SUPER SENIOR CITIZENS

SUPER SENIOR CITIZENS
-SANJOG MAHESHWARI
Super-senior citizens (males 75 and above and females 70 and above) expect a bit more compassion and consideration from the State and the society - a few extra benefits, amenities and facilities, over and above other senior citizens, so that some sunshine could be added in the twilight years of their life. Reasonably enough, among other things, they richly deserve: (1) Priority in the matter of healthcare and medical facilities- recently even the P.M., after undergoing heart’s surgical intervention, himself expressed some pious sentiments in this regard that merit serious consideration and urgent action on the part of concerned authorities and policy- planners (2) across the board 50% concession in the travel charges all classes by Air, train, buses or any other mode of transport with priority in reservation of seat/birth therein (3) total exemption from payment of Income Tax ( A token 1% across the board minimum T.D.S irrespective of the income earned by them may be charged as their modest contribution or pay back to the Society. Depending on their circumstances and other factors they may volunteer for higher percentage of T.D.S on income) (4) Priority in grant of accommodation in Old Age Homes, Guest Houses, Rest Houses, Clubs, Hostels etc. so that they may have homes away from home for as long a period as they like, everywhere throughout the country, on concessional rates. If the Government takes quick and urgent initiative with the spirit of goodwill and welfare as its driving force, I am sure the private players owning hostels, dharamshalas, guest-houses, buses etc. may also join in the humanitarian experience.
-SANJOG MAHESHWARI
C-1A-42 B MIG FLATS, JANAPURI, NEW DELHI-110058

Article from The Hindu: Sent to you by Sanjeev

=============================================================
This article has been sent to you by Sanjeev ( sanjeev_maheshwari2004@yahoo.com )
=============================================================
Source: The Hindu (http://www.hinduonnet.com/op/2009/01/11/stories/2009011155101400.htm)
Open Page

Coveted change

SANJOG MAHESHWARI

Kudos to the American democratic processes, systems and institutions which, once again, unfailingly reinvented themselves by electing the best man, Barack Obama, to the most powerful position in the world, eschewing all extraneous considerations, for affectively answering the need of the times and to meet the “pressing urgency of now in the best interests of America”.
To usher in the much coveted ‘change’ to ‘meet the pressing urgency of now in the best interests of India we will have to switch over to the American model of Presidential democracy. We will then have our own Lincolns and Obamas, who are conspicuous by their absence in the present-day India.
We were made to adopt, enact and give to ourselves a Constitution, the good-intentioned provisions of which, when put to practice, delivered just the opposite. It was hoped that the Executive would be de-linked from the Legislature to ensure clean and vibrant administration. Instead, it has been reduced to the position of a handmaid of the Legislature. Very often, calculated attempts are made even to subvert the Judiciary and undermine its independence.
Our system of elections and electioneering contributed substantially to the criminalisation of politics. Vote-bank politics helped demagogues to ascend to powerful positions in the government by playing the religion, caste and regional card and pursuing quota-reservation policies. Our democratic system of governance and institutions are totally incapable of producing an Obama-like phenomenon in India. While we always want the best man to win an election, he simply dreads to run.

Copyright: 1995 - 2006 The Hindu

Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly
prohibited without the consent of The Hindu

R.T.I. ACT- DOES IT REALLY EMPOWER PEOPLE?

SANJOG MAHESHWARI
C1-A-42B M.I.G. FLATS,
JANAKPURI,
NEW DELHI 110058

RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT-2005 DOES IT EMPOWER PEOPLE?
-SANJOG MAHESHWARI.

While Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression to every citizen as his Fundamental Right, the fact remains that the people cannot effectively exercise this right unless they know. As early as in 1976, the Apex Court made an observation to this effect in the case of Raj Narain versus State of U.P. However, it took nearly three decades for successive governments at Centre to acknowledge that the people who pay taxes for running the government have a right to correct and complete information about how it is functioning and how their hard-earned money is being spent. In a democratic polity, it is the people who are the masters and as such must be in the know of various issues involved in the matter of governance and administration. In recognition of this fact, the Parliament enacted Right to Information Act-2005, which received the assent of the President of India on 15th June,2005 and came into force with effect from 12th October 2005- ( its earlier version- Freedom of Information Act-2002 having proved ineffective was soon repealed)

The new law has been invested with some important empowering provisions for the people aimed at introducing elements of transparency and accountability in administration to contain, if not completely eliminate, corruption. The all too gullible people of India soon started dreaming that now they will breathe in a corruption-free environment. However, the corrupt bureaucracy in the very first flush of Applications under the RTI law was so rattled that in their move to blunt its effectiveness, persuaded the cabinet committee to approve an amendment to exempt file notings and cabinet papers from disclosure under the Act. The proposed Amendment to the Act brought about within less than a year of the main Act coming in the force, was opposed tooth and nail by almost every right minded citizen. On the expected lines it was vociferously advocated and espoused by the politico-bureaucratic entrenched vested interests and the foot-dragging officialdom within the government. The malafide move was, however, foiled; thanks to the huge public ire and outcry against it. Thus the Act survived the first blow “to take life out of it” as aptly observed by Sh.O.P. Kejariwal, Central Information Commissioner and the common man sighed in relief and celebrated the event.

However, the euphoria died too soon. How wrong we were in forgetting that we live in a society where more the things change, more they remain the same. Almost two decades back a similar piece of legislation was enacted under the title: “Consumer Protection Act-1986” to protect the interests of consumers. Its enactment was also greeted with the similar enthusiasm. “Now consumer is king,” they chanted joyously. Twenty years and three amending Acts later, the statute in its practical application is now so riddled with complexities and technicalities that as of now there is no protection under the Act unless a consumer is Somebody. The Amendments contain nothing which is consumer-friendly. In fact some of their provisions are patently consumer-hostile. The RTI Act seems fated the same way. Because, if it is not the depraved amendment then it is the dubious “Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007 passed on 13th June 2007 and post haste within a week came into force with effect from 21-06-2007, that is proving its un-doing. Ostensibly brought about for “better internal management of the Commission and to facilitate its functioning” it in fact puts the remedies available under the Act way beyond the reach of an average citizen rendering the process of seeking information under it an exorbitantly expensive, unduly complicated, complex, torturous and lengthy affair which even a seasoned lawyer will find hard to follow. How the government proposes to meet the ends of justice by rendering a simple matter of seeking correct and complete information on any issue from the concerned government department or agency such a costly, cumbersome, time and energy consuming affair, is not clear? Is the government so oblivious of the fact that by encouraging the people to frequently agitate the Act for getting information for their use, it directly sets in motion the process of cleansing the rot since set in almost every government department and thus helping itself to eradicate corruption and erasing the age-old mind-set that breeds lethargy and devil-may-care attitude in its foot-dragging officials without even paying for it by enlisting the free of cost services of so many information-seekers that would be akin to a process of continuous auditing of the departmental records which as of now are in great mess and unmanageable shambles. And that too free of cost! So please make the process and procedure of seeking information under the Act as simple as possible, hand out deterrent penalty and punishment to the culprits and encourage rather than discourage the people to frequently seek and make use of the information so that the chaotic government records are perpetually kept in order, useable condition and good shape. And indeed why at all anybody in his right frame of mind should spend his hard earned money for seeking “ frivolous and inconsequential information” at a huge cost , unnecessarily taxing his patience and straining his slender resources in tackling with the mighty Government officials and antagonizing them in the process? It is the practice of providing the “frivolous and inconsequential information” by the Public Authorities in response to a valid Application under the RTI Act that should be the matter of immediate concern of the CIC and not the other way round.

With the cost thus increased manifold and process and procedure made so much complex and cumbersome now with the passing of the Regulations even the most needy would shy away from agitating the law under the Act and would opt for the hassle-free option of palm-greasing to get the desired results expeditiously. So for God’s sake please scrap the Regulations 2007 immediately. Instead the government should frame rules to make the procedure and fee structure uniform throughout the country. After all the Act addresses to an extremely simple matter – to enable a seeker to get correct and complete information on some matter. And the Commission has a still simpler task to perform- ensuring that the information so provided is in fact correct and complete. Why then make the process so complex, complicated, cumbersome and costly so as to scare away the people from seeking information which they need particularly when the process automatically ensures cleansing of the Augean stable that the records rooms of the government departments have become? Very simple rules of procedure should be put in place for filing Applications, 1st and 2nd Appeals/ Complaints more so because the clever bureaucracy is so skilled in the art of dodging and has so many tricks up its sleeve in giving the slip to inconvenient queries and at the same time disowning responsibility that they can easily get away without supplying the information they want to conceal or by supplying incomplete information and load the poor information seeker with information that he would not want. The malady has assumed such gigantic proportions that in 90 out of hundred cases one has to file Complaint or 2nd Appeal to the Central Information Commission and 2nd Appellate Authority, the apex body under the Act u/s 18 or 19 of it. And that involves an extremely complex and cumbersome process and procedure which makes a deep hole in one’s slender pocket. At that stage while your cost and expenses mount, the culprit would, in most of the cases, escape punishment with consummate dexterity with determination to take on you for the audacity of your asking for the information. The following few cases out of so many others are cited as proof, if at all a proof of such a widespread phenomenon and very well known fact where the complicity of the Information Commissioners had let down a genuine Information-Seeker in his quest for information and documents which he needed most urgently and provided escape route to the foot-dragging officialdom which, otherwise, ought to have been severely penalized for its willful dereliction of duty and shunning responsibility with a devil-may-care attitude: For example, in a very simple case where an applicant had requested for the information etc. regarding the action taken on and the status of a few representations made by him to a public authority, the Central Information Commission allowed the public authority to get off without supplying any of the requested information. In their order, they observed, “The information solicited herein is about policy matters for which no definite answer could have been given…………..” They, inter-alia, went on to say, “Yet the respondents are agreeable to allow the appellant to inspect the files / records related to his RTI request…………” (Case No. CIC/AT/A/2007/00574 dated 19-07-07). What files/records to inspect when the Public Authority/ custodian is unable to locate them in their office? A single stroke of pen scrubbed down all efforts made by the appellant and at the end of the day (it was more than a year!) he was poorer by a few hundred rupees and as ignorant about the status of his representations as before filing the Application for Information, first appeal and second appeal and few other applications in between and paying fees all the way for the documents which should have been but were not made available by the custodian. In an identical case, on the request for information made to the CPIO NCDRC on 17/18-2-08 followed by the First Appeal to the First Appellate Authority on 31-03-08 in respect of a representation dated 05-12-07, the CPIO of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide his letter No. A-2001/NCDRC/2008 dated 22-04-08, inter-alia, informs that “Section 4(1) (d) does not apply to a judicial proceedings conducted by a Court or Tribunal as it refers only to administrative and quasi judicial decisions of public authorities”. It is conveniently ignored that the appellant is simply interested in knowing the status of his representation dated 05-12-07: the date of its receipt in the Commission’s Registry, daily progress made on it with copies of the related file-notings etc. - a purely administrative matter which has nothing to do with the nitty-gritty of judicial proceedings. In yet another case, Ghaziabad Development Authority, gets off-the hook by supplying grossly incomplete and mostly irrelevant information even after more than a year of the application under the RTI Act duly followed by the first and second appeals at the appropriate levels.(U.P. State Information Commission case No. S-245). In another case a Public Authority fails to provide certified copies of requested documents such as the Service Book, Leave A/c., the Pensioner’s Pension Payment Order etc. which are classified as “PERMANENT RECORDS” UNDER GOVERNMENT RULES & REGULATIONS on the pleas that they are “ not readily traceable, are misplaced somewhere” and “efforts are still being made to locate them” and on 2nd Appeal made to the CIC, the Information Commissioner “authorizes the Appellant to inspect the records”. It is not clear that when the requested records are not at all “readily traceable at the end of the concerned Public Authority and “the efforts are still being made by them to locate the requested records” (even after more than a year!) according to their own admission “and copies of the same will be made available to the Applicant as soon as they are located” as is being asserted by them since long, what is the big idea in sending the Appellant on a wild chase of the black cat in a dark room where it apparently does not exist? In the circumstances, what useful purpose the appellant’s visit to the office of the Public Authority, as (graciously?) authorized by the 2nd Appellate Authority- the C.I.C in their Decision No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00247 dt. 17th July, 08, is going to serve, is not clear? Should they have not instead ordered disciplinary action against those responsible for the gross mismanagement of vital and important records which are mandated to be preserved permanently under the rules? In an identical case No. CIC/AT A/2007/01177, the Complainant- Information Seeker has submitted an Application dated 17-10-2008 to the Chief Information Commissioner Mr. Wajahat Habibullah seeking Review of the CIC’s Order dated 19-02-08, inter-alia, on the ground that the said order is ultra-virus to the provisions of the Right to Information Act-2005 as it would tantamount to refusal to provide the requested information and documents which are in the custody of the Public Authority on flimsy alibi. The receipt of the above Application for Review has not yet acknowledged though sent under the Speed Post on the same date. Also in another case, C.P.I.O of NISCAIR (C.S.I.R) pleads ignorance of both the documents-two medical reimbursement bills sent to them under Speed Post on separate dates from separate Post Offices even when the Proof of their delivery to the addressee got conclusively confirmed in writing by the competent postal authority and a certificate issued by them to that effect was submitted long back to the Public Authority who as of now is maintaining stoic silence over the matter and not even acknowledging the Appellant’s repeated reminders and the 1st Appeal to the NISCAIR’S First Appellate Authority. As there has been no response even to the 1st Appeal in the matter filed on 1st August 2008 under section 19 (1), the Information-seeker has since filed the Complaint dated 28-09-08 before the Central Information Commission u/s 18 of the Act and sent the same under Speed Post on 29-09-08. The receipt of the same is yet to be acknowledged by the CIC Registry. In yet another complaint case No. CIC/WB/A/2007/00627, the CIC vide order dated 03-05-07, remanded the Appellants appeal to the 1st Appellate Authority but has not so far passed any orders on the Complainant’s Complaint 09-09-2008 submitted to it against the 1st Appellate Authority order No.38/27/07-P&PW (A) dated 26/28 August 2008 nor yet acknowledged the receipt of the Complainant’s above cited Complaint dated 09-09-2008 sent on the same date under Speed Post. These examples are merely illustrative and by no means exhaustive.
The reasons for the miscarriage of justice under the Act, which, of late, has been recurring with alarming frequency, are not far to seek. Not so long ago, a peeved Mr. L..K. Advani, Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a member of the Appointment Committee of the Commission, irked by the fact that the Commission has become an all Babu-affair, declined to attend the CIC expansion meet called by its Chairperson, the Prime Minister of India.(Thanks to his instance and initiative, after the lapse of about three years, one or two ‘outside-officialdom-appointments’ in the CIC cadre , could have been made in the teeth of bureaucratic resistance, and they are showing encouraging results.) But that’s too little too late. Much more needs to be done to make the Law more user-friendly. If not for any other reason then to contain to some extent the mounting corruption that has since assumed gigantic proportions sufficient to push India in the obnoxious company of five most corrupt countries of the world.
While section 12 (5) of the Act provides a vast field consisting of varied areas of public activity ranging from law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, mass media or administration and governance to chose persons of eminence from them for the posts of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners, it is not clear why only the babus are allowed to grace these exalted offices? No wonder, they have soft-corner for the bureaucratic fraternity they come from and their Decisions are heavily loaded in favour of the Public Authorities providing the guilty many an escape routes to ride over an inconvenient situation whereas actions and remarks of the poor information-seeker are considered an affront to the authorities that be. Thus, instead of getting justice, the common Information seekers, generally end up inviting wrath and fury of those in the authority who react with a fierce vengeance. Thank God for small mercies that at least those who are Somebody, N.G.Os and men with money and power, do get information at the first stage itself and are spared the trouble of going in for 1st & 2nd Appeals/Complaints etc. The people who do not have deep pockets, clout and influence at the right places have little chance to get justice even at the CIC’s level as would be evident from the few of the many such cases cited above. The myth of “Empowerment of Common Man” needs to be exploded. For a common man, ours is a very difficult country to get justice.
Even after more than 60 years of independence, the colonial mind-set reigns supreme and the bureaucracy finds it difficult to shed.
Secondly, in most of the cases particularly in the autonomous bodies, the hierarchical built-up is such in which neither the Public Information Officer nor the 1st Appellate Authority wields the disciplinary powers under the Conduct Rules to initiate disciplinary action against the errant officials by invoking C.C.S (C.C.A) Rules for not providing the information and documents under their custody. When they can get away with any or every thing they do or do not do, why should they bother?
Thirdly, the Act does not provide for any relief in the form of compensation for the wrongs suffered by an aggrieved information seeker at the hands of arrogant Public Authority who have little reason to be wary of it.
It is high time the government sees the writing on the wall so that palm-greasing for getting the work done ceases to be a tempting option for the common man.



SANJOG MAHESHWARI.
C1-A-42 B M.I.G. FLATS,
JANAKPURI,
NEW DELHI-110058.

COMMENTS & VIEWS - R.T.I. ACT-2005

I stand by my statement. May be the N.G.Os. the activists, the mighty and the powerful getting the information/documents they want by agitating the Act. The common information seeker is rarely, if ever, gets so lucky. Out of the seven such cases that have come to my notice not a single applicant was lucky enough to get the requested information/documents, correct and complete in all respects. What he gains in the bargain is : the wrath and fury of the mighty Public authority and harassed for his audacity to seek-information from those who never cease to believe that they are not at all accountable for their acts to anybody. It is a matter of common knowledge that the Government records are in great shambles and disarray- records-room is virtually an Augean stable- and to search any document and information stored therein is akin to searching a needle in the haystack. Since there is absolutely no accountability, whatsoever, who would like even to rummage around let alone diligently search the requested relevant information/documents for nothing. In the referenced case, more than a year rolls by NOT a scrap of relevant material, document and information has been made available to the Appellant by the Public Information Officer of the Public authority of a Central Government autonomous body- the custodian of the requested records and information.. The Central Information Commissioner in his alluded order on the 2nd Appeal of the information seeker advises the applicant to help locate the records and information, and (closes the appeal?) at the Commission’s end. The Public authority cleverly attempts to evade the responsibility by misinterpreting these orders to mean that the applicant information seeker must provide them copies of certain hypothetical documents of unspecified description which, he neither has nor is supposed to have for the simple reason that the custodian of all manner of such records and documents is also the same Public authority from which the information and the requested documents are being sought and not the information seeker himself. While there is no provision of any such quid-pro-quos in the Act, which simply mandates to provide all the requested information and documents, not otherwise specifically barred, on payment of the prescribed fees and charges, the authorities that be arrogate to themselves all powers to bully and harass the information seeker and deny him the sought information and documents with impunity in spite of the Law. It is learnt that the grossly aggrieved Information-seeker in the case has since submitted an application for Special Leave to Review the Order to the Chief Information Commissioner. However, if by any chance, his application for special leave to review the order filed with the Chief Information Commissioner fails to get the consideration it richly deserves against such a blatant injustice then it could be the end of the road for the information seeker. The crowning irony is: Instead of providing the requested records and information as mandated under the Act, the custodian of the records and the information i.e. the concerned public authority it-self is asking for something-not even vaguely specified- the documents and information from the information seeker himself. For the reasons better known to him only, the Central Information commissioner finds nothing wrong in it, considers such a move “reasonable” and, in the ultimate analysis, absolves the custodian from his bounden duty and responsibility of providing the requested documents and information and, slams, for good, the doors of justice on the poor information seeker. Poorer by a few hundred rupees and more frustrated than ever before he ends up inviting the wrath and fury of the officers of the concerned Public Authority for his audacity to seek information/documents from them by agitating the Act as the already hugely hostile and immensely infuriated mighty public authority gets still more hostile against the information seeker who is then punished for the sin of requesting for information and documents so very vital and important for him. He does not have deep pockets to follow it up in the courts of law.
Ours is the most difficult country for getting justice even if one has been wronged. Whether it is so because of or in spite of all those empowering Laws; only God knows. If you feel that you have been rubbed on the wrong side by an executive action, your best bet is to suffer in silence and never ever invite still more trouble by agitating the appropriate Law.
The above is not an isolated case. Quite a few have walked along this path and suffered the similar fate. In fact, as pointed out above, barring those filed by the N.G.Os, powerful and influential persons, politicians, activists and organizations, almost every other filed by some Nobodies have been similarly fated and have a similar sordid story to narrate.
Once the activist late H.D.Shourie of Common Cause invited victims who suffered injustice at the hands of consumer courts to narrate their stories to him and was astounded to find that there were so many who lost only because they could not observe a few trivial formalities and technicalities. Is there any other Sourie around to compile such a list of ill-fated information-seekers who strove hard to get justice from the Information Commissions only to be greeted by disappointment after a frustrating experience of treading a labyrinthine course in quest for justice under the much touted “ Right to Information Act- 2005?
-SANJOG MAHESHWARI

CIC ORDER IN CASE NO. CIC/AT/A/2007/01177 Dt.19-02-2008

CIC ORDER in Case No. CIC/ AT/A/2007/ 01177 dt. 19-02-2008

Without verifying the facts and according unjustified credence to the factually false oral statement made by the Respondents, who took undue advantage of the absence of the Appellant in the hearing, the I.C. instead of forcing the Respondents to provide the requested documents/information to the Appellant, shifts the onus on to the latter by requiring him to provide to the former unspecified documents which simply do not exist at all, as a conditional quid-pro-quo, in order to cleverly bail the Respondents out of their bounden duty and responsibility to provide the requested documents/information to the seeker as enjoined under the Act.
For reasons best known to the concerned authorities, the order in the case has also not made available on the CIC website of the Net for public viewing. –SANJOG MAHESHWARI

RTI ARTICLE

SANJOG MAHESHWARI

RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT-2005-WHY IT FAILS TO DELIVER?

-SANJOG MAHESHWARI
While Article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression to every citizen as his Fundamental Right, the fact remains that the people cannot effectively exercise this right unless they know. In a democratic polity, it is the people who are the masters and as such must be in the know of various issues involved in the matter of governance and administration. As early as in 1976, the Apex Court made an observation to this effect in the case of Raj Narain versus State of U.P. However, it took nearly three decades for successive governments at Centre to acknowledge the fact that the people who pay taxes for running the government have a right
to correct and complete information about how it is functioning and how their hard-earned money is being spent. An informed citizenry and transparency of information are sin-qua-non for democratic functioning of government. It was also expected that proper implementation of such provisions in law could control corruption to some extent by holding Governments and their functionaries accountable to the public. The Parliament, therefore, enacted Right to Information Act-2005, which received the assent of the President of India on 15^th June,2005 and came into force with effect from 12^th October 2005- ( its earlier version- Freedom of Information Act-2002 having proved ineffective was repealed)The new law has been invested with some empowering provisions for the people, aimed at introducing elements of transparency and
accountability in administration and to contain, if not completely eliminate, corruption. However, the corruption-ridden bureaucracy had different ideas. Unnerved by the very first flush of Applications under the RTI law, it decided to make quite a few moves to exploit several loopholes in the law and blunt its effectiveness. First, they persuaded the cabinet committee to approve an amendment to exempt file notings and cabinet papers from disclosure under the Act. The proposed Amendment to the Act brought about within less than a year of the main Act coming in the force, was opposed tooth and nail by almost every right minded citizen. On the expected lines it was vociferously advocated and espoused by the politico-bureaucratic entrenched vested interests and the foot-dragging officialdom within the government. The malafide move was, however, foiled; thanks to the huge public outcry against the proposed amendment. Thus the Act survived the first blow “to take life out of it” as aptly observed by Sh.O.P. Kejariwal, Central Information Commissioner and the common man thought all was over.
However, the euphoria died soon. How wrong we were in forgetting that we live in a society where more the things change, more they remain the same. Came on the heels the dubious “Central Information Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007- made by the Chief Information Commissioner on 13-06-2007 and enforced post-haste by him after a week i.e. from 21-06-2007- which is proving its un-doing. Ostensibly brought about “for better internal management of the affairs of the Central Information Commission so as to enable it to function effectively”,
it actually puts the RTI Act-2005 way beyond the reach of a common man by rendering the process of seeking information under the Act an exorbitantly expensive, unduly complicated, complex, cumbersome,torturous and lengthy affair. To cap it all, the clever bureaucracy is so skilled in the art of dodging and has so many tricks up its
dirty sleeves in giving the slip to inconvenient queries and disowning responsibility that it easily gets away without supplying the information/ documents it wants to conceal or at best by supplying incomplete and irrelevant information and loading the information-seeker with all the rubbish he does not want that in 90 out of hundred cases one has to file Complaint or 2^nd Appeal to the Central Information Commission and/ or 2^nd Appellate Authority- the apex body under u/s 18 or 19 of the Act.
While what was required is: to address to the crying need of the day i.e. to force the officialdom to act more responsibly and also standardize the fees and procedure structure- which differs from State to State- and make it identical throughout the country, plug the multiple loopholes in the Act which render it ineffective, the Regulations, 2007 go on to prescribe a very costly, complex and cumbersome procedure for filing the Second Appeal or Complaint with the apex body i.e. the CIC. Even at this stage the art of dodging in which the bureaucracy is past-master comes handy to them. For example, in a very simple case where an applicant had requested for the information etc. regarding the action taken on and the status of a few representations made by him to a public authority, the Central Information Commission allowed the public authority to get off without supplying any of the requested information. In their order, they observed, “ The information solicited herein is about policy matters for which no definite answer could have been given…………..” They, inter-alia,went on to say, “Yet the respondents are agreeable to allow the appellant to inspect the files / records related to his RTI request…………” (Case No.
CIC/AT/A/2007/00574 dated 19-0707). What files/records to inspect when the Public Authority/ custodian is unable to locate them in their office? A single stroke of pen scrubbed down all efforts made by the appellant and at the end of the day ( it was more than a year!) he was poorer by a few hundred rupees and as ignorant about the status of his representations as before filing the Application for Information, first appeal and second appeal and few other
applications in between and paying fees all the way for the documents which should have been but were not available with the custodian. In an identical case, on the request for information made to the CPIO NCDRC on 17/18-2-08 followed by the First Appeal to the First Appellate Authority on 31-03-08 in respect of a representation dated 05-12-07, the CPIO of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission vide his letter No. A-2001/NCDRC/2008 dated 22-04-08, inter-alia, informs that “ Section 4(1) (d) does not apply to a judicial proceedings conducted by a Court or Tribunal as it refers only to administrative and quasi judicial decisions of public authorities”. It is conveniently ignored that the appellant is simply interested in knowing the status of his representation dated 05-12-07: the date of its receipt in the Commission’s Registry, daily progress made on it with copies of the related file-notings etc.- a purely administrative matter which has nothing to do with the nitty-gritty of judicial proceedings. In yet another case, Ghaziabad Development Authority, gets off-the hook by supplying grossly incomplete and mostly irrelevant information even after more than a year of the application under the RTI Act duly followed by the first and second appeals at the appropriate levels.(U.P. State Information Commission case No. S-245). In another case a Public Authority fails to provide certified copies of requested documents such as the Service Book, Leave A/c., the Pensioner’s Pension Payment Order etc. which are classified as “PERMANENT RECORDS” UNDER GOVERNMENT RULES & REGULATIONS on the pleas that they are “ not readily traceable, are misplaced somewhere” and “efforts are still being made to locate them” and on 2^nd Appeal made to the CIC, the Information Commissioner “authorizes the Appellant to inspect the records”. It is not clear that
when the requested records are not at all “readily traceable at the end of the concerned Public Authority and “ the efforts are still being made by them to locate the requested records” (even after more than a year!) according to their own admission “and copies of the same will be made available to the Applicant as soon as they are located” as is being asserted by them since long, what is the big idea in sending the Appellant on a wild chase of the black cat in a dark room where it apparently does not exist? In the circumstances, what useful purpose the appellant’s visit to the office of the Public Authority, as (graciously?) authorized by the 2^nd Appellate Authority- the C.I.C in their recent Decsion No. CIC/AT/A/2008/00247 dt. 17^th July,08, is going to serve, is not clear? Should they have not instead ordered disciplinary action against those responsible for the gross mismanagement of vital and important records which are mandated to be preserved permanently under the rules? Also in another case, C.P.I.O of NISCAIR (C.S.I.R) pleads ignorance of both the documents-two medical reimbursement bills sent to them under Speed Post on separate dates from separate Post Offices even when the Proof of their delivery to the addressee got conclusively confirmed in writing by the competent postal authority and a certificate issued by them to that effect was submitted long back to the Public Authority who as of now is maintaining stoic silence over the matter and not even acknowledging the Appellant’s repeated reminders and the 1^st Appeal to the NISCAIR’S First Appellate Authority. These examples are merely illustrative and by no means exhaustive.The reasons for the miscarriage of justice under the Act, which, of late, has been recurring with alarming frequency, are not far to seek. Recently, a peeved L.K Advani, Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and a member of the Appointment Committee of the Commission, irked by the fact that the Commission has become an all Babu-affair, declined to attend the CIC expansion meet called by its Chairperson, the Prime Minister of India. While section 12 (5) of the Act provides a vast field consisting of varied areas of public activity ranging from law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, mass media or administration and governance to chose persons of eminence from them for the posts of the Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners, it is not clear why only the babus are allowed to grace these exalted offices? No wonder, they have soft-corner for the bureaucratic fraternity they come from and their Decisions are heavily loaded in favour of the Public Authorities
providing the guilty many a escape route to ride over an inconvenient situation whereas actions and remarks of the poor information-seeker are considered an affront to the authorities that be. Even after more than 60 years of independence, the colonial mind-set reigns supreme and the bureaucracy finds it difficult to shed. Secondly, in most of the cases particularly in the autonomous bodies, the hierarchical built-up is such in which neither the Public Information Officer nor the 1^st Appellate Authority wields the disciplinary powers under the Conduct Rules to initiate disciplinary action against the errant officials by invoking C.C.S (C.C.A) Rules for not providing the information and
documents under their custody. When they can get away with any or every thing they do or do not do, why should they bother?Thirdly, the Act does not provide for any relief in the form of compensation for the wrongs suffered by an aggrieved information seeker at the hands of arrogant Public Authority who have little reason to be wary of it.
- SANJOG MAHESHWARI

