Whispers Forum

The Appellant sought information with reference to sanction of his permanent TA claim which appeared to have been restricted to 2 AC train fare. He asked for a copy of authority for restricting his claim to 2nd AC train fare instead of restricting the same to shortest route of his entitlement i.e. Air Travel. He further demanded a copy of authority for deduction of taxi fare of Rs. 3060/- (Rs.1560 and Rs.1500) against the said TA claim. After going through reply of CPIO, the CIC observed that it is the lowest air fare that has been taken into account and not the train fare as stated by the appellant in his second appeal. During the hearing, he explained that the restriction is partly based on the air fare and partly on the train fare. The CIC held that though it appears that what was sanctioned was as per the appellant’s entitlement, still point no 1 needs to be properly clarified to the appellant. The second point regarding the taxi fare has been explained properly in terms of the appellant’s entitlement.
Comments
The quantum of money spent on a CIC hearing would be more that the disputed TA entitlement in this case. It is often seen that deductions are made in the TA bill by the account departments without clarifying the reasons for the same. The claimant is left on his own to decipher the reasons for the trimming of the claim.
Citation: Prathipati Bhanu Prasad v. O/o the Controller of Defence Accounts (Border Roads), File no.: CIC/CGDAC/A/2022/610238; Date of Decision: 16/03/2023
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Visakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books, RTI Right to Information - Law and Practice and PIO’s Guide to RTI. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and Third party audit. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link www.rtifoundationofindia.com

If calling someone thief is defamatory, what about labelling someone as Mir Jafar and many other objectionable names and titles. Some think that more they abuse their opponents more kudos they will get from the bosses in the party. The language used by some is so horrible crossing all boundaries of decency good manners and civilized behaviour. It shocks when a few ministers or ex ministers and party seniors attack an opposition leader in such aggressive manner and bad language. Is this the democracy we are proud of .Lace your attack with lies ,lies and more lies ,make it more and more bitter to demoralise the other person so that mentally and physically he becomes unfit to challenge you. Democracy to survive needs not only educated people but men and women of character who respect their opponents.
Aarti Khosla

TMC and Samajwadi Party(SP) have joined hands and both Mamata and Akhilesh have indicated that more regional parties could join the coalition but they emphatically said Congress would have no place in the alliance. Jairam Ramesh has rightly said that an opposition coalition without Congress cannot take on BJP and I fully agree with it. It appears regional parties want to form a coalition without Congress. Such a coalition will cause no harm to BJP. As an indication of growing distance from Congress, SP has said it would contest even from Raebareli and Amethi. So far they never contested from these traditional seats of Gandhi family.
Yogita Saxena

The appellant sought to know as to when his application will be placed for consideration before the Rajya Sabha. The CIC observed that The RTI Act does not cast any obligation on the PIO to answer queries, in which the seeker of information attempts to elicit answer to the questions with prefixes, such as, why, what, when and whether. The CIC directed the PIO to forward the letter petition of the appellant dated 28.11.2019 to the Chief Secretary, Bihar under intimation to the appellant within 3 days of the receipt of the order.
Comments
The case shows how the drafting of the RTI applications affects eliciting proper response from the public authority. The applicant could have asked whether there are any norms for putting up a letter to the Rajya Sabha and for the body to consider it.
Citation: Santosh Kumar Pandit v. Parliament of India Rajya Sabha Secretariat, File no.: - CIC/PAROI/A/2022/137994, Date of Decision: 08/02/2023
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Visakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books, RTI Right to Information - Law and Practice and PIO’s Guide to RTI. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and Third party audit. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link www.rtifoundationofindia.com