Whispers Forum

DEBATE (1)
I don't buy this theory. I am of the view that there are numbers of Chief Ministers who fared well being married in this country.
Priyanka Agarwal
CBIC violating Transfer - Posting Policy
CBIC has not been transferring officers out of station for the last two years, may be due to corona. The officers of Batches 2008 onwards are posted in the same stations for the last 13 to 14 years. Officers who have joined as AC in 2008 are JCs now and on Jan 1, 2022 will become Addl. Commissioners, are continuing in the same stations, specially big metro cities, for last 13 to 14 years. Some have managed postings in Directorates, so that their tenure in that particular metro city is exempted, so that they may remain posted in the same metro after their tenure in Directorates is over. This is very dangerous situation, which is breeding corruption. It is high time PMO, FM and Revenue Secretary, look into this issue and nip this corruption, which is being done by CBIC, in violation of Transfer - Posting Policy.
Virendra Kushwaha

The applicant sought copies of marks awarded in different levels of examination to the appellant and other candidates, by each Member of the Recruitment Board constituted for recruitment to the post of Primary Teacher at Air Force School, Sarsawa. The applicant submitted that all the schools of Air Force are built on the land allotted to the Air Force Complex which is government land and in addition, the building for these schools is also being constructed by the Air Force with the government funds received from the Defence budget allocated to the Indian Air Force. The PIO submitted that the information sought by the appellant pertains to Air Force School, Sarsawa. Air Force Schools are run under the aegis of “The Indian Air Force Educational and Cultural Society” and do not fall under the term “Public Authority”. It is a non-public fund venture and does not fall under the definition of public authority as per Sec 2(h) of the RTI Act. The CIC held that the AFS Sarsawa is not a public authority u/s 2(h) of the RTI Act. The PIO was asked whether they can obtain any information from the custodian to which he submitted that they work in ex-officio capacity and will not be able to access information. In view of the same the Commission is not able to provide any relief.
Comments
In the case of Union of India and another v. Chotelal and Others on 8.12.1998, the Supreme Court observed that in view of the characters of the Regimental Fund, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the said fund cannot be held to be public fund by any stretch of imagination.
Citation: Priyanka Taneja v. Indian Air Force in File no.: CIC/IAIRF/A/2020/108465, Date of Decision: 01/11/2021
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

Information about upgradation of empanelment was sought including copy of the internal files, part files and any other note sheets or other relevant documents. The FAA denied the information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act. The CIC observed that the most pertinent questions which require adjudication in this case are: i) list of independent experts on the Committee and ii) comments of each expert committee member. The CIC further observed FAA’s order suffered from mis-application of the provision of Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and hence was set aside. Referring to the decisions of the Apex Court wherein disclosure of such details have been specifically denied invoking Section 8(1)(g) of the RTI Act, the CIC noted that the pleadings fail to indicate as to how disclosure of the list of members of the Committee and their comments could serve larger public interest. The CIC declined to disclose the information..
Comments
In the cases of i) Kerala Public Service Commission v. SIC & Ors. and ii) Bihar Public Service Commission v. Saiyed Hussain Abbas Rizwi, disclosure of information about examiners/ independent experts of the Committee or comments of the said members was denied.
Citation: Dr. Kumud Diwan v. Indian Council for Cultural Relations in Second Appeal No. CIC/ICCRL/A/2019/153496, Date of Decision : 02.11.2021
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