SOS e - Clarion Of Dalit

IT IS A FORUM TOWARDS PROTECTING THE CIVIL , HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE OPPRESSED - DALITS , MINORITIES & TRIBALS.The Criminal - Police - Politician - Judge - Criminals Nexus is trying to silence me in many ways. If anything untoward happens to me or to my dependents CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA together with jurisdictional police & District Magistrate will be responsible for it. Secure Mail : Naag@torbox3uiot6wchz.onion

Sunday, January 17, 2010

RTI & Violation of Dalit Rights

S.O.S e - Voice For Justice

Search this site

Recent site activity

edited by nagaraj mysore raghupathi
edited by nagaraj mysore raghupathi
edited by nagaraj mysore raghupathi
edited by nagaraj mysore raghupathi
edited by nagaraj mysore raghupathi

RTI & Violation of  Dalit  Rights

S.O.S - e - Clarion Of Dalit - Weekly Newspaper On Web

Working For The Rights & Survival Of The Oppressed

Editor: NAGARAJ.M.R… VOL.4 issue. 4… 27/01/2010

"There is a higher court than the court of justice and that is the court of conscience It supercedes all other courts. "
- Mahatma Gandhi


Your Excellency,

The Cabinet (Government of India) has approved the proposed amendment in the Right to Information Act, 2005 in the name of ambiguity in the law and to put the 'File Notings' and 'How a decisions were
arrived' out of the preview of the RTI Act, in spite of the fact that
law in clear terms defined the exemptions from disclosures which would
impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of
offenders, endanger the life or physical safety or any person or would
identify the source of information or assistance given in confidence
for law enforcement or security purposes, to balance the rights of
liberty as against the duty to protect the security of State, public
order, decency or morality or incitement to an offence which are
protected under Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India.

Hon'ble Chief Justice of India Mr. Y. K. Sabharwal pointed out that
"the 'Public Accountability' is a facet of administrative
efficiency. Publicity of information serves as an instrument for the
oversight of citizens. By the same token it suggests that law could
become a means for fighting corruption. Therefore, a Government which
produces a trustworthy flow of information creates greater certainty
and transparency. This is especially appreciated by those who intend
invest in the Country. International experience shows that countries
that allow citizens access to public information have seen a reduction
in indicators of corruption and, consequently, substantial increases
administrative efficiency. 'Public Accountability' is a part of
governance. It is the Government that is accountable to the public for
delivering a broad set of outcomes but more importantly it is the
public service consisting of public servants that constitutes the
delivery mechanism. Therefore, the accountability and governance
arrangements between Government which acts as the principal and the
public service which is its agent, impact on the Government's ability
to deliver and on its accountability to the public. The challenge lies
in ensuring that the public service is geared to meet the expectations
of the Government of the day and that public service is neutral,
whichever party is in power. When a Government department translates a
Government's policy into programmes, the success of that translation
is very much dependent on a clear understanding of and commitment to
the outcomes that are sought. It is not surprising that the history of
accountability and governance within the public service has shifted
from measuring "inputs" to measuring "outputs", to matching
outputs, and identify outcomes. The key which weakens accountability
the effectiveness of the Government or the public sector is the lack

Government should admit that the 'File Notings' and 'How a
decisions were arrived' are important part of the Information which
need to be disclosed to the governed.

The decision of the Government to amend the law is result of strong
lobbying from the Politicians and Bureaucrats, who feels uneasiness
under fear for the disclosure of their way of working at the cost of
larger public Interests and to weaken the accountability or the
effectiveness of the Government or the public sector. The decision is
dead against the fundamental right flowing from Art. 19(1)(a) of the
Constitution to know about Administrative Efficiency, Public
Accountability and Constitutional Governance in democratic India which
requires an informed citizenry and transparence in information which
are vital to its functioning and also to contain corruption and to
governments and their instrumentalities accountable to the governed.

Therefore, this is humble request to His Excellency to sent a message
to the Government to withdraw its aforesaid decision in favour of
amendment in RTI Act, 2005. The decision of the Government to amend
RTI Act, 2005 is undemocratic and unconstitutional. Therefore Your
Excellency the Guardian of the Constitution as well as the Fundamental
Rights of the Citizens should act promptly to restrain the Government
from any further move to curtail the fundamental rights of the

Jai Hind. Vande Mataram.

your's sincerely,
nagaraj .M.R.

By An Indian Citizen

The cabinet has reportedly approved far-reaching amendments to the
Right to Information Act, 2005, which among other things seeks to
restrict access to "file notings" and allow access to only
notings relating to social and developmental issues".

File notings are recordings of the views and reasons given by various
officials for or against any proposed decision. Access to 'file
notings' under the RTI Act has to be viewed in the context of the
constitutional guarantee of the 'right to know' or the 'right to
information' available under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of

It is settled that the 'right to information', implicit under Article
19(1) (a) is an untrammelled constitutional guarantee, subject only to
the 'reasonable restrictions' validly imposed by legislation under
Article 19(2), which allows on the right in the interest of "the
sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the state,
relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, or
relation to contempt of court, defamation and incitement to an

Any restriction imposed on the people's 'right to information' by the
RTI Act must fall within the ambit of Article 19(2). Section 8 of the
RTI Act already allows restriction of the right to information in the
interest of all the factors mentioned in Article 19(2).

As held by the Supreme Court, unreasonableness of the restriction
imposed on this right is to be determined by the courts. RTI Act is
intended to operationalise this existing right and to impose only the
permissible 'reasonable restrictions' under Article 19(2).

The proposed amendment must be tested in this jurisprudential context.
The scheme in Article 19(2) is clear. It specifies the heads in the
interests of which alone 'reasonable restriction' can be imposed by

It does not permit an omnibus restriction permitting the right to
information only under a few specified heads. It is the permissible
exclusion, and not permission which needs valid legislation.

Permission or the right is guaranteed unless restricted by a valid
This is the first infirmity in the proposed amendment. There is a
greater infirmity in the restriction proposed on disclosure of file

It is well settled that all state actions must conform to the rule of
non-arbitrariness to satisfy the requirement of Article 14. All
decisions must be based on a discernible principle, and cogent

A reasoned order or decision is assurance against nepotism,
arbitrariness and corruption. Reasons provide an internal check
arbitrariness in decision-making.

Mere information of the decision without disclosure of the reasons for
it and the decision-making process is not enough to permit scrutiny of
the decision made.

The very purpose of the 'right to information' would be frustrated
without the knowledge of the 'reasons' for the decision, emerging from
the file notings.
 Except for information which can, or needs to be withheld in the
interests of the specified heads under Article 19(2), there is no
authority to permit exclusion of the remaining information in the form
of 'file notings' or otherwise.

The stated apprehension that disclosure of all file notings would
honest persons involved in the process from expressing their candid
opinion is misconceived. The fact is the opposite.

Assurance of public scrutiny or transparency in government business
will motivate the honest to be candid in the expression of their views
in writing, and it will deter others from not acting honestly for fear
of exposure.

Transparency or openness is an accepted principle of democracy and
governance. American judge Louis Brandeis had said: "Sunlight is the
best disinfectant, and electricity is the best policeman".

The 'Seven Principles of Public Life' indicated in the Lord Nolan
Committee's Report on Standards in Public Life, include objectivity,
accountability and openness which have been set out in the following
terms: Objectivity: In carrying out public business, including making
public appointments, awarding contracts, or recommending individuals
for rewards and benefits, holders of public office should make choices
on merit.

Accountability: Holders of public office are accountable for their
decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to
whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.

Openness: Holders of public office should be as open as possible about
all their decisions and actions. They should give reasons for their
decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest
clearly demands the same.

After all, public power is derived from 'We the People of India...'
exercise must be subject to legitimate scrutiny by the people, who are
the source of that power.

The people have a participatory role in a republican democracy as they
are "the keepers of the Constitution" (to borrow the expression from
Joseph Storey's exhortation to the American people).

The only reasonable restrictions on the people's plenary power of
to information can be those imposed by a valid law relating to the
limited heads specified in Article 19(2).

Omnibus exclusion of file notings relating to all heads except
'development and social issues' is impermissible under the

Failure of RTI Act in India
       In the clutches of corrupt public servants mafia

In the courts of law , every statement to be valid must be supported
by evidences. That too, the statements of public servants / government
officials & their reports in government records are considered as
sacrosanct , the ultimate gospel truth by courts of law.

The corruption has spread it's  tentacles  far & wide in the public
service. The bribe booty is shared by lower to higher officials. If an
official is complained against , his higher official conducts a formal
investigation & reports in the record that lower official is not

The vigilance authorities / Karnataka lokayukta has recently raided on
police , tax officials & seized illegal wealth amounting to crores of
rupees. Take the recent case where in senior IPS officer ,
superintendent of police chamarajanagar , mr.srikantappa was arrested
by Karnataka lokayukta. The victims spoke to media that he used to
threaten them with false cases. In this way , how many victims /
innocents were arrested & tortured by his arrest warrants ? how many
innocents suffered in false cases ? how many rich criminals got scot
free , by srikantappa's filing of B reports leading to closure of
cases ?

In the past how many suffered by srikantappa's actions ? has the court
subjected to review all the previous actions of srikantappa throught
his corrupt career ? if not , why ?

The courts of law has taken the official reports , records of
mr.srikantappa as gospel truth & indirectly aided rich criminals &
harmed innocents. It is the same case with respect to reports of all
government officials � police , labour , tax , etc.  the rich
criminals buy out  government officials & make them write favourable
report about themselves. Whereas the poor , innocents suffer from
adverse reports & injustices. The courts of law takes the government
records at it's face value & meat out injustices to the poor ,
innocents while aiding the rich criminals.

When a commoner requests for information as per RTI Act , the
government officials either give incomplete information , false
information or decline to give information under one pretext or the
other. The officials are damn sure that the truthful information  will
be detrimental to themselves  & will be  taken as evidence against
themselves in the courts of law. So information , truth is not given.
Even information commissions are failing here. Thereby, the public are
denied to seek justice in the courts of law , by lack of evidences.

The courts of law before accepting the records of government
officials , must subject it to a "test of truth". When a government
report is contested against , a fact finding team comprising members
of public , complainant , respondent & the court , must check it out
at the ground level. Orelse when a complainant says that the report of
a government official � police , labour , tax , etc as false that
government official must be subjected to lie detector test , narco-
analysis, ertc by court of law. The questionnaire ie the questions to
be asked during the scientific test are to be prepared with feedback
from both complainant & respondent's side. In that way , impartially
truth can be found out. After all , the objective of courts of law is
"Quest for Truth", not just giving out judgements based on reports of
corrupt officials.

Nowadays , we are even seeing reports of corruption among the
judiciary itself. If a complaint against a judge is made out that a
level ground is not provided to put up one's case in the court or
cross examination of one party is not allowed or lie detector test /
narco analysis of one party is not allowed ( in turn taking the lies
of that party as truth ), the judge making a varied interpretation of
law, the judge not safe guarding the health & life of the complainant
in the custody of police leading to 3rd degree torture of complainant
by police , etc, in all such cases the supreme court of India must
change the presiding judge of such cases , the cases must be
thoroughly reviewed & the guilty judge must be subjected to narco-
analysis , lie detector test , etc & legally prosecuted. In this back
drop , accountability of police & judges to the public ie citizens of
India � kings of democracy , is a must. After all , the kings of
democracy / citizens of India / taxpayers  are the paymasters of all
public servants.

We at e � voice of human rights of watch have utmost respect for the
judiciary & all government institutions. It is the corrupt few in
those institutions who are themselves bringing disgrace to the august
institutions they occupy , by their corrupt deeds. The saving grace is
that still honest few are left in public service & it is an appeal to
them , to legally prosecute their corrupt colleagues.

In India , the private enterprises are the wealth creators of our
economy. However , some private enterprises are violating labour
laws , tax laws , human rights & fundamental rights of people. In turn
harming the public , looting the tax dues. This is creating black
money causing various social evils in the society. These huge private
enterprises take loans from public sector banks ie take public's money
as loans , collect money from public in the form of shares ,
debentures , sell their product to the public. Still , they are not
covered by RTI Act, they don't give truthful information to the public
nor allow public inspection of their sites , why ? they buy out
concerned government officials & gets them to write favourable report
about themselves. There are wide differences between the ground
reality & these government reports. If the aggrieved person , victim
of injustices meated out by these private enterprises , tries to
legally seek justice, these criminal private enterprises buy out
police , concerned officials & fixes up the victim in false cases. The
police in total disregard to law violates the human rights &
fundamental rights of the victim in custody , subjects the victim to
3rd degree torture in custody. The presiding judge of the case doesn't
safe guard the rights , health , life of victims in custody. The judge
doesn't check out the truthfulness of government reports & passes on
judgement making varied interpretation of just remember the case of
"local citizens vs coca cola company" in plachimada , kerala.

Is it not right & just in such cases , to subject the presiding
judge , police , concerned government officialds & most importantly
key officials of that criminal private enterprise to lie detector ,
narco- analysis tests , to know the truth ? is it not right to conduct
the inspection of alleged site , review of all company's records , by
a team comprising of members from public , court , complainant &
respondent ?

Some of these criminal enterprises threaten to finish off the poor
victims . as these company's have money power they can buy out
rowdies , police & capable of doing anything. In such cases , if
anything untoward happens to the victim or his family , are not the
officials of such criminal enterprise liable to pay compensation to
the victims's family or survivors ?

In India , do we truly have democracy & freedom ? is this corrupt
India � what our freedom fighters dreamt of & fought for ?

Use RTI Act to curb corruption

In this article we have talked about the RTI (Right to Information)
act. This act, has given the people, the power to CHANGE the country.
The RTI act has made the inner working of the Govt. transparent! If
YOU, the average citizen learns to use this act, YOU can change the

In this article, we have told you everything that you need to know
about the RTI Act, how you can use it, how it affects you etc! Even if
you know nothing about “politics” or “laws” do not worry. This article
is written in a very simple and easy to understand way keeping the lay
man in mind.

If you think that the RTI Act does not affect you, "YOU ARE WRONG!"
If you are a citizen of Indian, the RTI Act has given you a lot of
power that you can and must use.

For example, next time you ask for a “phone line” or a “water
connection”, if you use the RTI Act, you can get your work done
quickly. You will not have to make 15 trips to the Govt. offices and
bribe and beg the officials to get your work done. RTI has changed all
that. Though this article we will show you how to use RTI, to get your
work done!

Are the roads outside your house terrible, RTI will help you solve the
problem. Is there a problem of un-hygiene in your area, RTI will help
you solve your problem.

If you are young and cannot appreciate all the above points, then
believe us that sooner or later you will have to go and get some of
your work done though Govt. offices. When you do, you will appreciate
the power RTI. But, by then it will be too late.

Why? Because there is talk about RTI being changed so that the power
is taken away from the people. In this article we have showed you how
you can fight this and support RTI.

Basically, if you are an Indian, YOU MUST read this! Not only that, do
tell as many people as you can to also read this. Do this for your
Now, in the next section we shall try to understand what the RTI Act
is all about...

The Government of India always lays emphasis on making the lives of its citizens easy, smooth and making India truly democratic and keeping this in mind the RTI Act has been established.
RTI stands for Right To Information and has been given the status of a fundamental right under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. Article 19 (1) under which every citizen has freedom of speech and expression and have the right to know how the government works, what role does it play, what are its functions and so on.
The Act confers right to the citizens to know as to how the taxpayers money is being spent by the Government.


In a major boost to transparency in judiciary, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday ruled for the second time in four months that the office of the Chief Justice of India was covered by the Right to Information Act.
Also, the court said, Right to Information was a Fundamental Right.
“The higher the judge is placed in the judicial hierarchy, the greater the standard of accountability and the stricter the scrutiny of accountability of such mechanism,” said a high court Bench.Any Indian can, therefore, demand to know how much CJI K G Balakrishnan earns every month, how much he holds in assets, why a certain judge was appointed and what was being done about complaints against judges.
In short, the highest judicial office in the land was open to public scrutiny. The Prime Minister and the President were already covered by the Act.
Balakrishnan had openly opposed it and the Supreme Court had appealed against a September 2009 order of the High Court bringing his office under RTI.
The Supreme Court has not given up yet. It is likely to challenge the high court’s order, this time before itself, said Supreme Court officials.
But on Tuesday, the office of the Chief Justice of India stood stripped of secrecy.
“The higher the judge is placed in the judicial hierarchy, the greater the standard of accountability and the stricter the scrutiny of accountability of such mechanism,” said a high court Bench comprising Chief Justice AP Shah, Justice S Muralidhar and Justice Vikramjit Sen.
“Democracy expects openness and openness is concomitant of free society. Sunlight is the best disinfectant,” the court added.
The issue landed in high court following an RTI query by a Delhi resident, SC Aggarwal, on an article published in Hindustan Times on November 7, 2007, that the judiciary was opposing a law requiring judges to declare their assets.
While the Supreme Court dithered, its judges on August 26, 2009 passed a resolution saying they will declare their assets. But lawyers representing the top court argued that whether the CJI came under the RTI law was not yet decided.
Twenty-two judges of the Supreme Court passed that resolution.
The high court on Tuesday rejected Attorney General G E Vahanavati’s argument — that the office of the chief justice of India cannot be subjected to public scrutiny — that the judges’ resolution was “informal and non-binding.”


PUNE: Social activist Satish Shetty (39), who had blown the whistle on a series of land scams in and around Talegaon , Lonavala and



Pimpri-Chinchwad near here, was brutally murdered by some unidentified assailants near his residence at Talegaon-Dabhade on Wednesday morning.

Shetty was on his morning walk around 7 am when he was attacked with swords and sharp weapons. He was rushed to hospital but was declared dead on arrival.

An anti-corruption crusader for the last 15 years, Shetty had started wielding the Right to Information Act (RTI) Act to expose the irregularities in government offices since the last five years. His brother, Sandeep (34), told the police in his complaint that Shetty may have been murdered by some persons whom he had exposed. He said his brother had exposed many land scams in and around Talegaon.

Senior police inspector Bhausaheb Andhalkar of the local crime branch, Pune rural, said Shetty had used the RTI Act to expose the setting up of restaurants and marriage halls in residential zones.

The murder shocked citizens and civic activists in Pune and Pimpri-Chinchwad . Traders and shopkeepers in Talegaon-Dabhade pulled down their shutters to protest against the killing.

Shettys murder is a major embarrassment for the police as he had demanded police protection after having received threats to his life (see box).

Shetty had sought police protection
Fearing threats to his life, Satish Shetty had recently applied for police protection. In his application to the police, he had stated that he was receiving threats every day from unidentified persons. Additional superintendent of police Ramnath Pokle confirmed that Shetty had applied for police protection and said, We had decided to provide protection to him. The matter was under process.


Four days after unidentified persons fired outside the south Mumbai house of civic activist Nayana Kathpalia, Right To Information (RTI) activist Satish Shetty was murdered on Wednesday morning in Pune.
Shetty, who led a crusade against illegal land transactions in Pune district’s Lonavla region, lived in Talegaon Dabhade on the old Mumbai-Pune highway, 40 kms from Pune. The 39-year-old was returning from his morning walk on Wednesday when a group of unidentified persons attacked him with sharp weapons.
He sustained serious injuries all over the body. His brother, Sandeep, rushed him to Pawna Hospital at Somatane Phata, where doctors declared him dead on arrival. No arrests had been made until late on Wednesday night.
Sandeep lodged a complaint with Talegaon Dabhade police station saying that his brother had been receiving threatening phone calls for the past few days over a land transaction in Maval taluka (sub-district), on which he had sought information under RTI.
Sandeep, in his complaint, had named a city businessman closely associated with politicians.
Shetty, an activist of Bhrashtacharvirodhi Dakshata Samiti  (anti-corruption vigilance committee), had used the RTI to force the government to take action against several illegal transactions. He was associated with anti-corruption activist Anna Hazare.
Shocked by the murder, RTI activists in Pune decided to meet on Friday to chalk out their next course of action. Vijay Kumbhar of the Surajya Sangharsha Samiti said that RTI activists across the country have been facing threats and the government should take steps to protect them.
Kumbhar said Shetty had exposed private parties that had encroached on government land in Maval and also irregular constructions in and around Lonavla. He said it was because of Shetty’s follow-up that action was taken against the illegal registration of land transactions.
An NGO MITRA [Movement against Intimidation, Threat and Revenge against Activists] has written to Chief Minister Ashok Chavan demanding a Central Bureau of Investigation inquiry into Shetty’s murder.


The City police nabbed a rowdy sheeter in connection with the murder of an RTI activist who had sought information about encroachment on a BBMP land near Jnanabharathi and had also filed an application with the Lokayukta.

Police said Lohith Raj alias TC Raj, 33 years, was arrested in connection with the murder of RTI activist Venkatesh of Eeranapalya.
The murder was executed as Venkatesh had launched a movement to save the BBMP land from the encroachment and had lodged complaints with the police, BBMP and the BDA.
On the fateful night of April this year, Venkatesh was returning home on his bike when he was intercepted and was murdered. To misguide the police, the assailants threw him on the road to make the case look like an accident.  However, the post-mortem report revealed it a case of murder. A hunt was launched for the murderer. The police nabbed Lohith Raj near Bidadi. Lohith Raj is a resident of Veeraiyanapalya. There were  other six warrants against him.

Citizens have right to access file noting under RTI

Appeal No.       ICPB/A-1/CIC/2006
Right to Information Act – Sections 6/18
 Name of Appellant : Satyapal
  Name of Public Authority :  CPIO, TCIL
Decisions appealed against :
            The CPIO, TCIL has declined to supply a copy of a document on the ground that the same forms part of “file Noting” which, according to CPIO is exempt under the RTI Act.  Appellate authority also has confirmed the decision of the CPIO.  The appellant contents that he has the right to seek information contained in the  “File Notings”.
            Shri Satyapal – appellant, a resident of Delhi, applied to the CPIO, TCIL seeking for copies of certain documents by a letter dated 17th October, 2005.  By a letter dated 14th November, 2005, CPIO, TCIL furnished copies of certain documents, however, stating that a particular document sought for was a file noting in the Department of Telecom and as such it was exempt from disclosure.  By a letter dated 17th Nov. 2005, Shri Satyapal again wrote to the CPIO, TCIL pointing out that the information sought for by him did not fall within the ambit of Section 8 of the RTI Act and as such the same should be supplied.  He also brought to the notice of CPIO, TCIL that in respect of information already furnished, a copy of a bill in respect of advertisement relating to independence day 1996 had not been supplied.  By a letter dated 28th Nov. 2005, the CPIO, TCIL while furnishing a copy of the bill, once again reiterated that file notings are exempt from disclosure in terms of the clarification given by the Department of Personnel in their website.  Aggrieved by this decision, Shri Satyapaul preferred an appeal to the appellate authority by a letter dated 14th Dec. 2005 stating that file notings are not exempt from disclosure in terms of Section 8 of the RTI Act.  He followed up the same by letters dated 14th Dec., 31st Dec. 2005 and 5th January, 2006.  The appellate authority by a letter dated 5.1.2006 rejected the appeal stating “The information sought by you pertains to the file notings of the Department of Telecommunication as also that of TCIL.  I am of the view that TCIL is exempted from disclosing the information sought by you under Section 8(1)(d)&(e) of the RTI Act.  UO No.7-17/95-PP dated 4.10.1995 is a part of file notings.  You have mentioned in your appeal that the information has been denied misconstruing it as “file notings” by CPIO, TCIL.  I confirm that these are notings in the file”.  Aggrieved with the decision of the appellate authority, Shri Satyapal has filed this appeal before this Commission.  According to Shri Satyapal, there is no specific exemption from disclosure as far as file notings are concerned in Section 8 of RTI Act.
Commission’s Decision :
            It is seen that while the CPIO declined to furnish the information sought for on the ground that file notings are exempt from disclosure, the appellate authority, without confirming or rejecting the stand of CPIO that file notings are exempt from disclosure, has relied on Section 8(1)(d) and (e) of the RTI Act to deny the information.
            As is evident from the Preamble to the RTI Act, the Act has been enacted to vest with the citizens, the right of access to information under the control of public authorities in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of any public authority.  Conscious of the fact that access to certain information may not be in the public interest, the Act also provides certain exemptions from disclosure.  Whether file notings fall within the exempted class is the issue for consideration.
            Section 2(f) defines information as “Any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinion, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form and information relating to any private body which can be accessed by a public authority under any other law or the time being in force”.
            Section 2(j) reads : “Right to information means the right to information accessible under this Act which is held by or under the control of any public authority and includes the right to (i) inspection of work, documents, records; (ii) taking notes, extracts or certified copies of document or records; (iii) …… (iv) …. “.  In terms of Section 2(i) “Record” includes (a) any documents, manuscript and file;
            In the system of functioning of public authorities, a file is opened for every subject/matter dealt with by the public authority.  While the main file would contain all the materials connected with the subject/matter, generally, each file also has what is known as note sheets, separate from but attached with the main file.  Most of the discussions on the subject/matter are recorded in the note sheets and decisions are mostly based on the recording in the note sheets and even the decisions are recorded on the note sheets.  These recordings are generally known as “file notings”.  Therefore, no file would be complete without note sheets having “file notings”.  In other words, note sheets containing “file notings” are an integral part of a file.  Some times, notings are made on the main file also, which obviously would be a part of the file itself.  In terms of Section 2(i), a record includes a file and in terms of Section 2(j) right to information extends to accessibility to a record.  Thus, a combined reading of Sections 2(f), (i)&(j) would indicate that a citizen has the right of access to a file of which the file notings are an integral part.  If the legislature had intended that “file notings” are to be exempted from disclosure, while defining a “record” or “file” it could have specifically provided so.  Therefore, we are of the firm view, that, in terms of the existing provisions of the RTI Act, a citizen has the right to seek information contained in “file notings” unless the same relates to matters covered under Section 8 of the Act.  Thus, the reliance of the CPIO, TCILO on the web site clarification of the Department of Personnel to deny the information on the basis that ‘file notings’ are exempted, is misplaced.
            However, it is seen from the decision of the appellate authority that he was of the view that TCIL was exempted from disclosing the information sought, under Section 8(1)(d)&(e) of RTI Act.  In terms of Section 8, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen information relating to matters covered under subsections (a) to (j) of that Section.  Section 8(d) exempts information including commercial confidence, trade secrets or intellectual property and Sub section (e) exempts information available to a person in his fiduciary relationship.  Even then, at the discretion of the competent authority even these information could be disclosed if he is of the opinion that public interest so warrants.  From the decision of the appellate authority of TCIL, which is not a speaking one, it is not clear whether the file notings, a copy of which was denied to the appellant, relate to commercial confidence or trade secret or intellectual property or is available to TCIL in its fiduciary relationship.
Direction :
Since we have held that file notings are not, as a matter of law, exempt from disclosure, the CPIO, TCIL is directed to furnish the information contained in the file notings, on or before 15.2.2006 to the appellant.  However, if the CPIO, TCIL is still of the opinion that the said file notings are exempt under Section 8(d) & (e), he is at liberty to place the file notings before the Commission on 13.2.2006 at 11 AM to determine whether the same is exempt under these sections and even if so, whether disclosure of the same would be in the public interest or not.
Let a copy of this decision be sent to CPIO, TCIL and the appellant.
(Padma Balasubramanian)
Information Commissioner
(Wajahat Habibullah)
Chief Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy:
( P. K. Gera )
Date 31/1/06











MYSORE - 570017.


Honourable DG & IG of Police ,

State Police H.Q ,



Honourable Circle Inspector of Police,

Vijayanagar Police Station,


Honourable Sir,

Honourable Chief Jusice of India & H.E.Honourable President of India
& other public servants

In India , as per constitution of india all citizens are

equal , have right to equal oppurtunity &

equitable justice irrespective of caste , creed , religion , etc. the

constitution has guaranteed these to every indian

citizen by way of CONSTITUTIONAL FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. Also , every

humanbeing on earth has got HUMAN RIGHTS, by virtue of

his / her birth.


SERVANTS have forgotten this & are acting as lords ,

autocrats - unquestionable public masters. CONSTITUTIONAL

FUNCTIONARIES are PUBLIC SERVANTS appointed to serve the public,

public are the kings of democracy , they are the taxpayers &

paymasters of this very same public servants.

In India , corruption has spread it's tentacles far &

wide , it has not even spared the judiciary. The last

resort of commonman for seeking justice is judiciary , even there

corruption has spread.In present day India , if one

is rich , he can committ any type of crime & get away clean from

courts of law. there are corrupt police officials

who modify FIR , suppress evidences ,manipulate evidences , takes up

different line of investigation , fix innocents ,

coughs-up false confessions from innocents by 3rd degree torture ,

file B report closing the case , decides not to

appeal in higher court of law , etc , ALL FOR A PRICE. Just see the

list of millionnaire police officials who are

caught by karnataka lokayukta.

Next step , the prosecutor & defense advocate strikes a

deal , manipulates evidences , manipulates way

of presentation of case & way of argument favouring the rich crooks

for a price , as observed in high profile

BMW case involving public prosecutor IU KHAN & defense counsel RK

ANAND. In this way , if corrupt police & advocates ,

together manipulate the due process of law , the presiding judge is

left high & dry eventhough the judge is honest,

he is left helpless. to add to this , when the judge himself is

corrupt , people's last hope , democracy is dead. nowadays

we are hearing too many reports of irregularities in judiciary.

our publication has filed many appeals as PUBLIC INTEREST

LITIGATION before hon'ble supreme court of india,

but the vested interests there are not accepting it as PILs. WHAT DOES



The issues raised by us for sample :

1. sale of fake medicines & adulterated food products , beverages ,

colas affecting the health of millions of indians

& public of importing nations who are importing the same dangerous

products from india .

2. demolition , eviction of houses , lands belonging to poor dalits ,

tribals , backward castes by government authorities

whereas regularising illegal land encroachments , illegal buildings

by high & mighty people in total disregard to law.

in some cases government has even made contempt of court , by defying

court orders & enacting special laws all to favour rich land grabbers.

