Whispers Forum

Sonia Gandhi Rahul Gandhi Priyanka Gandhi has to retire from politics. Then only congress can survive.
M N Jagsu
Posting in CIC
It's good that he has made a decision for posting in CIC, whether his man or others, but it is his responsibility to make them work for the benefit of the common man so that the lost glory of CIC can be brought back. It's a shame that no representatives from DDA or RCS attend the hearings of the CIC and do not execute the CIC's orders. If this continues, then the CIC should be closed. Even corporations like ONGC are least bothered by RTIs and thus CIC.
Vishnu Agrawal

Hard work of BJP karyakartas and RSS in Trivandrum over decades finally bore fruit !
R Krishna
Thiruvananthapuram is becoming BJP's fort
No Shashi Tharoor himself knows that Thiruvananthapuram is becoming BJP's fort so he started shifting towards BJP to confirm his 2029 Lok Sabha seat from Thiruvananthapuram and can also become a central minister .
M G Snu
Sreelekha will work towards transformation of Tiruvananthapuram
I hope R Sreelekha will work towards transformation of Tiruvananthapuram city and make it world class. Wish her all the best and congratulations to her.
Roshan

A husband sought for the current balance of PPF account and last amount deposit of his wife enclosing the copy of marriage certificate as the evidence of marriage. The PIO denied the information under section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act. Before the CIC, the PIO explained that as per the procedure under Section 11 of the RTI Act, the consent from the concerned third-party and wife of the appellant was sought. However, she had declined consent for disclosure of information relating to her PPF account. The CIC noted that there is no public interest and rejected the appeal.
Comments
Many couples feel that they have a right to seek information about their spouse from a government agency. Legally, husband and wife are distinct individuals and the information relating to each of them has to be considered personal to each one of them.
Citation: Vipin Mittal v. Department of Post, Second Appeal No. CIC/POSTS/A/2024/645016; Date of Decision: 14.10.2025
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Vishakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books PIO’s Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. Her weekly article is being published since 2008 on this site. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and third party audit to individuals / organisations. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation at the link https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com

TOI 12th Dec 25 carried a story titled Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam finds its way into textbooks. The council seems to be hurt by its inclusion in text book. The write up based on an official statement is misleading. Vasudhaiv Kutumbakam has been narrowly interpreted to mean “welcoming and nurturing diverse communities”. Diverse communities are strange to Hindu India, when the scholars wrote the text in Upanishads and Sanhitas. Vashudha is planet Earth, a part of the Shrishti (Creation). This planet belongs to all species, elaborated in the texts and does not refer to communities. Communities are different from species. One illustration, indicative but not comprehensive, is Janmejaya’s Naagyagya, akin to modern nuclear war and climate change or pollution etc. Scholars must not allow such liberties go unchallenged in public interest and interest of humanity and this planet Earth.
M L Gupta

The Indigo has taken the entire country for a ride and no concrete action is being taken against them. Nothing seems to be happening on the ground. A classic case of mis-management by a private airline causing widespread dissatisfaction to lakhs of citizens-largely Indian but also foreigners.India’s image has been badly hit.
The government has ordered 10% reduction of Indigo flights with the resultant business to be apportioned among other airlines.But,is that enough considering the degree of culpability of criminal negligence ?
Did the DGCA as the regulatory authority not know about the impending disaster,especially the demerits of building a monopoly situation by way of higher prices,reduced choice, inadequate services for passengers due to lack of competitive pressure?
Perhaps,this single “monopoly”factor made the airline so arrogant that they treated travellers as “customers or commodities ”,not passengers.Profit was their sole motive.Passengers have a sense of ownership.This is not acceptable to them.
Should the case not be covered under the Consumer Protection Act? Refund is being talked about.Why should Indigo not give compensation for causing widespread hardships to thousands of suffering passengers who are feeling cheated,misled and financially wronged.Let the compensation be 3 to 4 times the refund amount.
Also, most importantly,in order to remove monopoly/duopoly, why not introduce more private players for providing better services at competitive prices? What is the role of the competition commission of India in investigating abuse of dominance and protecting consumers’ interests.? It is a wake-up call.
A K Saxena (Former civil servant)

The IndiGo fiasco is a live example of what happens when a single company is allowed to have disproportionate power or dominance. IndiGo controls something around 65% of the domestic air-travel market. The problem isn’t only about aviation alone. It could be true for sectors such as telecom, ports, retail, logistics and so on.
When dominance becomes monopoly-like, and regulation/oversight remains weak — that’s when danger begins. Power dynamics tilt when a single firm dominates and public interest gets compromised. Consumers become vulnerable, infrastructure and services become stressful sending shocks ripple widely.
The example of IndiGo is real and immediate and dangerous. The impacts cause systemic disruption, hurting ordinary people and threatening fairness.
No wonder, healthy competition is vital for innovation, better pricing and quality.
What remains to be seen is will the government learn and take necessary steps from the IndiGo pitfalls?
Tyaga Roy

A “did not go airline”, “we, not the ordinary people”, “India’s flying public”, “taxi drivers going hungry for days”, “loss of millions of hours wages for the gig workers”, “price of voters’ choice to weaken a functioning government”, “failed bureaucracy”, “regime change attempts”, “business disruption”, “ causing public inconvenience nonchalantly”, “politicians bargaining for aviation portfolio”, “ bureaucratic hankering for top posts”: end result failures galore! Indigo was no accidental occurrence, it had been brewing for days, yet no preventive measures were taken. Is that how a minister manages the ministry? Is this how a Secretary runs his ministry? Had the airline been monitored rightly, not even an hour’s disruption could have taken place. Unfortunate and ominous!
M L Gupta

Finance Minister announced that Customs is her next target for "Simplification"
Officers have suggested that it must start with divesting powers of Revenue Secretary in Personnel matters of CBIC.
3 posts of Members are lying vacant
A Chief Commissioner is holding charge of DGDRI a post meant for Pr CC!! Reason? No DPC!
Posts of Chief Commissioners are lying vacant because Revenue Secretary was stopped at UPSC gate for 'verification' FM ought have moved to shift both CBIC/CBDT from the Revenue Department.
I wonder when did Ms Nirmala Settharaman last review personnel management of CBIC/CBDT.
I retired years back.
But the Stranglehold on postings by the Revenue Secretary obviously speaks of a "Nexus".
Absolute Power Corrupts!!
Ajay Agnihotri

The Appellant filed an application seeking information whether it is mandatory to have SEBI Registered License with person or company who teaching about stock market and whether SEBI takes Complaint against stock market educator person or company who is Non Registered with SEBI. The PIO replied that it cannot be construed as "information", as defined u/s 2(f) of the RTI Act as it is in the nature of seeking clarification. The CIC observed that outstretching the interpretation of Section 2(f) of the RTI Act to include deductions and inferences to be drawn by the CPIO is unwarranted and upheld that reply provided by the PIO.
Comments
Under Section 6 of the RTI Act, an applicant is entitled to get only such information which can be accessed by the public authority under any other law for the time being in force. A public authority is not required to furnish information which require drawing of inferences and/or making of assumptions. It is also not required to provide `advice' or `opinion' to an applicant, nor required to obtain and furnish any `opinion' or `advice' to an applicant. The reference to `opinion' or `advice' in the definition of `information' in section 2(f) of the Act, only refers to such material available in the records of the public authority. Further, many public authorities provide advice, guidance and opinion to the citizens as a public relation exercise. But the same is purely voluntary and should not be confused with any obligation under the RTI Act.
Citation: Akshay Vasani v. Securities And Exchange Board of India, Second Appeal No. CIC/SEBIH/A/2024/644498; Date of Decision: 31.10.2025
Dr Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is a RTI Consultant currently working with IIM Vishakhapatnam. She has co-authored the books PIO’s Guide to RTI and Right to Information – Law and Practice. Her weekly article is being published since 2008 on this site. She offers consultancy on RTI matters and third party audit to individuals / organisations. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation at the link https://www.rtifoundationofindia.com