Whispers Forum

The whole system of compassionate appointment has become farcical. The family of the poor person who has given his service and life for the government is helpless with very few to care for him. If an independent audit is done, it would be clear that only a handful is able to get the benefit of compassionate appointment. Those who are waiting are in a large number and no one is able to say when the appointment would be done. At least the CIC should have come to the rescue of the person and directed to disclose the norms for appointment on compassionate grounds or the time period for it. If there is no time period, even saying so and asking for framing of time frame could have been useful. Let there be pride in the orders of the Information Commission.
Shashi Nigam

I agree with Nidhi Jain's ‘New low of Media reporting’ (WIC dt April 17). The media is largely responsible for the mess the country is in today. What about the self-regulatory watchdogs like the Press Council of India and the Editors' Guild of India, mandated to protect press freedom? Did these bodies take any action against the muzzling of press? Toothless tigers. A majority of journos owe allegiance to their political masters. The Media ,both digital and print, is controlled by the business tycoons , who, in turn, are controlled by politicians supporting different ideologies. One wonders how could the journalists report against the media barons and the politicos, who control them ? All TV anchors read scripted speeches, ghost-written by those who are close to the power that be. Free, fair and independent Press is an anachronism.
A K Saxena (A former civil servant)

The Appellant sought information with regard to his applications for appointment on compassionate grounds. The CIC observed that the query of the appellant viz. “As to when the appellant will be offered appointment on compassionate grounds” is futuristic and hypothetical. Regarding the query whether the appellant is eligible for appointment on compassionate grounds, the CIC observed that the same is interrogative in nature and therefore, the queries are not covered under Section-2(f) of the RTI Act, 2005.
Comments
Whenever an application is received, a PIO should examine whether it seeks “information” as defined under section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The responsibility of a PIO is limited to providing what is covered under the term information.
Citation: Nandkishor Gohe v. Military Engineer Service, File no.: CIC/IAIRF/A/2022/117292; 06/04/2023
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

The Supreme Court has made it mandatory for all courts to follow its guidelines on following the sealed cover procedure. This is a landmark judgment. Good for democracy and a rap on the knuckles of all autocracies. The top court has observed that non-compliance of guidelines would perpetuate the culture of opaqueness and secrecy. Successive governments at the centre and states, have been submitting the desired information before the courts in sealed covers, strictly for the eye of the Bench. Reason: National security. Similar sealed cover procedure is used by the bureaucracy in public administration aspects like appointments, promotion, termination of service, vigilance matters, disciplinary cases etc. The opaque approach harms the interests of the affected parties in defending their cases effectively due to sealed cover information, to which they have no access. There is another fall out effect while implementing the RTI Act. It is common knowledge that the information sought under the RTI Act, more often than not, is withheld by the Public Information Officers (PIOs) on simplistic ground: breach of National security. While the Supreme Court is making all out efforts to make its proceedings transparent by making available transcripts of its live proceedings. The sealed cover procedure should not be allowed by courts unless they are convinced of the sensitivity of withheld information from the national security angle. Incidentally, it is as much damaging to the interests of aggrieved parties as the practice of giving unreasonable judgments by the subordinate judiciary. The top court is urged to look into it.
A K Saxena (A former civil servant)

The appellant has sought the following information with regard to sanction of family pension in respect of Late Sh. Roop Narayan Jha. The PIO replied seeking certain documents which were not provided by the appellant who preferred to file a second appeal. The CIC observed that the appellant shall submit the documents proving his relationship with the deceased as well as the legal heir proof of him and his father to justify the entitlement to receive information. On receipt of the requisite documents, the PIO shall send a suitable reply to the appellant.
Comments
On the demise of an individual, the information relating to him still remains private and only the legal heirs are entitled to obtain the information.
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