CGHS - A FLAWED HEALTH SCHEME OF THE CENTRAL GOVT.

Health WatchCGHS shamDiscriminatory provisionsBy Sanjog Maheshwari
The anomalies are many. Why all pensioners and retirees not treated at par? Is the life of a Class IV employee who after retirement devotes all his spare time doing useful social work in the service of the community for the welfare and well-being of the people, in any way less valuable.
The healthcare and medical facilities provided under the banner of Central Government Health Scheme (CGHS) suffer from several anomalies, inadequacies, and discriminatory provisions. While right to health care and medical facilities should be seen as an integral facet of the right to life equally for all, irrespective of the individual’s status, the big babus have ensured that hassle-free world class health care, diagnostic and other medical facilities at posh private nursing homes, hospitals, health care centres at government cost and expenses is available only to the MPs and upper strata of the government employees. The nursing home facilities in government hospitals are also mostly cornered by such higher strata beneficiaries and generally remain out of reach of “commoners”. Medical specialists attached to the CGHS dispensaries, remain unavailable on their slotted week days of visit, as they are away on what is termed as VIP duties. There also exits a complex classification and sub-classification of CGHS beneficiaries in various categories; based on which the scale of facilities admissible to them under the scheme is decided. The parameters and norms differ from beneficiary to beneficiary depending on: the stage and scale of pay or pension, the position he holds or held in the government, whether as an employee or pensioner of some “purely government department” (whatever it may mean) or Central Autonomous body, and so forth; as if the life of a “commoner” is of lesser value. What is astoundingly appalling is that the pensioner-beneficiaries of autonomous bodies are not treated at par with their counterpart retired from purely government service- particularly in the matter of grant of credit facilities in the recognized private healthcare-centres, nursing homes etc. And this is where it hurts them the most. Even while they perpetuate and practice such blatant discrimination or for that matter make provisions for it in the rule book, they are not held accountable for the miseries caused thereby to the poor autonomous body pensioner- beneficiaries of the scheme. The traumatic experience and the plight of an autonomous body pensioner—beneficiary of CGHS—when in the evening of his life, suffering from age-induced infirmities and debilitating diseases, has to run around complying with quite a few absurd formalities, placating highly inflated egos of concerned babus (still afflicted with colonial mindset), getting department’s permission before and after the treatment, incurring all expenses from his own slender resources on the spot in the first instance irrespective of the enormity of the amount of expenditure involved, making repeated rounds to the hospital for getting the bills verified by the CGHS medical authorities then to the department from which retired, submitting reimbursement bills that are very much watered down for one reason or the other, settling silly objections raised only for objections’ sake, facing callous indifference, unwarranted hostility, objections and rejections all the way—can better be imagined than described. He is subjected to this unreasonable discrimination only for the sin of his retiring from an autonomous body. While a pensioner-beneficiary retiring from an autonomous body like CSIR in a disgusting display of blatant discrimination is denied credit facilities in the CGHS empanelled private hospitals, nursing homes and other health care centres to which his counterpart retiring from the Government service is eligible, simmering discontentment among this section of beneficiaries is quite conspicuous. Why this should be so particularly when the CSIR is a hundred per cent Central Government autonomous body working under the aegis and control of Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India and the Prime Minister of India is its ex-officio president? For no fault of his a CSIR pensioner-beneficiary is subjected to blatant discrimination even when he is required to make contribution to the scheme similar in scale and amount to that of a similarly placed Central Government pensioner; thanks to the whims, fancies and arrogance of the big babus in the Government who insert discriminatory provisions in the rule-book with calculated impunity. The anomalies are many. Why all pensioners and retirees not treated at par? Is the life of a Class IV employee who after retirement devotes all his spare time doing useful social work in the service of the community for the welfare and well-being of the people, in any way less valuable. As respected senior citizens of this country, all pensioners should be treated at par particularly in the matter of health care and medical facilities; distinctions of posts and positions held whether retired from so-called purely government service or hundred per cent Central government funded autonomous body must immediately go. Among pensioners age and age only should be the criterion for according “Priority” in the matter of providing health care and medical facilities which otherwise should necessarily be unvarying in scale and standard for all the pensioners across the board.

