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

Citing danger to life and national security, India's central bank, the <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=Reserve+Bank+of+India&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">Reserve Bank of India</a> (<keyword id="30067" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="RBI">RBI</keyword>), refused to share specific details of <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=Prime+Minister+Narendra+Modi%27s+&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">Prime Minister Narendra Modi's </a>ban on high-value banknotes. This deepens the mystery over who took the unprecedented decision. 
 The <keyword id="6355513" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="cabinet">Cabinet</keyword> has accepted that it was the RBI who recommended the move and was announced by PM <keyword id="6354642" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Modi">Modi</keyword> on Nov. 8, Power Minister Piyush Goyal had told parliament. 
 
According to a report by <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-11/central-bank-cites-threat-to-life-as-india-cash-mystery-deepens">Bloomberg</a>, the RBI board approved the ban three-hours before PM Modi's speech and hadn't discussed the matter beforehand. 
 
On the other hand, the RBI told a lawmakers' panel that the government had "advised" the monetary authority to "consider" the ban a day before the RBI board made its recommendation. The government then "considered the recommendations" and decided to withdraw the notes, culminating in PM Modi's address that blindsided the nation. 
 Now, more clarity is expected on January 20th, when RBI Governor <keyword id="6375119" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Urjit-Patel">Urjit Patel</keyword> deposes before a parliamentary committee. Details are essential to help assess the success of the shock move as well as gauge the impact of the decision on Asia's No. 3 economy. 
 
"It is very perplexing that the RBI doesn't answer questions about how the decision was arrived at. There are concerns that in the whole process the RBI has been sidelined by the government and that raises questions about its independence," Shilan Shah, Singapore-based India Economist at Capital Economics, told ET. 
 
The central bank as of January 11th, had answered five out of 14, disclosing the date and time of the RBI's board meeting and the fact that the board had never discussed <a href="http://www.businessinsider.in/searchresult.cms?query=demonetization&amp;sortorder=effectivedate">demonetization</a> before Nov. 8 
 
It also said it doesn't have information to answer one question, on how many of the worthless notes have been deposited at commercial banks 
 
It transferred two questions on printing of new notes to organizations that manage the presses 
 The RBI said that a question asking "what prompted the board to discuss and approve the withdrawal of notes" doesn't come under the definition of "information" under the <keyword id="6356198" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword> Act 
 
Also, RBI provided different answers to a question asked three times, seeking details on board members who opposed the move. In two replies the RBI said "it is a matter of fact that the decision was unanimous." In a separate response, it said "this information is not available on record" 
 
To a question seeking details on the number of demonetized notes already at banks on the evening of PM Modi's speech, the RBI claimed an exemption, citing danger to the life or physical safety of anyone who disclosed this information to the public 
 
The RBI also claimed exemptions on two questions seeking detail on its preparations for the demonetization and studies it used to forecast the impact of the move. Sharing these "sensitive matters" would endanger India's sovereignty, integrity and security, according to the RBI 
 The use of those specific exemptions are "perplexing," Capital Economics's Shah said. <keyword id="164869" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Shailesh-Gandhi">Shailesh Gandhi</keyword>, a former bureaucrat with the <keyword id="6390205" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Central-Information-Commission">Central Information Commission</keyword>, told the FirstPost website on December 31st that the RBI's attitude of stonewalling smacked of "sheer arrogance." 
 
"What the RBI is doing by refusing to answer queries under RTI is denying citizens their fundamental rights," Gandhi said.

This is why RBI is not answering questions on why it banned Rs 500/Rs 1000 notes and it is quite serious

<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

The Finance Ministry has refused to disclose whether its boss Arun Jaitley was consulted before the announcement of demonetisation by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on November 8, 2016, according to a news report by the PTI. 
 
The Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had earlier claimed that the query whether the Finance Minister and the Chief Economic Advisor were consulted before the announcement does not come under the definition of "information" under the RTI Act. 
 
The definition of "information" under the Act refers to "any material in any form" under the control of a public authority. 
 
The response of the Finance Ministry to an RTI query filed by Press Trust of India (PTI) assumes significance as it acknowledges that there are records pertaining to the question but they cannot be disclosed under the Right to Information Act. 
 
The Finance Ministry has taken refuge under the exemption clause of section 8(1)(a) of the Act to deny the information. It did not, however, give any reasons as to how the information would attract the section, according to a news report by the PTI.. 
 
The section allows withholding information "disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence". 
 
According to procedure, a first appeal can be filed with the Ministry concerned which is to be handled by a senior official. If it is unsuccessful, the matter escalates to the Central Information Commission, the top adjudicating body on the RTI Act. 
 
The three key institutions which are directly related to the move of demonetisation-- the PMO, the RBI and the Finance Ministry-- have refused to disclose information about the sudden measure on different pretexts. 
 
The Finance Ministry is the latest respondent. 
 
The RTI Act has specific provision which allows records attracting its exemption clauses to be disclosed "if public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests". 
 
"The clause of public interest would apply where exemption clause applies on the information sought by an applicant. In the present case, the information sought does not attract any exemption clause," former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi told PTI. 
 
He said the law is very clear: when a public authority rejects to disclose information it must give clear reasons as to how the exemption clause would apply in the given case. 
 
On the responses of the PMO and the RBI, former Chief Information Commissioner A N Tiwari had said that their replies are wrong as the applicant had sought to know a fact which would be part of records hence an "information" under the RTI Act. 
 
Notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 ceased to be legal tender after a surprise announcement by the PM on November 8 last year.

Finance Ministry just refused to reveal a crucial question on demonetization

The <keyword id="432663" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="Corporate-espionage">corporate espionage</keyword> case, which was unearthed a month back, has revealed a huge conspiracy theory undermining at the ministry level. In a major crackdown by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), The Economic Times reports that two employees of the Ministry of Finance along with a Mumbai-based consultant have been held for their alleged involvement in illegally obtaining documents on foreign investment policies and passing them on to at least eight companies. 
 
A CBI spokesperson has informed The Economic Times, the investigating agency has conducted raids at six places in Delhi and two places in Mumbai on Thursday. These raids were carried out as part of an investigation into the "leakage and sale of confidential government documents relating to foreign investments in the Ministries of Finance and Commerce."Khemchand Gandhi, a chartered accountant-cum consultant, who has been detained by the police, used to sold documents and files to corporates. 
 
The ET report has confirmed that Gandhi has also been detained by the CBI after a bunch of documents sent to him was intercepted by the agency. The CBI had recovered Rs 60 lakh in cash from his residence and office along with a trove of documents. 
 <keyword id="239515" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Ashok-Kumar-Singh">Ashok Kumar Singh</keyword>, under secretary in the Department of Disinvestment in Finance Ministry, and Lala Ram Sharma, a section officer in the Department of Economic Affairs in Ministry of Finance, are also among those who have been detained. 
 
The residence of Daljeet Singh, an upper division clerk in the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) in the commerce ministry, was raided by the CBI but Singh was not detained, the ET reported. 
 Earlier, <keyword id="6358992" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="60" keywordseo="Delhi-Police">Delhi Police</keyword> had arrested two junior oil ministry officials and three other middlemen for allegedly leaking classified government documents to energy companies. 
 
They also held two consultants Santanu Saikia and Prayas Jain along with five executives from top energy companies, who were identified as RIL’s Shailesh Saxena, Vinay Kumar from Essar, KK Naik from Cairn, Subhash Chandra from Jubilant Energy and Rishi Anand from ADAG Reliance. Sources told the ET that Delhi Police has been subsequently questioning senior officials of these corporate. 
 
(Image: Reuters)

Corporate Espionage: CBI detains two Govt staffers and a tax consultant

Why was not the conversion of old currency notes allowed till March 31, 2017 for Indians as assured by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his speech on November 8 announcing demonetisation? 
 
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has refused to answer the question under the Right to Information (RTI) Act claiming the query does not come under the definition of "information" as per the transparency law. 
 
The Prime Minister in his speech on November 8, 2016, announcing demonetisation, had assured countrymen that they could convert the notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 till March 31. 
 
Later, it was decided that the window till March 31 will be kept only for Non-Resident Indians who constitute a major support base for the ruling BJP. 
 
The issue about the time limit for converting old currency notes is also being heard by the Supreme Court where Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi has reportedly submitted that the law will prevail over the words of the Prime Minister. 
 
In its response, the RBI refused to share file notings on the decision to limit currency conversion window till March 31 only for NRIs saying it would be against the economic interests of the state. 
 
The applicant had sought reasons, as "recorded" in the files of the RBI, behind the decision to not allow conversion of currency till March 31 for Indians as assured by the PM. 
 
"The question is in the nature of seeking reasons or justification from CPIO which is not defined as information as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act," the response form Suman Ray, Central Public Information Officer, said. 
 
The Supreme Court has clarified the issue in one of its noted judgements saying if opinion or advice is available in the records of the public authority, it will come under the definition of the "information" under the RTI Act. 
 
Former Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said that section 8(2) of the RTI Act allows disclosure of information, even if it is exempted, if it is in larger public interest. 
 
The RTI Act defines "information" as "any material in any form" held by or under the control of a public authority. 
 
The definition covers "any material in any form, including records, documents, memos, emails, opinions, 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 for the time being in force". 
 
The bankers' bank has stonewalled almost every RTI query pertaining to demonetisation citing one or the other reason. 
 
It had refused to respond if the views of Finance Minister Arun Jaitley or Chief Economic Advisor were taken before demonetisation was announced, it had also refused to disclose reasons behind the sudden move, among others. 
 
It had also refused to allow access to minutes of the meetings held to decide on the issue of demonetisation of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 notes. 
 
After the deadline to exchange the scrapped notes expired on December 30, 2016, the government issued an ordinance saying only those who were abroad, the armed forces personnel posted in remote areas, or others who could give valid reasons for not being able to deposit the cancelled notes, can do so till March 31.

You Searched For "Shailesh Gandhi" and got 5 results

This is why RBI is not answering questions on why it banned Rs 500/Rs 1000 notes and it is quite serious

BI India Bureau

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

Sriram Iyer

Finance Ministry just refused to reveal a crucial question on demonetization

BI India Bureau

Corporate Espionage: CBI detains two Govt staffers and a tax consultant

BI India Bureau

Now RBI refuses to give explanation on why people weren’t allowed to exchange old notes till March 31

BI India Bureau

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides