहर पड़ा कचरा हटवा दिया गया।
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> नहीं रुकी बच्ची : बच्ची राज्य सूचना आयोग पहुंची। मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त
> >>> रणजीत सिंह पंकज ने जवाब दिया कि पृथम दृष्टया आवेदन कर्ता नाबालिग है
> >>> तथा भारतीय बालिग कानून के तहत बालिग की परिभाषा में नहीं आता। सूचना का
> >>> अधिकार अर्ध न्यायिक प्रक्रिया है इसलिए कोई नाबालिग आरटीआई कानून के तहत
> >>> कार्यवाही नहीं कर सकता। उसने ऐश्वर्या को सलाह दी कि वह अपने अभिभावक के
> >>> माध्यम से आवेदन करे।
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> स्कूल के बाहर कचरा
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> उत्तर प्रदेश के ताजा मामले में 9 साल की ऐश्वर्या शर्मा ने स्कूल के
> >>> बाहर पड़े कचरे की शिकायत स्कूल की कापी के पन्ने पर मुख्यमंत्री मायावती
> >>> के कार्यालय में की थी।
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> http://www.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-minors-cannot-use-rti-act-1612393.html
> >>> --
> >>> Urvashi Sharma
> >>> Founder , Convener - YAISHWARYAJ
> >>> Vice President - Save Culture Value Foundation
> >>> Member - NAPM , NCPRI , PUCL , ASHA PARIVAAR
> >>>
> >>> RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
> >>> aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com
> >>>
> >>> Mobile Rti Helpline
> >>> 8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > with regards,
> > Abhishek
> > +91-9919767128
> > email id: abhishek.swatantra@realherokikhoj.in.
> > youthinitiative@ymail.com.
> > www.weneedchange2020.blogspot.com
> >
>
>
> --
> Urvashi Sharma
>
> RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
> aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com
>
> Mobile Rti Helpline
> 8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )
>

--
with regards,
Abhishek
+91-9919767128
email id: abhishek.swatantra@realherokikhoj.in.
youthinitiative@ymail.com.
www.weneedchange2020.blogspot.com

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Re: नाबालिग नहीं कर सकते आरटीआई का इस्तेमाल!

abhishekji

The language of your mail is uncultured and derogatory to a girl
child . it amounts to verbal abuse of a girl child for which our
organization shall raise a complaint with National Commission for
protection of child rights and national commission for women
against you.