REVAMP THE POLITICAL SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE O4-12-08

SANJOG MAHESHWARI.

BIG CHANGE CALLED FOR TO COMBAT TERRORISM

-SANJOG MAHESHWARI
The life of a common citizen of India is of little value in the eyes of so-called VIPs and Netas. otherwise the brutal massacre of innocent people in cold blood in the recent carnage wrought by the terrorist violence in the business capital of India - the maximum city- Mumbai, would not have been brushed off as a trifling event by Mr. R.R.Patil Maharashtra’s now ex- Dy. Chief Minister & Home Minister. Commenting on the dastardly diabolical terror attacks and violence hat claimed about 200 innocent lives and maimed several times over, the callously uncaring worthy reported to have observed nonchalantly -“Aishi chhoti moti Baaten Barey Shahar mein hoti hi rahatien hain” . Other examples: Deeply-grieved father of martyr Major Sandeep Unnikrishnan, the NSG commando killed in action, when gets upset by pompous affectations of the C.M of Kerala, the worthy disgraces himself without remorse by retorting that “even a dog would not have visited the Unnikrisnan house had it not been that of a martyr.” However, wiser counsel prevailed and he has since apologized- after two days. While Mumbai bleeds, Ex-C.M. of Maharashtra Vilas Rao Deshmukh undertakes a location-scouting spree at Taj for his actor son’s
film taking an entourage of about twenty including Bollywood personalities with him.While Batla House encounter claims precious life of a gallant officer of the Delhi force, Shiv Raj Patil ex-Home Minister Central Government busies himself figuring out the dress to be worn for a meeting and
another worthy lands up on the martyr’s house showing the colour of his money to the family and doubting the martyrdom at the same time.
While these and many more such examples of audacious and atrocious actions and remarks are deplorably bad in taste, they underscore the fact that the Indian Political class as a whole considers itself way above the common citizenry. We have been putting up with this polluted mindset ever since independence so much so that it has now got deeply ingrained in the psyche of each and every politician. The Indian society is thus sharply divided in two classes: (i) The
privileged political class that rules and, (ii) The common citizenry that is ruled upon.
A politician belonging to the former class, inter-alia, wants and invariably arrogates to itself: (1) Power and political clout, more the merrier, in the government sans any responsibility and
accountability. If that comes with a political post so much the better, if not, the attendant pay, perks privileges, facilities, spacious Bunglow and such other freebies etc., of course, at the State’s cost, not only for self and the family but also for generations to come, will do. (2) Ditto for the Security cover-higher the category, the better it would be. (3) Rest of the things, such as minting tons of money for generations to come, by fair or foul means, the worthy, belonging to this class, is sure enough to arrange on his own.A common man from the other section, which comprises of those who routinely spend the entire day doing hard work eking out a living and arranging a square meal for the family, has no time and energy for indulging in the luxury of sparing a thought for any other thing aside from job and family. He, however, sometimes wants but rarely, if ever, gets an opportunity of thinking out-of –the-box and putting his thoughts across to the people. At the same time he wants always to be on the right side of the Establishment. Inviting the wrath of the authorities that be by being on their wrong side, howsoever the great cause or provocation may be, is not his cup of the tea. Out of an assembly of about one lakh such people recently in Mumbai, only one had the guts to air his views on a T.V.Channel
when he said something to the effect that “We want an Indian Musharraf to rule our country.” While only a handful might be sharing his views, it was he who only could avail of an opportunity to ventilate them. Others restricted themselves to giving vent to their rightful indignation, fury, anger and despair, pent up sentiments of grief and misery caused by the recent carnage. They ended up lamenting the inadequacy and loopholes in our security mechanism that let the Merchants of Death gun down hundreds and maim many times more. Of course, that also was very natural, but at the same time far from adequate- certainly not enough.
Media, both print and electronic, too, for the time being, are standing up for the cause and have been making the right noises ever since then. It, however, is a safe bet that all this will last only
till it does not transgresses into the comfort zone of the ruling political class and does not become too hot for its comforts. Then, the whole thing will lose the news-value and suddenly, all this will lapse into a deafening silence.
Our system of democratic governance invests the former- the ruling class VIPs and the inisters- with “absolute Power” to do and say any or everything without the least accountability. It also
insulates them from all manner of public or media anger and outrage. Judicial action against their callously irresponsible actions and behaviour, rarely initiated, simply goes nowhere. As a result of political expediency, the few who may be shown the door, just to assuage the public feelings, will continue to be invested with all those powers, privileges, perks and benefits security cover,
everything in tact as before, at the State’s cost. Obviously, to them it is immaterial whether all that comes with any other political post, position or office in the Government or without that.
What is important is: they will stand absolved of all their acts of omission and commission and negligence which had caused those deaths- destruction and the disaster. They enjoy total liberty to do and say whatever may suit them best and serve their immediate purpose. The life will limp back to normalcy and all will be forgotten and forgiven within a few days. This has happened umpteen times in the past; it will continue to happen many more times in the future as well. No useful purpose is going to be served unless we revamp the entire system of our democratic governance. And that includes de-linking the Executive from the Legislature; raising an Independent federal semi-military Police Force and Investigating Agency and biding good-bye to the Westminster type of Parliamentary Democracy, which has let us down through all these year, by switching over to the American model of Presidential form. SANJOG MAHESHWARI

Delhi Election

BJP’S DELHI DEBACLE
-SANJOG MAHEHWARI
Contrary to all the speculations, the Congress has won the battle of ballots in Delhi. Poll results did not favour BJP which got only 23 seats in the State Assembly elections against 40 to 45 projected as safe estimate whereas the rival Congress got 42 not thought of by the party in its wildest dream; certainly not after 26/11-“ Mumbai-carnage ”. The reasons that factored in the clear sweep of the poll-results in favour of the Congress party are obvious: (1) the sixth-pay commission bonanza to government servants and pensioners that swayed the voting pattern of a sizeable segment of this community in favour of the Congress party could not have been granted at a better time (2) “Minority” votes which in the earlier Corporation poll got divided among the political parties with persuasions similar to those of Congress, this time around, went solidly en-block in favour of the party (3) the projection of Mr.V.K. Malhotra, an aging leader, as BJP’s candidate for the C.M’s post; though the presence of a lesser number of the “minority” voters in his constituency ensured his own victory, and (4) Low-key campaigning by the complacent B.J.P
leadership on local issues and problems that render the life of a common man unbearably miserable such as: unsustainable, unplanned haphazard development and crass urbanization, ever increasing air pollution which has since scaled greater heights being more than pre-C.N.G. level, still more polluted Jamuna-lifeline of Delhi- waters even after spending hundreds of crores on implementation of the Jamuna Action Plan, traffic-choked Delhi roads with frequent traffic jams and snarl-ups lasting for hours on end, bumper to bumper cars inching their way on the traffic-chocked roads and belching volumes of carbon-dioxide all the while in the atmosphere, total absence of proper parking facilities in the colonies, people losing life and limb in routinely happening road-rages, elderly and ladies living in a totally unsecured and unsafe environment constantly exposed to murder, rape, loot and other heinous crimes , frequent power failures, sewage-contaminated low-pressure piped water supply, spurious drug racket- the list of woes of an average Delhiites is virtually endless. The Congress government even in its last ten long years of rule could not take on them headlong. That, and many such other unsettling matters such as rampant corruption, poor quality service provided by the government agencies, overcrowded metro, killer Blue-line monster etc. plaguing the life of an average Delhiite, should have provided enough ammunition to the B.J.P,. But, perhaps, BJP leadership also had been equally oblivious of the woes and the plight of the common man. Important though all these matters were and are from a Delhi citizen’s point of view, he certainly did not allow them to overshadow the tragic saga of death, devastation and destruction authored by the most inhuman carnage in recent history- the 26/11 terror attack on Mumbai, which was nothing short of an attack on India. The bitter truth, however, remains that no party has any plans for the ‘Big Change’- a radical overhaul of our debased political system of governance- to set the house in order in the first instance, that only can empower the Indian nation to stand as one man against such carnage and deter it. -SANJOG MAHESHWARI

The Great American Democracy

Kudos to the American democratic processes, systems and institutions which, once again, unfailingly reinvented themselves by electing the best man, Barack Obama, till recently an obscure senator, to the most powerful position in the world, eschewing all extraneous considerations, for affectively answering the need of the times and to meet the “pressing urgency of now in the best interests of America”.
While we may shower praise on Obama’s elocutionary skills: his passionate ‘we can’ victory speech, his sincerity, courage of conviction and call for ‘change’, his victory was a tribute to the great American democracy. It is their system of democratic governance due to which the miracle happened in spite of the obvious disadvantages: being a black man, a half- Muslim with Hussein as a middle name, rumours of his early days addiction to drugs and association with grotty characters; a political minnow who apparently had no chance, even in the primaries, against Hillary Clinton.
Political analysts have celebrated this historic event of global significance by writing millions of words eulogizing America for its capacity to shake off the dark past for which Abraham Lincoln had made the supreme sacrifice. The Indian constituency of thinkers and political analysts, marveling over the Obama’s stupendous victory, can not help but crave for an early end of this dark period of insipid, spineless, thoroughly rotten and corrupt political leadership in their own country, yielding place to the inspiring and committed leadership.
Is it possible to user in the much coveted ‘change’ to ‘meet the pressing urgency of now in the best interests of India’ under the shadow of our grossly debased variety of Westminster type of Parliamentary democracy which was adopted in unseemly haste? The answer is an emphatic “NO”. For that to happen, we will have to switch over to the American-model of Presidential democracy. Nothing short of this is going to help. The sooner we adopted it, the better it would be for the health of our society and polity; our all round development and well-being. We will then have our own Lincolns and Obamas who are conspicuous by their absence in the present day India.
Even before more than 90% of our populace could know what was happening, “We The People of India” were made to adopt, enact and give to ourselves a Constitution, the good-intentioned provisions of which, when put to practice delivered just the opposite. For example, it was hoped that Executive would be de-linked from the Legislature to ensure clean and vibrant administration. Instead, the Executive has been reduced to the position of a handmaid of the Legislature. Not very infrequently calculated attempts are made, even to subvert the Judiciary and make it subservient to Legislature. Its independence is undermined. Judicial pronouncements and verdicts, whenever made in any case by the Hon’ble Supreme Courts and High Courts should be accorded the status of law of the land. We not only need a fiercely independent judiciary but also an independent Executive and Media.
Our system of elections and electioneering contributed substantially to the criminalization of the politics. It created the politics of vote-bank which in turn helped third rate demagogues with criminal background, who are long on rhetoric and dramatics and short on everything else, to ascend to powerful positions in the government by playing religion, caste and region card and pursuing quota-reservation policies with dogged determination to woo, cultivate and consolidate caste and minority vote-banks. Our corruption-ridden democratic system of governance and institutions are totally incapable of producing an Obama-like phenomenon in India. While we always want the best man to win an election, he simply dreads to run. No wonder, democracy in our country has degenerated into highly criminalized and corrupt ‘mobocracy’.

-SANJOG MAHESHWARI