tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-83295694623868016052024-02-22T19:05:56.293+05:30West Bengal RTI ManchThe Right To Information Act of India is a landmark act which empowers every Indian citizen to
1. ask any questions from the Government or seek any information
2. take copies of any government documents
3. inspect any government documents
4. inspect any Government works
5. take samples of materials of any Government workUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-33838297690761897312007-08-03T14:48:00.000+05:302007-08-17T15:02:53.296+05:30<span style="font-size:130%;">First ever penalty under section 20 of RTI Act in West Bengal</span><br /><br />After more than 2 years of implementation of the Act, the West Bengal State Information Commission imposed its’ first ever penalty amounting to Rs. 15, 500.00 on the SPIO & the Chief Executive Officer of Health Department, Hooghly under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act 2005. The penalty was imposed for an inordinate delay of 62 days made after the stipulated time frame in furnishing the information sought by a Local Club/Organiser of Jangipara, Hooghly. We have the entire story from Amitdyuti Kumar of APDR:<br /><br />The organisers of Thunder Club, a very well known Social organisation of Jangipara are not associated with any politcal party. The organisation also organises two/three voluntary blood donation camps every year. The usual place of such camps was the local Primary Health Center outdoor. Last year (2006), the Block Medical Officer and the Chief Medical Officer of Health of the District did not even reply to their requests made on 17 April and again on 5 May. However kowledgable Health Center employees told that the club will not be allowed to run its camp<br />atthe instruction of 'higher-ups'. Raghunath Chakrabarty, an organiser of the club submitted an application undert he Right to Information Act 2005 to know why their letters were not replied to and what is the cause of denying permission to hold the camp. The SPIO (and the Chief Medical Officer of Health of the District) again preferred to ignore the RTI application. A persistent Mr. Chakrabarty appealed to the State Chief Information Commissioner. On being notified by the SCIC, the CMOH gave some wrong informaton, which were proved to be lies by papers submitted by Mr Chakrabarty. The SPIO-cum-CMOH was first show caused and as he again tried to evade was called for a hearing on 17 July 2007.<br />On 27 July 2007 the Commission passed an order on Appeal/Complaint No.977(3)-WBIC/RTI/91/07 imposing a penalty of Rs 15500/- on the CMOH,<br />Hooghly which "shall have to be deposited within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order" and report compliance to the Commission. "If he fails to do that, the Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare was directed to initiate departmental action against<br />him and recover the said amount from the salary of Dr. Mandal in five<br />equal monthly instalment and remit the same.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The full text of the order is given below :</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family: arial;">WEST BENGAL INFORMATION COMMISSION</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Bhabani Bhaban (2nd Floor), Alipore</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Kolkata--700 027</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Telefax (013) 2479-1966</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Appeal/complaint No. 977(3)-WBIC/RTI/91/07</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Right to Information Act, 2005</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Date of hearing on 17.07.2007.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Raghunath Chakraborty</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">-Vs-</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">C.M.O.H., Chinsurah, Hooghly & State Assistant Public Information</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Officer</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Present: l. Shri Raghunath Chakraborty ........ Complainant.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">2.Dr. Akhil Kumar Mandal ......... Respondent, Chief Medical</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Officer</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">of Health Hooghly.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">3 .Shri Arun Kumar Koley Block Medical Officer of</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Health</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Jangipara Rural Hospital, Jangipara</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> ...... Respondent.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Facts on record:</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">1. Shri Raghunath Chakraborty of Jangipara, Hooghly requested for some</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">information under RTI Act from the Chief Medical Officer of Health,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Hooghly on 09.02.2007 regarding grant of permission to hold a Voluntary</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Blood Donation Camp at Jangipara Rural Health Centre.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">2. Without getting any reply from the Chief Medical Officer of Health</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Shri Chakraborty preferred a complaint under section 18(1) of the RTI</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Act to the Commission on 03.04.2007, the Commission issued a show cause</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">notice vide No. 483(2)-WBIC/RTI/91/07 dated 04.04.2007. In reply the</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Chief Medical Officer of Health, vide No. HC/2024 dated 12.04.2007 stated</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">that the camp was not allowed from the point of security of the O.P.D.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">space. He later vide No. HC/2338 dated 02.05.2007 revised the reply and</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">stated that the Blood Donation Camp was not allowed at Jangipara Rural</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Hospital since for the last</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">three years. There was no proper store facilities, especially due to</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">storage of materials supplied by SHSDP-II Project of World Bank.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Meanwhile, the Commission was not satisfied with the first reply and issued a</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">second show cause notice vide No. 564-WBIC/RTI/91/07 dated 20.04.2007.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">3. The Deputy Director of Health Services and State Public Information</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Officer also directed the Chief Medical Officer of Health to comply</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">with the direction of the Commission. Shri Raghunath Chakraborty vide his</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">application dated 29.05.2007 challenged the statement of Chief Medical</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Officer of Health and produced documentary evidence showing that the</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Blood Donation Camp was actually held in 2004 and 2005. The Commission</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">vide its No. 800-WBIC/RTI/91/07 dated 31.05.2007 forwarded those</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">documents too to the Chief Medical Officer of Health and sought for his</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">clarifications. The Chief Medical Officer of Health vide No. HC/3008 dated</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">08.06.2007 categorically stated that no organization was allowed to</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">perform the Blood Donation Camp at Jangipara Rural Hospital.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">4. The Commission issued notice for -hearing to both the parties to</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">appear on 17.07.2007 before the Commission.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Order:</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">5. Shri Raghunath Chakraborty produced evidence showing that the Blood</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Donation Camp did take place in the year 2004 and 2005. The Chief</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Medical Officer of Health could not deny this fact. When asked why had he</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">written that no Blood Donation Camp was allowed during the last three</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">years preceding 2006 and also why had he categorically reiterated that no</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Blood Donation Camp was allowed, the Chief Medical Officer of Health,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">submitted that he was so briefed by the office. But he could not produce</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">any documentary evidence about such briefing.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">6. It is further noted by the Commission that the Chief Medical Officer</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">of Health did furnish information, incorrect though, to the</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Commission, but he did not care to furnish any information to the applicant.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Ultimately, Block Medical Officer of Health vide Memo No. 183/JRH dated</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">11.05.2007 informed the applicant that the Block Health & Family Welfare</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Samity in its meeting dated 10.05.2007 decided that no organization</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">would be provided space inside the hospital premises for conducting the</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Blood Donation Camp. It is interesting to note that this decision has been</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">taken one year after the application seeking permission for Blood</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Donation Camp was made and also after the show cause notice was served to</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">the S.P.I.O.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">7. It is therefore, amply clear that incorrect and misleading </span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">information was furnished to the Commission and no information was furnished</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">to the applicant till 11.05.2007. The Chief Medical Officer of Health</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">was duly asked to show cause to prove that he acted reasonably and</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">diligently and also reasonable opportunity of being heard was given to him.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">The Chief Medical Officer of Health failed in every respect to prove</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">that his action in not providing information to the applicant and</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">misleading the Commission by providing incorrect information was bonafide in</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">nature. In fact he had nothing to say for the incorrect information</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">furnished by him to the Commission.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">8. The action or inaction of the S.P.I.O. attracts the penal provision</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">of Section 20(1) for imposing penalty @ Rs. 250/- per day. Section</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">20(1) states that where the Central Information Commission or the State</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Information, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">appeal is of the opinion that the Central Public Information Officer</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, has,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">information or has not furnished information within the time specified under</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied the request for</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">information or knowingly given incorrect,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">incomplete or misleading information or destroyed information which was</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">the information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">rupees each day .till application is received or information is furnished,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">twenty-five thousand rupees:</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">9. The Commission therefore is left with no option but to impose</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">penalty on the Chief Medical Officer of Health and State Assistant Public</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Information Officer Dr. Akhil Kumar Mandal. The initial application by</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Shri Raghunath Chakraborty was submitted to him on 09.02.2007 and the</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">decision of the Block Health & Family Welfare Samity was furnished to him</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">on 11,05.2007.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Therefore, there is a delay of 62 days after the statutory period of 30</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">days from the date of receipt of the application was over.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">10. It is therefore ordered that penalty of rupees 15,500/- is imposed</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">on Dr. Akhil Kumar Mandal, Chief Medical Officer of Health & State</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Assistant Public Information Officer, Hooghly. He shall, within 15 days</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">from the date of receipt of this order, deposit this amount to head of</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">account "0070 - Other Administrative Services - 60 - Other Services - 800</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">- Other Receipts - 021 - Collection of Fees from Information Seeker for</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">the purpose of servicing Information - 27 - Other Receipts" and report</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">compliance to the Commission. If he fails to do that, the Additional</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Chief Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare is directed to</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">initiate departmental action against him and recover the said amount from</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">the salary of Dr. Mandal in five equal monthly instalment and remit</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">the same to the head of account</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">as mentioned.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Date:27.07.2007 Sd/-</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Arun Kumar Bhattacharya</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> State Chief Information Commissioner</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Authenticated true copy forwarded to:</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">l.Shri Raghunath Chakraborty, Vill. + P.O. Jangipara, Hooghly,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">PIN-712404.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">2.Dr. Akhil Kumar Mandal, Chief Medical Officer of Health & State</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Assistant</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Public Information Officer, Chinsurah, Hooghly.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">3.Shri Arun Kumar Koley, Block Medical Officer of Health, Jangipara</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Rural</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Hospital, Jangipara, Hooghly.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">4.The Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Health & Family Welfare</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Swasthya Bhavan, GN-29, Sector-V, Salt Lake City, Kolkata-700 091.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">5. The Deputy Director of Health Services (Admn) & State Public</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Information</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Officer, Directorate of Health Services, Swasthya Bhavan, GN-29,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Sector-V,</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Salt Lake, Kolkata-700 09.</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;">Date: 30.07.2007 Sd/-</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> Secretary & Acting Registrar</span><br /><span style="font-family: arial;"> West Bengal Information Commission</span><br /></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-4622336547041596142007-04-28T09:42:00.000+05:302008-12-12T03:48:22.427+05:30First fine in West Bengal RTI<span style="font-size:130%;">First fine in RTI</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">SOUMEN BHATTACHARJEE</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8Xl4YMXfGvXENvj7rY9LOwv3smWZAbf2NPjM8nqLn35t1w1az8f0zDQPvE6UF4xLHfT40fXd4pcgg_pHdXzDjfdXYSKcAxbOpsVHjgU36czm73K8s5uy2ZNhimbhvbXv_CX4urrKrPaSM/s1600-h/Telegraph+RTI+2.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8Xl4YMXfGvXENvj7rY9LOwv3smWZAbf2NPjM8nqLn35t1w1az8f0zDQPvE6UF4xLHfT40fXd4pcgg_pHdXzDjfdXYSKcAxbOpsVHjgU36czm73K8s5uy2ZNhimbhvbXv_CX4urrKrPaSM/s320/Telegraph+RTI+2.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5058702326337775106" border="0" /></a><br /><br />The state information commission awarded the first ‘penalty’, under the Right to Information Act, 2005, to the cooperation department for failing to gather a piece of information for a petitioner, within the stipulated time.<br /><br />Chief information commissioner Arun Bhattacharya asked the cooperation department to pay a token amount as compensation for harassing the petitioner.<br /><br />“We have instructed the cooperation department to pay Rs 1,000 as compensation for harassing Saroj Khettry, the petitioner, as the department could not provide him with the information in the stipulated time,” stated Arun Bhattacharya, chief information commissioner of the state.<br /><br />Khettry, 74, had sought a copy of the legal opinion that the department of co-operation had taken concerning the allotment of his flat on Jhowtala Road.<br /><br />His quest dates back to the late 1970s, when he decided to leave his flat by resigning from the cooperative society, near Purna cinema in Bhowanipore.<br /><br />He had paid Rs 4.47 lakh for the 850-sq-ft flat. Khettry vacated the flat as he was told that the booking amount would be returned.<br /><br />“The promoter and the society did not return the money and even handed over the flat to someone else. Since then, I have been trying in vain to know the name of the owner of the flat,” said Khettry.<br /><br />After running from pillar to post for years, Khettry’s plea was first heard in October last year, when he was assured that the owner’s name would be revealed to him.<br /><br />“Initially, the principal information officer told me in a letter that his department has the legal document. But later, his department officials said the document had gone missing,” said Khettry.<br /><br />On April 3, Khettry’s appeal was heard by the commission, where the chief information commissioner ruled out that “misplacing the document cannot be an excuse for not furnishing a piece of information”.<br /><br />The commissioner ruled that “the penalty was for the entire department, including principal information officer H.P. Roy”.<br /><br />He added that only the principal information officer should not be blamed for the matter as the entire department had ignored Khettry’s plea and harassed him.<br /><br />Published in <a href="http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070428/asp/calcutta/story_7707469.asp">The Telegraph, 28 April 2007</a><br /><br /><hr /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">First penalty for RTI Act violation</span><br /><br />CIC slaps fine on Cooperative dept SPIO for failing to furnish information<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-qllbuHk3XEV6lZw9taIXhOqFlseekKiL9MUfEutHiDr9fnXoIw6MgNziBUq9DEWQa4Ucn-V2RoYeQ7YhMdQ4K1ymxVyGgTopr2rMyRlqwzGZSurlz4gx3lx_LeX439oeEuBoRKkPtyFW/s1600-h/IndianExpress+RTI+1.JPG"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-qllbuHk3XEV6lZw9taIXhOqFlseekKiL9MUfEutHiDr9fnXoIw6MgNziBUq9DEWQa4Ucn-V2RoYeQ7YhMdQ4K1ymxVyGgTopr2rMyRlqwzGZSurlz4gx3lx_LeX439oeEuBoRKkPtyFW/s320/IndianExpress+RTI+1.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5058702738654635538" border="0" /></a><br /><br />Subhendu Ray<br />Kolkata, April 27: The Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) has penalised the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) of the Cooperative department for allegedly violating the Right to Information (RTI) Act. This is the first case in West Bengal wherein such an action has been taken under the RTI Act. According to the order issued by the CIC, the SPIO has to submit within 30 days a fine of Rs 1,000 before the one-man commission.<br /><br />Acting on a complaint filed by one Saroj Kumar Khetri that he was not provided with the piece of information he had sought eight months ago, CIC Arun Kumar Bhattacharya penalised the department under Section 20 of the RTI Act 2005.<br /><br />The complainant said he had purchased a flat at Jhowtala Road in 1973 but the same was later issued to someone else. “My membership in the society was not disclosed in the society audit. I appealed to our cooperative society’s registrar to take action against the board members of the society, but he did not pay any heed,” Khetri said.<br /><br />He filed a writ petition in the High Court, which ordered the authorities to dispose of his representation in accordance with law.<br /><br />The secretary of the Cooperative department had sought legal advice from the department’s legal adviser in connection with the writ petition filed by Khetri.<br /><br />“On June 16 last year, I sent an application to the department requesting for a copy of the legal advice. During the hearing before the Information Commission, the SPIO, HP Roy, had promised to give me the copy within 10 days,” Khetri said.<br /><br />He was, however, given a copy of the legal opinion in a separate case instead.<br /><br />“I then moved the Information Commission to get the response of the SPIO,” Khetri said. The commission then seized the file, examined it and penalised the department.<br /><br />Roy, the SPIO who is also the joint secretary of the department, admitted that it was a gross mistake on their part. “A wrong legal advice document was given to him (Khetri) by mistake. The actual document was not in the file,” he said.<br /><br />Sabir Ahmed, programme coordinator of The Calcutta Samaritans, a city-based NGO that has been working towards proper implementation of the RTI Act in the state, said applicants in West Bengal hardly ever got a response from the agencies concerned.<br /><br />“By imposing a penalty this time, the commission has set an example and we appreciate this gesture,” said Ahmed.<br /><br />Published in <a href="http://cities.expressindia.com/archivefullstory.php?newsid=233778&creation_date=2007-04-28">Kolkata Newsline, Indian Express, 28 April 2007</a>Satabdihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11803280324738954772noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-17886191521635609702007-04-20T15:06:00.000+05:302007-04-20T15:15:13.720+05:30<span style="font-size:130%;">Finally, the RTI cell begins to function in KMC</span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family: arial;">Debarati Chakraborty</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="font-family: arial;">Kolkata, April 19:</span></span> FINALLY the Right to Information (RTI) cell in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) started to function as the cash collection centre came into existence. Because of its absence previously, the cell was completely inactive and had only been able to forward 18 replies out of 92 applications received.<br /><br />An officer of the cell said, “The cash collection centre has finally developed. From now onwards, the treasury department will handle the monetary aspect of the RTI cell.”<br /><br />Although the RTI cell in KMC was inaugurated with great fanfare in January this year, the cash collection centre came into being some five days ago. “The applicants have to pay a certain amount to the KMC in order to procure information through the RTI cell. But unfortunately, there was no such mechanism here. This was stopping us from replying to about 90 applications received so far,” said Pashupati Barik, the State Public Information Officer of the KMC’s RTI cell and the Deputy Municipal Commissioner Personnel.<br /><br />Sources within the RTI cell said, “Applicants will have to deposit money in the miscellaneous counter of the Treasury Department. The Act states that Rs 2 has to be taken from the applicant for each page of information provided or the actual cost price of the sample. After the applicant deposits this amount, we will provide him with the necessary information.”<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Fees structure</span><br />* Rs 2 for each page (in A-4 or A-3 size paper) created or copied<br />* Actual charge or cost price for a copy in large size of paper<br />* Actual cost price for sample or model<br />*n Rs 5 for each 15 minutes or fraction thereof for inspection of records<br />* Rs 15 per diskette or floppy<br />* Actual charge for publication or Rs 2 per page of photocopy for extracts for information provided<br /><br /><br />Published in <a href="http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=232541">Kolkata Newsline, Indian Express, April 20 2007</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-72079050240160923872007-04-10T15:21:00.000+05:302007-04-20T15:45:15.308+05:30<span style="font-size:130%;">Calcutta University Chancellor Mr. Gopal Krishna Gandhi, takes up students’ cause on implementing the Right to Information Act</span><br /><br />Even as state universities sat on the decision on implementing the<br />Right to Information Act the chancellor, Mr Gopalkrishna Gandhi, has<br />taken upon himself to see that the universities reach a decision<br />about showing answer papers to students under the Act. Under his<br />instruction the vice-chancellors and information officers of all<br />state universities will meet tomorrow for a round table conference to<br />decide whether universities will show evaluated papers to examinees<br />under RTI.<br /><br />The first case under RTI occurred in a state university when Calcutta<br />University had to show answer papers to a B Com student after a<br />directive from the state information commissioner. Although the<br />universities have been sufficiently alarmed by the incident, there<br />have been no further progress on the issue.<br /><br />However, during a recent discussion held by the chancellor with vice-<br />chancellors of state universities the issue cropped us once again.<br />The chancellor then asked the universities to take a uniform decision<br />on whether to show answer papers if any student took recourse to RTI<br />Act. "The chancellor told us to convene a round table about the<br />implications of the RTI Act after vice-chancellors told them about<br />the impending problem. Accordingly, we will try to reach a unanimous<br />decision in this regard. The meeting will be attended by information<br />officers of the universities as well as the respective vice-<br />chancellors, " said pro-vice chancellor (academic) of CU, Prof.<br />Suranjan Das. The meeting will be held at Netaji Subhas Open<br />University tomorrow.