3. take the cases corporate frauds, violation of labour laws ,

pollution board laws , tax laws , etc by companies.

4. The reports in media about certain highly placed public servants

leaking india's defense secrets to foreign countries

& some politicians , film stars attending parties hosted by anti

nationals DAWOOD IBRAHIM & underworld dons in gulf

countries & elsewhere.

these type of appeals are for public good , national

security , as public are affected by them. still supreme court of

india is not considering

our repeated PIL Appeals.the courts have the authority to consider

even a post card , e-mail as a PIL Appeal , the courts

even have the right to initiate suo-motto action for public good ,

inspite of absence of any appeals / complaints.

over & above this at the time of my very first appeal my income was

very low & i was a retrenched factory employee who was eligible

for free legal aid, even free legal aid was not given to me.

Now , even to my repeated RTI Appeals the Honourable chief

justice of India & H.E.Honourable President of India

are not giving the requested information . these action of CJI &

PRESIDENT OF INDIA is aiding high & mighty criminals , anti

nationals ,

amounts to suppression of information , truth , evidences , which is a

cognizable offence.


INDIA - , , , , ,





, ,




are you ready to catch tax thieves ? , ,


reliance industry where is accountability ? , ,

crimes at infosys campus , ,

crimes by B.D.A against a poor woman , ,

crimes of land mafia in India , ,

currency thefts in RBI Press , ,

killer colas & killer medicines of India , ,

We do have highest respect for all constitutional bodies ,

public servants , but it is an appeal to the

honest few in public service ,to bring to book their corrupt

colleagues.The Honourable Chief Justice of India & H.E.Honourable

President of India

have violated their oaths of office , failed in their constitutional

duties , suppressed material truths / informations & thereby


violated my Constitutionally guaranteed FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS & BASIC

HUMAN RIGHTS & Obstructing me from performing constitutionally


Hereby , i do

request you to legally prosecute the below mentioned public servants

1. H.E.Honourable President of India
2. Honourable Chief Justice Of India
3. Union Home Secretary , GOI
4. Governor , Reserve Bank Of India
5. Director-General & Inspector General Of Police , government of
6. Commissioner , Bangalore Development Authority
7. Commissioner , Mysore Urban Development Authority
8. Commissioner , Mysore City Corporation
9. Labour Commissioner , government of karnataka and
10. all public servants belonging to tax dept , pollution control
board , etc mentioned in the above cases with web links.

on the above mentioned charges. the whole issue of this news paper &

the related materials at the weblinks provided, forms part of this

complaint. If i am repeatedly called to police station or else where
for the sake of investigations , the losses i do incurr as a result
like loss of wages , transportation , job , etc must be borne by the
government. prevoiusly the police / IB personnel repeatedly called me
the complainant (sufferer of injustices) to police station for
questioning , but never called the guilty culprits even once to police
station for questioning , as the culprits are high & mighty . this
type of one sided questioning must not be done by police or
investigating agencies . if anything untoward happens to me or to my
family members like loss of job , meeting with hit & run accidents ,
loss of lives , etc , the jurisdictional police together with above
mentioned accussed public servants will be responsible for it. Even if
criminal nexus levels fake charges , police file fake cases against
me or my dependents to silence me , this complaint is & will be

if anything untoward happens to me or my dependents , the government
of india is liable to pay Rs. one crore as compensation to survivors
of my family. if my whole family is eliminated by the criminal nexus ,
then that compensation money must be donated to Indian Army Welfare
Fund. afterwards , the money must be recovered by GOI as land arrears
from the salary , pension , property , etc of guilty police
officials , public servants & Constitutional fuctionaries. thanking
Jai Hind , Vande Mataram.

Date  : 04.07.09………………… your's sincerely,

Place : Mysore…………………..nagaraj.m.r.


Public Sanitation at the cost of Life )

 edited , printed , published & owned by NAGARAJ.M.R. @ : LIG-2 / 761 , HUDCO FIRST STAGE , OPP WATER WORKS OFFICE , LAKSHMIKANTANAGAR ,HEBBAL , MYSORE -570017 INDIA cell :09341820313 home page: , , , ,      
 e-mail :   ,  

_displayNameOrEmail_ - _time_ - Remove
  Sign in   Terms   Report Abuse   Print page  |  Powered by Google Sites

Labels: ,

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home