regards

urvashi sharma

On 12/4/10, abhishek kumar <abhishek.glamartist@gmail.com> wrote:
> आप लोग करना क्या चाहते हैं?एक तो आपने सूचना के अधिकार का तमासा बना दिया है
> और दूसरा बच्चे के बचपन का I
> कृपा करके बच्चे को बच्चपन को छोड़ दे I ये बच्चपन दुबारा नहीं मिलेंगे I अध्
> खिली कली को जबरदस्ती फूल न बनाये I
>
> मुझे लगा की आप लोग बहुत समझदार हैं ,पर आप लोंगो की ऐसी हरकत को देख कर मुझे
> रोना आ रहा है I
>
> माँ ,बाप जो सपने खुद नहीं पूरा कर पाते हैं , वो सपने अपने बच्चों मे देख
> कर पूरा करते हैं ,ये human tendency हैं I पर इस कदर सपने पूरा न करें ,कि
> मासूम की मासूमियत भी उस से दूर न हो जाये I name or fame ऐसी चीज है जो शेर
> कें मुह मे खून लगने के समान हैं,अगर इसकी भूख लग गई तो बच्चा अपने बच्चपन को
> भूल कर नाम पाने की प्रतियोगिता मे कूद पड़ेंगा I अभी तो बहुत अच्छा लग रहा पर
> बात मे यही ज़हर का भी काम करेंगा I इतना मुझे आपसे अनुरोध हैं,कृपा करके
> बच्चे के बच्चपन को छोड़ दे I
>
> करबद्ध प्रार्थना है सभी rti activist से कि बच्चे को लेकर तमाशा न बनाये I
> बच्चे के बच्चपन को बचाने के लिए सभी प्रार्थना करें I
>
> 2010/12/4 ashish kumar srivastava <aksri80@gmail.com>
>
>> *आन्धिया हमको डराती है, तो डरा लेने दो *
>> *हम न छोडेंगे चमन खाक में मिल जाने तक *
>>
>>
>>
>> Warm Regards,
>> Ashish K. Srivastava
>> Social Activist,
>> Asha Parivar, NAPM,
>> Al-Khair credit Cooperative Society
>> Save Cultural value Foundation,
>> SAMAR
>> Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh,
>> India
>> Cell. No.
>> +91-9198864150
>> +91-9473896465
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/12/3 urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com>
>>
>> http://www.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-minors-cannot-use-rti-act-1612393.html
>>>
>>> लखनऊ. सूचना के अधिकार के तहत कोई नाबालिग जानकारी नहीं मांग सकता। यह
>>> कहना है उत्तर प्रदेश सूचना आयोग का। आयोग ने चौथी कक्षा के एक
>>> विद्यार्थी का आवेदन यह कहते हुए खारिज कर दिया। इस विद्यार्थी ने
>>> मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से गायब दस्तावेजों का ब्योरा मांगा था।
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> यह भी कम आश्चर्यजनक नहीं कि सूचना के अधिकार कानून के किसी भी प्रावधान
>>> में आवेदक की न्यूनतम या अधिकतम उम्र का कोई उल्लेख नहीं है। इसमें केवल
>>> यह लिखा है कि भारत का कोई भी नागरिक दस रुपए की फीस जमा करवा कर पब्लिक
>>> अथॉरिटी से जानकारी हासिल कर सकता है।
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग में मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त एएन तिवारी का भी यही कहना
>>> है कि इस कानून में कहीं नहीं लिखा है कि इसका इस्तेमाल केवल 18 साल से
>>> अधिक उम्र के लोग ही कर सकते हैं। तिवारी ने कहा कि इसके लिए कोई आयुसीमा
>>> नहीं है।
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> क्यों जरूरत पड़ी : कोई जवाब न मिलने पर उसने पता किया तो मुख्यमंत्री
>>> कार्यालय ने बताया कि उसे कोई शिकायत नहीं मिली। तब इस बच्ची ने आरटीआई
>>> के तहत आवेदन देकर जानना चाहा कि मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से ऐसी कितनी
>>> शिकायतें गायब हुई हैं तथा इसके लिए कौन जिम्मेदार है।
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> चकरा गया मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय : बच्चे के इस आवेदन पर मुख्यमंत्री
>>> कार्यालय चकरा गया। उसने जवाब दिया कि उसे कोई आवेदन ही नहीं मिला। लेकिन
>>> स्कूल के बाहर पड़ा कचरा हटवा दिया गया।
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> नहीं रुकी बच्ची : बच्ची राज्य सूचना आयोग पहुंची। मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त
>>> रणजीत सिंह पंकज ने जवाब दिया कि पृथम दृष्टया आवेदन कर्ता नाबालिग है
>>> तथा भारतीय बालिग कानून के तहत बालिग की परिभाषा में नहीं आता। सूचना का
>>> अधिकार अर्ध न्यायिक प्रक्रिया है इसलिए कोई नाबालिग आरटीआई कानून के तहत
>>> कार्यवाही नहीं कर सकता। उसने ऐश्वर्या को सलाह दी कि वह अपने अभिभावक के
>>> माध्यम से आवेदन करे।
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> स्कूल के बाहर कचरा
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> उत्तर प्रदेश के ताजा मामले में 9 साल की ऐश्वर्या शर्मा ने स्कूल के
>>> बाहर पड़े कचरे की शिकायत स्कूल की कापी के पन्ने पर मुख्यमंत्री मायावती
>>> के कार्यालय में की थी।
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-minors-cannot-use-rti-act-1612393.html
>>> --
>>> Urvashi Sharma
>>> Founder , Convener - YAISHWARYAJ
>>> Vice President - Save Culture Value Foundation
>>> Member - NAPM , NCPRI , PUCL , ASHA PARIVAAR
>>>
>>> RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
>>> aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com
>>>
>>> Mobile Rti Helpline
>>> 8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> with regards,
> Abhishek
> +91-9919767128
> email id: abhishek.swatantra@realherokikhoj.in.
> youthinitiative@ymail.com.
> www.weneedchange2020.blogspot.com
>

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

RTI COUNCIL OF UTTAR PRADESH CONVENER Sri AKHILESH SAXENA IS A COPYCAT - HAS NO WITS OF HIS OWN

Dear all ,

Please see the link below

http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/63890-up-minor-reason-rejecting-right-information-query.html

the discussion appeared in rtiindia.org was copied word-to-word by the
so called Akhilesh Saxena jii.

Please see the comments of dr.s.malhotra ji and the forwarded mail of
Akhilesh saxena .

This is against the ethics . So I request so called convener of rti
council of Uttar prdesh , Akhilesh Saxena ji not to indulge in such
unethical acts.

I admire dr.s.malhotra for his comments and views.

regards

urvashi sharma

On 12/3/10, Akhilesh Kumar Saxena <akhileshsaxena09@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Urvashi Ji,
>
> In my humble opinion , the CIC of UPSIC is right in his decision . It is
> accepted that if a particular law is silent on some provision , then such
> interpretation can be drawn from other laws prevailing and referring to such
> provisions . RTI Act is silent on " minimum age of the applicant " but other
> laws are not which require a deponent to be a major above 18 years of age ,
> of sound mind .
>
> It has to be kept in mind that Applicant will soon be Appellant and
> Complainant which would require him or her to verify the contents of his
> pleadings in appeals and complaints . Verification of legal or quasi-legal
> documents require knowledge and capacity to take CONSIDERED independent (
> non-tutored) decision - sound mind . A child of tender age can not be
> trusted with such decision making .
> While the law does give one a right , but at the same time it stipulates one
> to use that right judiciously without disrupting the harmony in the system .
> Now consider a wrong or frivolous application , Appeal and Complaint by such
> child . Issue of information is certainly there , but just imagine the
> wastage of time , man-power to the system by some unwise queries . The PIO ,
> AA , Commission shall all be scratching their heads just to make the kid
> understand the wisdom of their decisions ( though most sane people find it
> difficult to understand the wisdom of such decisions many times - just a
> joke ) .
> Just image - kids sending RTI Applications to school asking why mobiles are
> banned in exams , why they have to wear dress , why school does not start
> after they get up at 11 AM and the like ...the list can be mind-boggling .
> But at the same time, I do not underestimate the significance of queries
> raised by some kids . They are capable of raising such issues which can
> shake you no ends because these come from unadulterated minds . In such
> cases some mechanism should be evolved that the issues of kids can be taken
> up suo moto at some level like the Hon'ble High Courts are doing for the
> cause of social justice or the Applications to be entertained through an
> appointed master in the school or the like . How it will work can be debated
> and a mechanism evolved . RTIAct and very basic provisions of IPC , should
> be included in syllabus at 8th class level so that they can start filling
> RTI Apps when they are 14-15 years , DoPT may certify such RTI KIds after
> training them for 2-3 months .
> In nutshell , I would be happiest person if kids just know what is
> corruption and how it is eating into the national resources . They should be
> able to ask - "dad ! how did you purchase the Audi ?"
> Purpose of RTI Act would be full-filled ..
>
> I think we need to separate 2 issue - whether a minor CAN make an
> application under the RTI Act, and whether a KID should be so allowed.
>
> As far as the validity under present law is concerned, I think the law is
> clear enough - section 3 proclaims that All citizens have right to
> Information. As RTI Act does not define 'citizen', we can safely infer that
> it is the citizen as defined under the Citizen Act, 1955. If the legislature
> had intended to confer this right on adults only, it could have very well
> said so clearly in the law itself. Neither courts nor the ICs have any right
> to put words and stipulations into the act where they do not exist.
>
> On the issue of desirability of kids asking questions under RTI, though I
> fully respect your right to hold that view, I disagree with you. About the
> objections raised by you, *please note *that anything starting with 'why' is
> automatically rejected, without reading any further. And there are
> sufficient provisions in the law to protect public authorities to protect
> from 'wrong or frivolous' questions, by children as well as adults.
>
>
> Regard's
>
> Akhilesh Saxena
>
> Convener-*RTI Council of* *U.P.*
>

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

MISC. BENCH No. - 8305 of 2010 , HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

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

?Court No. - 1

Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 8305 of 2010

Petitioner :- Nutan Thakur [ P.I.L.] Civil
Respondent :- High Court Of Allahabad Through The Registrar General Allaha
Petitioner Counsel :- Nutan Thakur (Inperson )
Respondent Counsel :- Manish Kumar,P.N.Gupta

Hon'ble Pradeep Kant,J.
Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
On objection being raised by Sri Manish Kumar as well as the learned
State Counsel that the writ petition against the High Court and Vidhan
Sabha under R.T.I. Act, jointly is not maintainable, Ms. Nutan Thakur,
who has appeared in person, says that the writ petition may be allowed
to be withdrawn and the same may be dismissed as withdrawn with
liberty to file fresh petition.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with the
liberty aforesaid.
Order Date :- 25.8.2010
Arjun

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

नाबालिग नहीं कर सकते आरटीआई का इस्तेमाल!

http://www.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-minors-cannot-use-rti-act-1612393.html

शुक्रवार,03 दिसम्बर, 2010 को 08:59 तक के समाचार

नाबालिग नहीं कर सकते आरटीआई का इस्तेमाल!

लखनऊ. सूचना के अधिकार के तहत कोई नाबालिग जानकारी नहीं मांग सकता। यह
कहना है उत्तर प्रदेश सूचना आयोग का। आयोग ने चौथी कक्षा के एक
विद्यार्थी का आवेदन यह कहते हुए खारिज कर दिया। इस विद्यार्थी ने
मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से गायब दस्तावेजों का ब्योरा मांगा था।

यह भी कम आश्चर्यजनक नहीं कि सूचना के अधिकार कानून के किसी भी प्रावधान
में आवेदक की न्यूनतम या अधिकतम उम्र का कोई उल्लेख नहीं है। इसमें केवल
यह लिखा है कि भारत का कोई भी नागरिक दस रुपए की फीस जमा करवा कर पब्लिक
अथॉरिटी से जानकारी हासिल कर सकता है।

केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग में मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त एएन तिवारी का भी यही कहना
है कि इस कानून में कहीं नहीं लिखा है कि इसका इस्तेमाल केवल 18 साल से
अधिक उम्र के लोग ही कर सकते हैं। तिवारी ने कहा कि इसके लिए कोई आयुसीमा
नहीं है।

क्यों जरूरत पड़ी : कोई जवाब न मिलने पर उसने पता किया तो मुख्यमंत्री
कार्यालय ने बताया कि उसे कोई शिकायत नहीं मिली। तब इस बच्ची ने आरटीआई
के तहत आवेदन देकर जानना चाहा कि मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से ऐसी कितनी
शिकायतें गायब हुई हैं तथा इसके लिए कौन जिम्मेदार है।

चकरा गया मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय : बच्चे के इस आवेदन पर मुख्यमंत्री
कार्यालय चकरा गया। उसने जवाब दिया कि उसे कोई आवेदन ही नहीं मिला। लेकिन
स्कूल के बाहर पड़ा कचरा हटवा दिया गया।

नहीं रुकी बच्ची : बच्ची राज्य सूचना आयोग पहुंची। मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त
रणजीत सिंह पंकज ने जवाब दिया कि पृथम दृष्टया आवेदन कर्ता नाबालिग है
तथा भारतीय बालिग कानून के तहत बालिग की परिभाषा में नहीं आता। सूचना का
अधिकार अर्ध न्यायिक प्रक्रिया है इसलिए कोई नाबालिग आरटीआई कानून के तहत
कार्यवाही नहीं कर सकता। उसने ऐश्वर्या को सलाह दी कि वह अपने अभिभावक के
माध्यम से आवेदन करे।

स्कूल के बाहर कचरा

उत्तर प्रदेश के ताजा मामले में 9 साल की ऐश्वर्या शर्मा ने स्कूल के
बाहर पड़े कचरे की शिकायत स्कूल की कापी के पन्ने पर मुख्यमंत्री मायावती
के कार्यालय में की थी।
--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Fwd: Every Citizen Have Right to Information

dear all

a am forwarding a mail from convener of recenty formed rti group -*RTI
Council of* *U.P.* for your valuable comments on the topic.

specifically i would like to have comments of arvind kejriwalji ,
niraj kumarji and bimal khemaniji , who are in the " MARGDARSHAK
MANDAL " of this Council.

regards

urvashi sharma

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Akhilesh Kumar Saxena <akhileshsaxena09@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 16:52:57 +0530
Subject: Every Citizen Have Right to Information
To: urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com>
Cc: Himanshu Swarnkar <himan.swarn@gmail.com>, abhishek kumar
<abhishek.glamartist@gmail.com>, nirajklko <nirajklko@yahoo.com>, rti
nirajlucknow <nirajklko@gmail.com>, alokqr <alokqr@gmail.com>,
patrakarsadan <patrakarsadan@gmail.com>, jusufkabir
<jusufkabir@gmail.com>, IZHAR AHMAD <rti.lucknow@rediffmail.com>,
Izhar Ansari <izharansari@rtiactiongroup.org>, rti youth
<rti.youth@gmail.com>, "mahendra@ PROJECT VIJAY"
<mps.simco@gmail.com>, Anil Jani <aniljani1008@rediffmail.com>, bimal
khemani <bimal.khemani@yahoo.co.in>, Parivartan India
<parivartan_india@rediffmail.com>, aksri80 <aksri80@gmail.com>, neel
kamal <shvfoundation@gmail.com>

Dear Urvashi Ji,

In my humble opinion , the CIC of UPSIC is right in his decision . It is
accepted that if a particular law is silent on some provision , then such
interpretation can be drawn from other laws prevailing and referring to such
provisions . RTI Act is silent on " minimum age of the applicant " but other
laws are not which require a deponent to be a major above 18 years of age ,
of sound mind .

It has to be kept in mind that Applicant will soon be Appellant and
Complainant which would require him or her to verify the contents of his
pleadings in appeals and complaints . Verification of legal or quasi-legal
documents require knowledge and capacity to take CONSIDERED independent (
non-tutored) decision - sound mind . A child of tender age can not be
trusted with such decision making .
While the law does give one a right , but at the same time it stipulates one
to use that right judiciously without disrupting the harmony in the system .
Now consider a wrong or frivolous application , Appeal and Complaint by such
child . Issue of information is certainly there , but just imagine the
wastage of time , man-power to the system by some unwise queries . The PIO ,
AA , Commission shall all be scratching their heads just to make the kid
understand the wisdom of their decisions ( though most sane people find it
difficult to understand the wisdom of such decisions many times - just a
joke ) .
Just image - kids sending RTI Applications to school asking why mobiles are
banned in exams , why they have to wear dress , why school does not start
after they get up at 11 AM and the like ...the list can be mind-boggling .
But at the same time, I do not underestimate the significance of queries
raised by some kids . They are capable of raising such issues which can
shake you no ends because these come from unadulterated minds . In such
cases some mechanism should be evolved that the issues of kids can be taken
up suo moto at some level like the Hon'ble High Courts are doing for the
cause of social justice or the Applications to be entertained through an
appointed master in the school or the like . How it will work can be debated
and a mechanism evolved . RTIAct and very basic provisions of IPC , should
be included in syllabus at 8th class level so that they can start filling
RTI Apps when they are 14-15 years , DoPT may certify such RTI KIds after
training them for 2-3 months .
In nutshell , I would be happiest person if kids just know what is
corruption and how it is eating into the national resources . They should be
able to ask - "dad ! how did you purchase the Audi ?"
Purpose of RTI Act would be full-filled ..

I think we need to separate 2 issue - whether a minor CAN make an
application under the RTI Act, and whether a KID should be so allowed.

As far as the validity under present law is concerned, I think the law is
clear enough - section 3 proclaims that All citizens have right to
Information. As RTI Act does not define 'citizen', we can safely infer that
it is the citizen as defined under the Citizen Act, 1955. If the legislature
had intended to confer this right on adults only, it could have very well
said so clearly in the law itself. Neither courts nor the ICs have any right
to put words and stipulations into the act where they do not exist.

On the issue of desirability of kids asking questions under RTI, though I
fully respect your right to hold that view, I disagree with you. About the
objections raised by you, *please note *that anything starting with 'why' is
automatically rejected, without reading any further. And there are
sufficient provisions in the law to protect public authorities to protect
from 'wrong or frivolous' questions, by children as well as adults.

Regard's

Akhilesh Saxena

Convener-*RTI Council of* *U.P.*

UPSIC order

-- Urvashi Sharma Founder , Convener - YAISHWARYAJ   Vice President - Save Culture Value Foundation   Member - NAPM , NCPRI , PUCL , ASHA PARIVAAR , RTI Helpmail( Web Based ) aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com Mobile Rti Helpline 8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )