Whispers Forum

The most dangerous trend in a democracy is that as soon as any political party takes over either in a State or at the Centre, there is a reshuffling of bureaucrats on a mass scale. Are these bureaucrats inefficient or were they working as workers of a particular party? Legislators are non-permanent whereas the civil servants are permanent. Is it not unconstitutional practice in the sense that there is a separation of power between the three pillars of democracy, i.e., the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary? Transfer of a civil servant in a normal course is justifiable, otherwise not. This is a clear indication that the bureaucracy, which is required to be non-partisan, is made party-tools.
Zile Singh
CGHS can be improved
The trajectory of a beneficiary in the CGHS is more complex than that of Black money. It is a case study in harassment of people: beneficiaries and doctors! Patient and doctor time is wasted in an exercise that can be drastically cut straightaway. When the specialist prescribes medicines, the doctor in the dispensary writes again before issuing medicines, whereas that part of the exercise can be cut by single specialist prescription which connects the patient to his/her card number through computer. Even the medicine can be issued from the RML/SJH like facilities rather than making patients run to the dispensary, file the prescription and make another visit for medicines (worth less than even 100 rupee or so). Tests can also be conducted at the facility itself (Arvind is quietly stealing the show- Mohalla clinics giving CGHS a healthy competition- tests, consultation and medicines in the Mohalla itself rather than distanced locations. A free service against paid service to CGHS beneficiaries).
M L Gupta

It has been pointed out in Forum that Indian embassies do not care for NRIs though few of the 150 embassies have any substantive work to keep them busy. The fault lies not with the Ambassadors but with the Prime Minister. Vajpayee reversed Congress policy of treating NRIs as renegades and his government treated them as a resource by creating a Ministry for Overseas Indians. Modi abolished the Ministry and the work of Overseas Indian was given to an officer of Ministry of External Affairs who looks after consular affairs. Foreign countries can hardly be expected to respect India when India does not take care of its own citizens living in those countries. Hopefully, the next Prime Minister will reestablish the Ministry abolished by Modi.
Prof N C Saxena
Diluting the credibility of Whispers
While Whispers is indeed a very popular and useful window to happenings in the corridors of Government machinery, one observes that this particular column betrays political leanings, even if unintentionally. True journalism should be objective, and if at all biased, it should be critical of the Government of the day, which undoubtedly and invariably be deficient in some respect of the other. That one particular individual and his party are always right cannot be a valid axiom, anywhere. To that extent, despite disclaimers, this column tends to dilute the credibility of Whispers. One would expect the author to become more balanced.
R Kash

Appellant submitted before the CIC that he has not received any reply from the CPIO or the FAA till date regarding his query about the ownership of a particular land. In response to a show cause notice for imposition of penalty, the PIO regretted that the RTI Application dated 31.03.2017 was not replied to. He further submitted that later, Appellant filed a RTI another RTI Application dated 02.02.2018 wherein he sought information which is covered in the information sought in RTI Application dated 31.03.2017 also. A reply dated 28.02.2018 was sent to the Appellant asking him to inspect documents and take copies as required. The PIO prayed that the show-cause proceedings may be dropped as there was no malafide intention in the failure to provide a reply on the RTI Application dated 31.03.2017 within the stipulated time frame. The CIC observed that the facts of the case reflect very poorly on the lack of rationality of the PIO even as malafide intention is not evinced. The CIC dropped the show-cause proceedings with a severe warning to the PIO to remain careful in future.
Comments
All the PIO’s should remember that each RTI Application has to be dealt as per the provisions of RTI Act. Merely on a belief that two very distinct RTI Applications seek similar information,a PIO cannot absolve himself from the statutory duty of replying to one of the RTI Applications within the stipulated time frame of RTI Act. Reply to one RTI Application cannot take care of the other even if the information is similar.
Citation: Kartik B Joshi v. CPIO O/o Cantonment Board, Devlali Cantt in Adjunct Decision File No. : CIC/IARMY/A/2017/155555/SD/Adjunct, Date : 26/12/2018
Dr. Anuradha Verma (dranuradhaverma@yahoo.co.in) is the co-author of the books: RIGHT TO INFORMATION – LAW AND PRACTICE and PIO’s guide to RTI. Her other articles can be read at the website of RTI Foundation of India at http://www.rtifoundationofindia.com/
Citation: Mr. Shiv Kirti Singh v. CPIO M/o. Finance in Complaint No. CIC/BS/C/2015/000189-BJ, Dept. of Revenue CBDT, Date of Decision: 17.04.2017, 29.11.2018