Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

Expanded as <keyword id="55120" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Right-To-Information">Right To Information</keyword> Act, <keyword id="6356198" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword> means that any Indian citizen can request any information (which is supposed to be public knowledge) from the offices and departments of the state or central governments. The act mandates that the said offices and departments must process such requests in a timely manner. Why RTI? The Government of India has implemented the RTI in order to see that the Indian citizens are enabled to exercise their rights to ask some pertinent questions to the Government and different public utility service providers in a practical way. RTI Act replaced the Freedom of Information Act 2002. The objective of this act was to help the citizens avail of quicker services from the government agencies since the act enables them to ask questions like why a particular application or an official proceeding gets delayed. Mainly the act aims at achieving a corruption-free India. What is mandated by the RTI Act? The RTI Act mandates that any Indian citizen is free to seek any information from any public or government authority and the authority is under liability to respond to such a request within a period of 30 days from the date of receiving such an application. However, the information sought must not be related to defense, national security, or personal details. Before the advent of the RTI act, the disclosure of information in India was restricted by the Official Secrets Act and some other special laws. The RTI Act relaxed many such laws in the country. The RTI act has also made it mandatory for computerizing the records for the purpose of wide spread relay so that any information sought by the public can be processed quickly aided by the information categorization. Applying for RTI Applying for RTI is a simple process and can be done either online or offline. Nevertheless, some states have not still effected the online option. One can apply for RTI through the official website of the RTI. For different states and departments, the rules for filing RTI is different. What Information can be sought under the RTI Act? Any Indian citizen is free to seek answers from a Government Authority like applying for a delayed IT refund, driving license or passport, or details of a repair or infrastructure project completed or going on. Information sought can also be related to the funds allotted under the different kinds of relief funds in the country. The act enables students to get copies of answer sheets from the universities under this act. The background of RTI Act In 1987, a few laborers In Rajasthan were refused their wages on charges of inconsistent performance. Mazdoor Kissan Shakti Sanghatan (MKSS), an activist group fought for these workers and demanded that the government produced the necessary proof to verify the worker’s performance records. After a series of protests, the MKSS got the copies of rolls, which also brought to surface the corruption existed among the officials. Provoked by such discrepancies, the MKSS protested for the RTI. This protest turned into a national event leading to the passing of the Freedom of Information Act 2002 which became the RTI Act 2005. A Pune police station received the first RTI application in the year 2005. See Also - <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/meet-the-top-10-richest-women-in-the-world/articleshow/68318378.cms">Meet the top 10 richest women in the world</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/auto/article/checkout-new-and-upcoming-electric-bikes-in-india/articleshow/73999357.cms">Upcoming electric bikes in India in 2021</a>

What is RTI Act, all you need to know about RTI act

<keyword id="6355211" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI-Act">RTI Act</keyword> 2005 is an improved version of the Freedom of Information Act 2002. The act enables any Indian citizen to seek any required information from a state or central government office or department. The <keyword id="6356198" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword> Act mandates that the government responds to a citizen’s request for any such information in a timely manner. RTI can be viewed as one of the most powerful legislations in India that gives the citizens right to question any public authority and their activities. Whether you are concerned about the poor maintenance of roads in your area or the problems in water connection or cleanliness or the processing of pension, the RTI Act enables you to seek any information in the public domain. The RTI Act vouchsafes for the transparency in the working of every government department or office and accountability of every public authority’s work. Here we learn how to file an RTI. RTI filing offline Identify the department in which you wish to file an RTI plea and find out if it comes under the scope of the local authority, state or central government. Write or type out the application either in Hindi or English or in the local language of the area. You can also request the Public Information Officer to write the application. Address the application to the concerned state or central Public Information Officer and mention on ‘Seeking information under the RTI Act - 2005’ in the subject line. Put the request in the form of a detailed and specific question mentioning the year or period the plea falls in. if required, one can also seek a document or its excerpt which will be charged at a nominal fee of Rs. 2 per page. To file the request, pay Rs. 10 in cash or through bank draft or money order or court fee stamp. If the proof is produced, people living under the poverty line are exempted from paying the fee. Mention your full name, address, contact details and email address and the name of the town and date. You can send the application by mail or hand it over at the office personally. You need to keep a photocopy of the request and also receive an acknowledgement from the office. As per the RTI Act mandate, the concerned office must respond to the request within 30 days. Further to this, the person making an RTI plea can also file an appeal to the ‘The Appellate Authority’ which must also respond within 30 days. You can also appeal to the Information Commission, the Chief Information Commissioner, and State/Central Information Commission. <keyword id="8330290" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="rti-filing-online">RTI filing online</keyword> Visit the RTI website and click on ‘Submit Request’ button. Check the ‘I have read and understood the above guidelines’ option. You will see the form asking you to fill in the necessary details. Select the department. Fill in your contact details. You can type in the request in about 3,000 characters. You can also attach a PDF file that does not exceed 1 MB. Pay the fee Rs. 10 vide net banking, credit or debit card. You will get an acknowledgement with a registration number once the payment is done. It is also possible to make a request via email. You can visit the RTI page to check the status of the request.

how to file RTI online and offline

<ul><li>It said that the office of <keyword id="6363345" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="cji">CJI</keyword> will come under Right to Information act (<keyword id="6356198" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword>). </li><li>This means that information can be sought by anybody by filing an application.</li><li>However, Justice Ramana who pronounced the verdict also said that RTI should not be allowed to be used as a tool of surveillance. </li></ul> The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> of India has made its <keyword id="42759" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice">chief justice</keyword> accountable to the public. It said that the office of CJI will come under Right to Information (RTI) which means that information can be sought by anybody by filing an application. “RTI office of <keyword id="45053" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice-of-India">Chief Justice of India</keyword> is a public authority under RTI. Judicial independence has to be kept in mind while dealing with transparency,” ruled SC in its order. However, Justice Ramana who pronounced the verdict also said that RTI should not be allowed to be used as a tool of surveillance. "Nobody wants to remain in the state of darkness or keep anybody in the state of darkness. The question is drawing a line. In the name of transparency, you can't destroy the institution," the SC bench said. 2010 or now? This order mirrors the Delhi High Court judgement which said that judicial independence was not the privilege of a judge but a responsibility. The case was filed by an RTI activist S C Agarwal who had engaged prominent lawyer Prashant Bhushan to file the case. The controversial case had triggered a debate between transparency and judicial freedom. Bhushan had famously questioned if judges inhabit a “different universe” and described their reluctance to part information as “disturbing”. This is the second important judgement that Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi has pronounced in the last week, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/news/ayodhya-ram-mandir-case-supreme-court-verdict-top-highlights/articleshow/71979856.cms">after AYodhya case order on Saturday (November 9). </a>

Chief Justice of India will now come under RTI lens, says Supreme Court

<ul><li>The Lok Sabha, the lower house of India's Parliament, has approved the amendments to the Right to Information Act.</li><li>Activists and former bureaucrats believe the amendments will dilute the powers of the Chief Information Commissioner.</li><li>The Narendra Modi government is under attack from both opposition parties as well as activists for the amendments to the RTI Act.</li></ul> The Lok Sabha, the lower house of India's Parliament, has approved the amendments to the Right to Information (RTI) Act.With this, the Narendra Modi government has taken the powers to decide the tenure, salaries, and other terms of employment of Chief Information Commissioners (CIC). The CICs who currently get paid as much as the Chief Election Commissioners-- ₹250,000 a month-- for a maximum of five years, provided he/she is under the age of 65. However, the amendments will allow the government to decide the tenure and the salaries on a case to case basis. The Modi government is under attack from both opposition parties as well as activists for the amendments to the RTI Act. "The implication is the Centre wants to control the CIC and downgrade the function of State information commissioners (SICs), and that appointments of information commissioners are to be henceforth dictated by political patronage,” Shailesh Gandhi, a former Chief Information Commissioner, <a href="https://www.thehindu.com/news/states/centres-decision-to-bring-amendments-to-rti-act-draws-criticism-from-activists/article28629973.ece" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">told The Hindu on July 21</a>. The government has however, defended its decision saying the amendments will only streamline the functioning of the office and make it more effective. Simply put, the government's contention is that the "the mandate of Election Commission of India and Central and State Information Commissions are different. Hence, their status and service conditions need to be rationalised accordingly”. The Right to Information Act was brought in 2005 to enable any citizen of India to request and obtain information from a "public authority", which is required to reply within thirty days. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/motor-vehicles-amendment-bill-and-its-impact-on-insurance-businesses-in-india/articleshow/70331607.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink" target="_blank">Here’s why insurance players aren’t too happy with the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Bill</a>

India’s Parliament has amended the Right to Information Act even as activists and opposition leaders fume

Indore, Feb 13 () A total of 8,926 cases of fraud involving Rs 1.17 lakh crore hit 18 public sector banks during the first three quarters (April-December) of the current fiscal, a reply to an RTI query has revealed. The country's largest lender State Bank of India (SBI) was the biggest hit by frauds, RTI activist Chandrasekhar Gaur told on Thursday quoting an official of the RBI who furnished replies to the RTI application. SBI reported 4,769 cases of banking frauds worth Rs 30,300 crore during the nine-month period ended December 2019. This is about 26 per cent of the Rs 1,17,463.73 crore, which is the total amount of reported cases of banking frauds in PSBs during this period, he said. In Punjab National Bank, 294 cases of banking fraud were reported during this period, with Rs 14,928.62 crore involved in it. During the period, 250 cases involving a total amount of Rs 11,166.19 crore were reported in Bank of Baroda. A total of 860 cases of fraud worth Rs 6,781.57 crore were reported in Allahabad Bank during this period, while 161 cases of fraud worth Rs 6,626.12 crore in Bank of India, it said. As many as 292 cases of fraud worth Rs 5,604.55 crore detected in Union Bank of India, 151 cases worth Rs 5,556.64 crore in Indian Overseas Bank and 282 cases worth Rs 4,899.27 crore in Oriental Bank of Commerce were reported. Besides, 1,867 cases involving total amount of Rs 31,600.76 crore were reported in Canara Bank, UCO Bank, Syndicate Bank, Corporation Bank, Bank of Maharashtra, Central Bank of India, Andhra Bank, United Bank of India, Indian Bank and Punjab and Sind Bank, it added. The RBI has not given specific details of the nature of banking fraud cases and the losses suffered by banks or their customers due to these frauds. HWP ADU MAS AP NP MRMR

PSBs hit by fraud cases of Rs 1.17 lakh cr in Apr-Dec: RTI

New Delhi, Apr 28 () Outstanding loans amounting to Rs 68,607 crore of top 50 wilful bank loan defaulters in the country including firms of Mehul Choksi and Vijay Mallya have been technically written off till September 30, 2019, the Reserve Bank of India said in a RTI reply.Absconding dimantaire Choksi's company Gitanjali Gems tops the list of these defaulters with a whopping amount of Rs 5,492 crore, according to the list.This is followed by REI Agro with Rs 4,314 crore and Winsome Diamonds with Rs 4,076 crore.Rotomac Global Private Limited has funded advances of Rs 2,850 crore which have been technically written off and Kudos Chemie Ltd with Rs 2,326 crore, Ruchi Soya Industries Limited, now owned by Ramdev's Patanjali, with Rs 2,212 crore and Zoom Developers Pvt Ltd with Rs 2,012 crore being the other companies.Mallya's Kingfisher Airlines figures in the list at number 9, with outstanding of Rs 1943 crore which have been technically written off by the banks.Forever Precious Jewellery and Diamonds Private Limited has loans of Rs 1,962 crore written off while Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited have Rs 1915 crore written off loans.Choksi's other firms Gili India and Nakshatra Brands also have loans of Rs 1,447 and Rs 1109 crore respectively written off.REI Agro of Jhunjhunwala brothers is already under the scanner of ED. The CBI and ED are also probing alleged fraud by the owners of Winsome Diamonds.Vikram Kothari's Rotomac is the fourth in the list. He and his son Rahul Kothari were arrested by the CBI for bank loan default. In the last Parliament session, Rahul Gandhi had asked the government to provide a list of top 50 bank loans defaulters in the country, leading to sharp exchanges and uproar in the Lok Sabha."The information on top 50 wilful defaulters and their sum of funded amount outstanding and amount technically/prudentially written off as on September 30, 2019 reported in CRILC by banks, is provided," the RBI said in its written response dated April 24.In his application, RTI activist Saket Gokhale had sought the list of defaulters as on February 16, but the RBI said the requested information is not available.The RBI said that according to section 8 (1)(a) of RTI Act 2005 read with para 77 of Supreme Court judgement of December 16, 2015 in Jayantilal N Mistry case, information on overseas borrowers is exempted from public disclosure."Data is as reported by banks and RBI will not be held responsibly or accountable for any misreporting and/or incorrect reporting by the reporting entities," the RBI said in the written reply to the RTI query. SKC ZMN

Over Rs 68,600 cr loans of wilful defaulters, including Choksi, Mallya firms, written off: RBI in RTI reply

(Photo Source: Wikimedia.org) <ul><li>The government of the state of <keyword id="13126" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Maharashtra">Maharashtra</keyword> in India will allow its residents to directly inspect records of all district level offices and local government bodies for two hours every Monday, according to reports. </li><li>State residents reportedly won’t need to pay any fee or file a Right to Information (<keyword id="6356198" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword>) application to get access to public records. They can directly visit the office and look at the records. </li><li>The government’s resolution is however not applicable to the state secretariat because of lack of space.</li></ul>Residents of Maharashtra, India, can now check records of all government department and local bodies by visiting government offices during a two-hour window every week. The move is part of a recent <a href="https://www.maharashtra.gov.in/1145/Government-Resolutions">resolution </a>passed by the <keyword id="6356172" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Maharashtra-government">Maharashtra government</keyword> under India’s Right to Information (RTI) laws, the Indian Express <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/india/maharashtra-allows-citizens-to-inspect-goverment-records-under-rti-5475515/">reported</a>. The resolution is aimed at bringing transparency to government operations and cut the load of RTI applications filed with authorities, said the report citing a senior government official. State residents will not have to pay any fee or file an RTI application. They can reportedly directly visit the office and look at the records. All district-level offices and local bodies such as municipal corporations and councils have been instructed to stay open for inspection between 3 pm to 5 pm every Monday. A formal order was issued on 26 November, according to the Indian Express report. In case of a public holiday, citizens will be permitted to inspect records on the next working day. However, the state secretariat of Maharashtra will not participate in the move because of space constraints. In 2009, the Pune Municipal Corporation also opened its offices for public inspection, with the Pune Civic body allowing residents to also get a stamped copy of the records, according to the report. India passed the “Right to information” laws in 2005, granting its citizens the means to access information that is under the control of any public authority.

‘No need for RTI application’: Residents in this Indian state can now visit any government office and check official records once a week

India’s activists can rest easy. The Right to Information (<keyword id="6356198" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword>) Act of 2005 - a key guarantor, at least in principle, of India’s <keyword id="6354914" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="democracy">democracy</keyword> - seems safe, for now. The central <keyword id="26362" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Government">government</keyword> has reportedly suspended plans to amend the act, after its proposed changes were met with a heavy backlash, not only from activists, but its own information commissioners as well. Information commissioners are tasked with facilitating the implementation of the act through the <keyword id="6390205" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="central-information-commission">Central Information Commission</keyword> (CIC), which acts upon appeals and information requests from activists. The CIC, which met last week to discuss the proposed amendments, told the Department of Personnel and Training that the RTI Act should stay as is and that the amendments were flawed. An inside source confirmed this development <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/government-shelves-new-rti-rules-after-flak/articleshow/64408728.cms">to The Economic Times.</a> Hence, the government has decided against implementing the changes. Controversial amendments The draft amendments to the RTI Act have been in the works for while, but were made public by the Department of Personnel and Training in April 2017. As soon as they were released, the government was criticised by all stakeholders for trying to dilute the act. One of the main objections by information commissioners was against a proposal that gave the chief of the CIC the sole right to assign a case involving an appeal or a complaint to a single information commissioner as opposed to a bench of them. This went against the very nature of the RTI act, which requires the chief of the CIC to be assisted by information commissioners when it comes to assigning cases. The primary concern regarding this <keyword id="44495" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="amendment">amendment</keyword> was that it could lead to intervention by the government - something that would be harder to do if assigning cases were a collective responsibility. Another controversial change recommend was related to the withdrawal of cases in the event of the RTI applicant’s death. If implemented, this would have endangered the lives of applicants. In fact, this is already happening. According to the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, <a href="http://attacksonrtiusers.org/">75 RTI activists have died </a>since the passage of the act in 2005. The remaining proposals included the imposition of an application fee of ₹10 and a mandatory deadline of 90 days from the date of the request to file an appeal. Protection for applicants The decision to cancel these amendments is the right one. What the government needs to improve, however, is the security of applicants. As discussed <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/for-74-indian-activists-the-punishment-for-seeking-the-truth-has-been-death/articleshow/63425570.cms">in a previous piece,</a> their personal details need to be prevented from getting into the wrong hands. Furthermore, appeals and requests need to be processed faster by imposing strict penalties on information commissioners for delays and the government and its ministries need to voluntarily publish information regarding their operations. The RTI Act is capable of affecting change, but its effectiveness hinges on the continued desire to access information. It requires amendments, but not the ones that have been proposed until this point.

India's government has decided against amending the Right To Information Act

<ul><li>68 Right to Information (<keyword id="6356198" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword>) <keyword id="41907" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="activists">activists</keyword> have been killed since 2005, while 6 have committed suicide, according to the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. </li><li>There is no law to protect activists or to prevent their personal details from falling into the wrong hands. </li><li>The amended Whistle Blower Protection Bill has been stalled in Parliament since 2015.</li></ul> On March 20th, 38-year old Poipynhun Majaw was killed after receiving multiple blows from a wrench to his head in Meghalaya’s East Jaintia Hills district, a prominent mining area rich in coal and limestone. The motive behind his <keyword id="6355784" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="death">death</keyword> is yet to be confirmed by the district police, but it is likely tied to his investigation into the arrangements between the leaders of the Jaintia Hills district council and cement manufacturing firms. Majaw’s death, while tragic, is not surprising. The Right to Information (RTI) activist revealed last year that the district council had allowed cement companies to mine in the area without adequate licenses. As the head of the Jaintia Youth Federation, a social activist group, for six years, he rallied the district’s youth around a number of issues such as electoral fraud and environmental damage from business activities. Like many activists and journalists in the country who have used the RTI law to expose corruption, Majaw was a sitting duck. There was no adequate law to protect him or to prevent the personal details on his RTI application from falling into the wrong hands. The Right to Information Act The Right to Information Act , ranked <a href="http://www.rti-rating.org/">5th best</a> in the world in terms of strength according to the Centre for Law and Democracy, allows Indian citizens to request information from public institutions and the <keyword id="26362" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Government">government</keyword>. Since October 2005, when the RTI Act was implemented, the deaths of 74 activists have been documented in India, according to<a href="http://attacksonrtiusers.org/"> attacksonrtiusers.org</a>, a tracker set up by the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI). An additional 164 activists have reported assaults while 180 have been threatened. A significant portion of these activists had exercised this right and asked for information, only to be harassed and in some cases, silenced permanently. Around 68 of the deaths are outright murders, while the rest have been ruled suicides. John Mascrinaus, a data analyst at the CHRI, says that 16 of these murders have taken place in Maharashtra, 12 and eight have occurred in Gujarat and Karnataka, respectively, while six each have taken place in Bihar and UP. And what of the stories of the slain activists? They have been consigned to the archives of the internet, mere statistics in a country where the truth is better left uncovered and cold-blooded killings are regular fixtures of the daytime news. Their stories bear revisiting. A list of their names is published on the CHRI tracker and here are a few cases:- Rajesh Savaliya, 31. Killed on July 19th, 2017. Savaliya was still alive when he was found near a temple on National Highway 8 in the Navsari district of Gujarat. Despite being rushed the hospital, he succumbed to his head injuries later in the night. Savaliya had been receiving threatening calls for the preceding month after filing multiple complaints with the District Education Officer about all the schools in the area that had been operating without necessary licenses. In the process, he raised the ire of a consortium of owners running the schools. The<a href="http://indianexpress.com/article/india/gujarat-rti-activist-who-took-on-education-mafia-found-dead-in-navsari/"> Indian Express</a> was the only national daily to report on Savilaya’s death. Bhupendra Vira, 72. Killed on October 15th, 2016. A father of three and member of a local citizens activist group, Vira was shot while watching television at his home in Santa Cruz East, Mumbai. He was killed over a land encroachment dispute. Vira had won a number of demolition orders for four illegal residences constructed by his landlord Razzaq Khan, a former member of the municipal corporation. The documents obtained through Vira’s RTI application had shown that his land was being unlawfully encroached upon. Khan and his son were subsequently arrested for the murder. Yallalinga Kuruba, 17. Killed on January 11th, 2014. The body of the first-year college student was found on the railway tracks on the periphery of Koppal, a district in northern Karnataka. On January 6th, Kuruba had told a local news channel about the corruption that was hindering the implementation of government schemes in his village. He specifically cited the lack of roads and drainage systems. On January 10th, he reportedly filed an RTI to ask for details about the development work being subcontracted under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee scheme from the local Panchayat Development Officer. He was subsequently chased and killed by members of a gang that was loyal to Balan Gowda, a gram panchayat member. Ravinder Balwani, 61. Killed on April 26th, 2012. Balwani, a member of Parivartan, an NGO led by Arvind Kejriwal, was hit by a car in the Vasant Kunj neighbourhood in Delhi on April 23rd and died three days later after succumbing to his head injuries. Balwani had been receiving threats after filing a corruption complaint against a former official at Delhi Transco Ltd, the state transmission utility for the NCR region. He had also filed a complaint against the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission over the revision of tariffs.The cases reportedly involved a number of senior officials in the power sector. The perpetrators of the crime were never identified. Shashidhar Mishra, 35. Killed on February 14th, 2010. The street hawker and father of four was shot by some men on motorcycles in the Begusarai district of Bihar. Mishra, who was affectionately called Khabri Lal (news man) by his peers, had filed a number of complaints against panchayat and district officials. By the time he died, Mishra had filed close to a 1,000 RTI applications. His applications covered a range of issues, including the mistreatment of animals at a local dairy, unlicensed shops outside the railway station as well as land purchases and contracts given by local council officials- the latter being the last request he filed. What needs to be done? The deaths of the aforementioned people should not be in vain. The ability to exercise one’s right to information is an essential component of democracy and should be preserved. The personal details of RTI applicants need to be kept secure. The anonymous filing of RTI applications should be enabled. Additionally, applicants could also be required to furnish their email details as opposed to their address and mobile numbers. There needs to be a law to protect whistleblowers. The amended Whistle Blowers Protection (WBP) bill has been stalled in the upper house of India’s Parliament since 2015, when the NDA government moved to water down the original act with the removal of a clause that prevents whistleblowers from being prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act (OSA). This outdated anti-espionage act prohibits the disclosure of state secrets. In its attempt to preserve information that relates to national security, which the RTI act disallows applicants from obtaining in the first place, the government is compromising the personal security of its citizens. The proposed amendments to the Whistle Blower Protection act need to be withdrawn. Finally, the government authorities need to do a better job of disclosing information at the national, state and district level. A section of the RTI act calls for the “voluntary disclosure of information” by authorities. This includes all information related to government schemes and business licenses. This is precisely the information that Yallalinga Kuruba, mentioned above, was asking for. Out of the total number of RTIs filed to date, estimated at 24.9 million by CHRI, a vast majority are denied for reasons such as a “lack of information”, calling into question the purpose of the act itself. However, the act is genuinely capable of affecting change, as demonstrated by success stories such as<a href="http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-chandigarh-to-become-india-s-first-smoke-free-city-1102240"> Chandigarh’s decision to become a smoke free city</a> as a result of RTI petitions and the discovery that some funds used for the Commonwealth Games<a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Rs-744cr-dalit-fund-diverted-for-Games/articleshow/6173912.cms"> were actually earmarked for Scheduled Castes</a>. The government therefore has the responsibility of ensuring the safety of RTI applicants so the act can continue to be used to promote transparency, check corruption and ultimately, improve this country.

