RTI Details of payment of compensation paid to the farmers whose land was acquired
The Appellant denied receipt of satisfactory information in compliance with the order of the SIC, J&K dated 18.07.2019 and stated that no opportunity of hearing was provided to him at the FAA stage. The Respondent remained absent during the hearing despite prior intimation and an unsigned written submission was received by CIC from the O/o the Collector Land Acquisition I&FC Department, Srinagar vide letter dated 13.06.2022 wherein it was stated that the information was already provided to the Appellant on 14.01.2019. The CIC noted that a note ostensibly expressing satisfaction has been received by the respondent from a representative of Dr. Fayaz Ahmad on 11.06.2022, the factual veracity of which was not established. The CIC observed that as per available record, the order of the SIC, J&K has not been complied with till date since the statement of the compensation paid to each farmer/ land owner whose land has been acquired by the department has not been provided. Furthermore, the written submission given by the Respondent is unsigned and does not mention the name of the officer signing it. Holding that due to the absence of the Respondent, the proceeding before it is vitiated, the CIC issued show cause notice to the Collector, Land Acquisition I&FC Department, Srinagar to show cause why penal action should not be taken against him for not providing complete information to the Appellant and for not complying with the order of the SIC, J&K.
Comments
Not following the orders of the Information can lead to imposition of penalty on the concerned public information officer.
Citation: Dr. Fayaz Ahmad Bhat v. O/o Collector Land Acquisition, Irrigation & Flood Control Dept., Rajbagh, Srinagar in Second Appeal No. CIC/UTOJK/A/2020/114941, Date of Decision: 17.06.2022
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is an expert on RTI matters and has co-authored the books RIGHT TO INFORMATION - LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Apart from her weekly article here, her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at the link: www.rtifoundationofindia.com
Forum SC upholds prevention of money laundering Act
The Supreme Court has ratified and upheld all the clauses of Prevention of Money Laundering Act -PMLA which is as it should be as economic offences should be treated on par with treason. However, what is intriguing is that though it is named as the prevention of money laundering act, it has not been able to do that at all. Whatever action-raid, search, seizure, arrest, investigation, or trial are taking place after the event. The government will do well to address this issue-prevention. For a start, why not consider the following: 1. make it cumbersome and difficult to hoard so much cash by withdrawing 2000 and 500 rupee notes over a period of time and limit currency to 100 rupee notes. By restricting cash supply people will be forced to resort to bank transactions. 2. Put an expiry date-say three years on currency notes which will force hoarders to come to a bank sooner or later. These suggestions may sound simplistic but are surely worth a try rather than a protracted trial after the event and poor record of convictions. Will netas, babus, and businessmen -the largest perpetrators and beneficiaries of money laundering- bite the bullet?
Raghavan