<br /><br />The universities, however, have been differing over whether to show<br />the evaluated papers to students. While Calcutta University is<br />unwilling to show answer papers to students, some of the universities<br />say they are ready to implement RTI in this regard. The state<br />universities were confronted with their first RTI case when a B.Com<br />Part II examinee of CU, Utsav Dutta approached Calcutta High Court<br />last year as he lacked the requisite marks for reviewing his papers<br />under university regulations. The court had directed the petitioner<br />to approach the university under RTI Act. However, the university had<br />not responded to his appeal within 30 days, thereby rejecting his<br />appeal. Following a directive from state information commissioner, CU<br />had to finally give way.<br /><br />Published in The Statesman, April 10 2007Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-82930605079543383532007-03-13T13:01:00.000+05:302007-03-13T17:51:45.965+05:30<span style="font-size:130%;">Two weeks, 35 questions at KMC’s RTI cell</span><br />Express News Service<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Kolkata, March 12:</span> TWO Weeks after the first Right To Information (RTI) cell was set up in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation (KMC) premises, the State Public Information Officer (SPIO) of KMC claims that the response of the people has been phenomenal.<br /><br />“We have received 35 applications till date, of which, 15 are queries regarding buildings and constructions. The number of questions on assessment and licence are eight and four respectively,” said Pashupati Barik, the SPIO of KMC and the Deputy Municipal Commissioner (personnel).<br /><br />According to Barik, those who wish to make use of their RTI, need to do so through written applications.<br /><br />“A Rs 10 court fee stamp must be attached to the application. The application can be written on a white sheet of paper and then addressed to the SPIO of KMC along with the name, address and contact number of the sender. All the 35 applications received so far are still being processed,” he added.<br /><br />“The RTI act states that response to an application should be made within a month’s time and we are trying to do exactly that. Ideally, we should transfer applications to the respective departments within five days of receiving them. These departments in turn need to prepare a response within 10 days. We are still trying to quicken the the process,” said Barik.<br /><br />The RTI cell will not only help the common man get the right information but will also make the KMC’s dealings more transparent.<br /><br />“Transparency and impartiality is what we are aiming for through the RTI cell,” said Barik.<br /><br />But although officers at the RTI cell of KMC want to provide people with information, they also feel there should be a limit to it.<br /><br />“We cannot provide private information. For example, if a person wants to know whether his neighbour has a trade licence, because according to him the trade is illegal, we can provide the information. But we cannot disclose what trade the man is involved in,” added Barik.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Published in <a href="http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=226447">Kolkata Newsline, Indian Express, March 13 2006</a></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-42549276302815824422007-03-09T20:02:00.000+05:302007-03-14T20:07:04.099+05:30<span style="font-size:130%;">Please join the RTI workshop organised by West Bengal RTI Manch</span><br /><br />RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT<br />"As citizens of this democracy, you are the rulers and the ruled, the lawgivers and the law-abiding, the beginning and the end." Adlai Stevenson (1956)<br /><br />As a Volunteer I pledge that<br />“ I will never pay any bribe. I will rather use RTI.”<br /><br />People have to pay bribes in their daily interaction with Government Departments – be it getting a passport or a ration card or a license or an income tax refund etc. Everyone has to either pay a bribe or face harassment. Sometimes, even if a bribe is not directly asked, still your work is not done because of laziness or simple bureaucratic delay. What does one do in such a situation? So far people were helpless. They could only curse the system and do nothing. Each one of us when faced in a similar situation wondered whether there would ever be a time when our country would get rid of this curse of bribery. Maybe that time has come. Now we need not pay a bribe in such a situation. We have “Right to Information Act” now, which gets the work done. We, from the West Bengal RTI Manch sincerely request you all to be a part of this campaign, which is about helping people in getting their work done without facing bribery or harassment using this revolutionary tool, i.e. the “Right to Information Act 2005”. In congruent to this, we are organizing a RTI Work Shop/ Interactive Session to be held on SATURDAY, 10TH of MARCH 2007 at 16:00hrs. over the premises of the Advanced Center for the study of Philanthropy and Development Affairs, Azad Palace, 1st. Floor, 81C, Narkeldanga Main (New C.I.T.) Road, Kolkata - 700054. This building is located diagonally opposite to Swabhumi (The Heritage Park), just behind Subhas Sarobar.<br /><br />TIME: 16:00 HRS<br /><br /> * 2 (two) episodes of “Ab to hum janenge” by CHRI (20mins. Approx.)<br /> * Individual interaction with the participants, sharing experiences, RTI success stories in West Bengal & outside.<br /> * Filing of RTI Applications,<br /> * Distributing Court Fee Stamps of Rs.10/- to the participants against a payment of Rs.10/- only. [Subject to availability.]<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"> THIS IS YOUR RIGHT, COME FORWARD & USE IT !</span><br />FOR ANY FURTHER CLARIFICATION (S) PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"> MALAY BHATTACHARYYA</span> at 9231413834 or <span style="font-weight: bold;">ASHISH BISWAS</span> at 24278451Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-30755533680925102172007-02-24T20:08:00.000+05:302007-03-14T20:11:44.429+05:30<span style="font-size:130%;">Citizens to access reserved info, courtesy RTI at KMC</span><br />Mohammed Safi Shamsi<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Kolkata, February 23</span>: A week after the appointment of the information officer in compliance with the RTI Act, queries and applications are pouring in at the Kolkata Municipal Corporation’s newly-formed RTI cell.<br /><br />The civic body has already received 16 applications from citizens seeking information on various civic issues. Most of these applications are concerned with assessment and the buildings departments.<br /><br />Advertisement<br />Pashupati Barik, deputy municipal commissioner (personnel), now the state public information officer, KMC, told Newsline that a civic RTI cell is already in place. “As of now there are five officials to coordinate the process of receiving applications and disseminating information to the applicant,” Barik told Newsline.<br /><br />While the KMC is ready to oblige the applicant, as per the instructions of the information act, the bureaucracy is still undecided on the information that is to be guarded as ‘secret’. “The issues that cannot be made public will be discussed shortly,” Barik said.<br /><br />Citizens interested in obtaining information on civic issues can now apply to the information officer: “The queries can be written on plain paper with a Rs 10 court stamp pasted on the application,” said a civic official. Officials said that attempts will be made to ensure that the applicants receive the information within 30 days from the date of filing the query. The implementation of RTI at KMC is expected to help more citizens gain access to information which had been reserved till date.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">Published in <a href="http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=223887">Kolkata Newsline, Indian Express, 24th February 2007</a></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8329569462386801605.post-34833333046695562982007-02-13T20:30:00.000+05:302007-02-13T20:29:55.502+05:30<span style="font-size:130%;">Governor seeks report on implementation status of RTI act in West Bengal</span><br /><br />Published in <a href="http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070205/asp/calcutta/story_7340555.asp">The Telegraph, 5th February 2007</a><br /><br /><table border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="articleheader"><div id="hd" name="hd"><span style="font-size:100%;">Data panel asked for facts</span></div> - Governor frowns on flurry of complaints against RTI flaws </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="articleauthor">SOUMEN BHATTACHARJEE</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="story" align="left"> <table align="left" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="172"> <tbody><tr> <td> <img src="http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070205/images/05gandhi.jpg" align="left" /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td class="articleauthor" align="left"> Governor Gopal Krishna Gandhi </td> </tr> </tbody></table> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">The state information commission has an unlikely petitioner — Governor Gopal Krishna Gandhi.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">Bengal’s first citizen has sought a report from the panel on how the Right to Information (RTI) Act is helping people get the desired data.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">The governor has made it clear in the letter what had prompted him to seek such a report — a flurry of complaints from citizens over the commission’s “failure” to supply information.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">“The governor has sought a report on the performance of the commission. We have sent it,” said Arun Bhattacharyya, state information commissioner, refusing to disclose details of the “confidential report”.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">But sources reveal that the crux of the four-page report is the commission’s candid confession that non-cooperation by government departments is coming in the way of the implementation of the RTI Act, 2005.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">“The report states the commission is not even aware of the names of the principal information officers in various departments and assistant public information officers in the districts,” said a senior government official. These officers are supposed to act as nodal officers in providing information to petitioners.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">“Most public authorities have not maintained their office proceedings and records and so cannot give information… And the panel is getting dragged into unwarranted litigation,” added the official.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">A forum of Right to Information activists, however, has slammed the commission for its failure in implementing the act. The activists met commission officials on Thursday. “Till last year, the commission had received 148 complaints and 23 appeals. Only 61 cases have been resolved and eight orders passed in the past six months,” said Arvind Kejriwal, a member of the West Bengal RTI Manch.</span></p> <p class="story" align="left"><span style="font-size:85%;">While the RTI Act was passed in October 2005, the state commission has been functioning since June 2006. “It means the commission heard only one case per month. This, indeed, is poor performance,” said A. Biswas, another member of the Manch.</span></p></td></tr></tbody></table>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0