For 74 Indian activists, the punishment for seeking the truth has been death

Customers' complaints about problems like cash withdrawal and exchange of old notes faced post <keyword id="3315394" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="demonetisation">demonetisation</keyword> cannot be entertained under the Banking <keyword id="49909" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="ombudsman">Ombudsman</keyword> (BO) scheme, according to PTI news report. The central bank said that demonetisation is not one of the 27 grounds under which a customer can lodge a complaint with the Banking Ombudsman. During the demonetisation period, people had to face various problems in form of restrictions on withdrawal of currency notes and exchanging of old Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes that were withdrawn with immediate effect from midnight of November 8, 2016. "Banking Ombudsman Scheme (<keyword id="4744034" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="bo-scheme">BO Scheme</keyword>), 2006 specifies 27 grounds of complaints under which complaints can be lodged. Complaints related to demonetisation is not a ground of complaint specified under the Scheme," a Right to Information (<keyword id="6356198" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword>) query sent to the <keyword id="50847" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Reserve-Bank">Reserve Bank</keyword> has revealed. In response to the question as to how many complaints came to RBI ombudsman offices across India related to demonetisation, the RBI stated: "As such information is not available." When contacted, a banking ombudsman officer said, "Demonetisation does not come under Ombudsman Scheme." All India Bank Officers' Confederation (AIBOC) Secretary General Harvinder Singh said a lot many complaints came to banks during the demonetisation period and the lenders tried to resolve them to the extent possible, barring a few. "Many complaints came through emails, letters, phone calls and through personal visits. Even complaints were made directly to the Department of <keyword id="6354241" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Financial-Services">Financial Services</keyword>," Singh said. However, for example when banks were instructed to allow withdrawal of up to Rs 2.5 lakh by a family having marriage, the lenders could not help on time as the formal directives came late, he added. The banking ombudsman scheme covers complaints related to deficiency in banking including Internbanking or other services, non-adherence to the instructions of the RBI on ATM/debit cards and prepaid card operations. It also covers complaints regarding non-adherence by the bank or its subsidiaries of RBI guidelines on credit card operations, non-adherence of norms related to mobile banking or electronic banking, non-disbursement or delay in disbursement of pension among others. Even as the window to exchange the disbanded high value currency notes ended on December 30, 2016, people still visit RBI offices, though in a scattered number, in a hope to exchange their old notes which they could not do within the stipulated time for some or the other reasons. A Gurgaon resident, visiting RBI Delhi office, said he found some Rs 8,000 in old currency notes which his son had hidden somewhere and now wanted to exchange it with new ones. "But there is no one to hear my complaint," he said. Here, it is pertinent to mention that the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> earlier this month has given the Centre and the RBI two weeks' time to consider the option of granting a window to those who could not deposit their old notes for genuine reasons. A Supreme Court bench is hearing a batch of petitions, including from individuals seeking a direction to authorities to allow depositing demonetised notes to banks in lieu of legal currency after being failed to do so under the given time-frame.

No complaints regarding demonetization and its after effects will be entertained under Banking Ombudsman

Do not expect any compensation for theft or burglary of valuables in safe deposit boxes of public sector banks as the locker hiring agreement absolves them of all liability, according to <keyword id="6367495" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="PTI">PTI</keyword> news report. This bitter truth was disclosed in an <keyword id="6356198" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword> response by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and 19 PSU banks. Stung by the revelation, the lawyer who had sought information under the transparency law has now moved the Competition Commission of India (<keyword id="47183" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="CCI">CCI</keyword>) alleging "cartelisation" and "anti-competitive practices" by the banks in respect of the locker service. He has informed the CCI that the RTI response from the RBI has said it has not issued any specific direction in this regard or prescribed any parameters to assess the loss suffered by a customer. Even under the RTI response, all public sectors banks have washed their hands of any responsibility. According to the information availed by the lawyer, the unanimous reason given by the 19 banks, including Bank of India, Oriental Bank of Commerce, Punjab National Bank, UCO and <keyword id="292298" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Canara">Canara</keyword>, among others, is that "the relationship they have with customers with regard to lockers is that of lessee (landlord) and lessor (tenant)". The banks have contended that in such a relationship, the lessor is responsible for his or her valuables kept in the locker which is owned by the bank. Some banks, in their locker hiring agreements, have made it clear that any item stored in the locker is at the customer's own risk and he or she may, in their own interest, insure the valuables. The common feature of all locker hiring agreements states, "As per safe deposit memorandum of hiring locker, the bank will not be responsible for any loss or damage of the contents kept in the safe deposit vault as a result of any act of war or civil disorder or theft or burglary and the contents will be kept by the hirer at his or her sole risk and responsibility. "While the bank will exercise all such normal precautions, it does not accept any liability or responsibility for any loss or damage whatsoever sustained to items deposited with it. Accordingly, hirers are advised in their own interest to insure any item of value deposited in a safe deposit locker in the bank," they have said. Aggrieved by the responses, the lawyer - Kush Kalra - raised questions before the CCI - why not just keep the valuables at home after insuring them, instead of paying rent to the bank for a locker when it is not going to take any responsibility for the contents. He alleged that all these banks, also including State Bank of India, Indian Overseas Bank, Syndicate Bank, Allahabad Bank and others, have formed a "cartel" to indulge in such "anti-competitive" practices. He further alleged that the bank by forming an association or cartel are "trying to limit the improvement of services which is directly affecting the competition in the market and interests of the consumer". The lawyer has sought a probe under the Competition Act into the allegation of cartelisation by the banks in respect of the locker service.

You Searched For "RTI" and got 11 results

What is RTI Act, all you need to know about RTI act

BI India Bureau

how to file RTI online and offline

BI India Bureau

Chief Justice of India will now come under RTI lens, says Supreme Court

Preeti

Katya

India’s Parliament has amended the Right to Information Act even as activists and opposition leaders fume

Sriram Iyer

PSBs hit by fraud cases of Rs 1.17 lakh cr in Apr-Dec: RTI

PTI

Over Rs 68,600 cr loans of wilful defaulters, including Choksi, Mallya firms, written off: RBI in RTI reply

PTI

‘No need for RTI application’: Residents in this Indian state can now visit any government office and check official records once a week

BI India Bureau

India's government has decided against amending the Right To Information Act

Dilsher Dhillon

For 74 Indian activists, the punishment for seeking the truth has been death

Dilsher Dhillon

No complaints regarding demonetization and its after effects will be entertained under Banking Ombudsman

BI India Bureau

Banks have no liability for theft in lockers, informs RBI

BI India Bureau

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides