Friday, December 3, 2010

MISC. BENCH No. - 8305 of 2010 , HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System
(Judgment/Order in Text Format)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic
copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake,
please bring it to the notice of Deputy Registrar(Copying).


HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

?Court No. - 1

Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 8305 of 2010

Petitioner :- Nutan Thakur [ P.I.L.] Civil
Respondent :- High Court Of Allahabad Through The Registrar General Allaha
Petitioner Counsel :- Nutan Thakur (Inperson )
Respondent Counsel :- Manish Kumar,P.N.Gupta

Hon'ble Pradeep Kant,J.
Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi,J.
On objection being raised by Sri Manish Kumar as well as the learned
State Counsel that the writ petition against the High Court and Vidhan
Sabha under R.T.I. Act, jointly is not maintainable, Ms. Nutan Thakur,
who has appeared in person, says that the writ petition may be allowed
to be withdrawn and the same may be dismissed as withdrawn with
liberty to file fresh petition.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with the
liberty aforesaid.
Order Date :- 25.8.2010
Arjun

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/StartWebSearch.do
for more Judgments/Orders delivered at Allahabad High Court and Its
Bench at Lucknow. Disclaimer

नाबालिग नहीं कर सकते आरटीआई का इस्तेमाल!

http://www.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-minors-cannot-use-rti-act-1612393.html

शुक्रवार,03 दिसम्बर, 2010 को 08:59 तक के समाचार

नाबालिग नहीं कर सकते आरटीआई का इस्तेमाल!

लखनऊ. सूचना के अधिकार के तहत कोई नाबालिग जानकारी नहीं मांग सकता। यह
कहना है उत्तर प्रदेश सूचना आयोग का। आयोग ने चौथी कक्षा के एक
विद्यार्थी का आवेदन यह कहते हुए खारिज कर दिया। इस विद्यार्थी ने
मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से गायब दस्तावेजों का ब्योरा मांगा था।

यह भी कम आश्चर्यजनक नहीं कि सूचना के अधिकार कानून के किसी भी प्रावधान
में आवेदक की न्यूनतम या अधिकतम उम्र का कोई उल्लेख नहीं है। इसमें केवल
यह लिखा है कि भारत का कोई भी नागरिक दस रुपए की फीस जमा करवा कर पब्लिक
अथॉरिटी से जानकारी हासिल कर सकता है।

केंद्रीय सूचना आयोग में मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त एएन तिवारी का भी यही कहना
है कि इस कानून में कहीं नहीं लिखा है कि इसका इस्तेमाल केवल 18 साल से
अधिक उम्र के लोग ही कर सकते हैं। तिवारी ने कहा कि इसके लिए कोई आयुसीमा
नहीं है।

क्यों जरूरत पड़ी : कोई जवाब न मिलने पर उसने पता किया तो मुख्यमंत्री
कार्यालय ने बताया कि उसे कोई शिकायत नहीं मिली। तब इस बच्ची ने आरटीआई
के तहत आवेदन देकर जानना चाहा कि मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय से ऐसी कितनी
शिकायतें गायब हुई हैं तथा इसके लिए कौन जिम्मेदार है।

चकरा गया मुख्यमंत्री कार्यालय : बच्चे के इस आवेदन पर मुख्यमंत्री
कार्यालय चकरा गया। उसने जवाब दिया कि उसे कोई आवेदन ही नहीं मिला। लेकिन
स्कूल के बाहर पड़ा कचरा हटवा दिया गया।

नहीं रुकी बच्ची : बच्ची राज्य सूचना आयोग पहुंची। मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त
रणजीत सिंह पंकज ने जवाब दिया कि पृथम दृष्टया आवेदन कर्ता नाबालिग है
तथा भारतीय बालिग कानून के तहत बालिग की परिभाषा में नहीं आता। सूचना का
अधिकार अर्ध न्यायिक प्रक्रिया है इसलिए कोई नाबालिग आरटीआई कानून के तहत
कार्यवाही नहीं कर सकता। उसने ऐश्वर्या को सलाह दी कि वह अपने अभिभावक के
माध्यम से आवेदन करे।

स्कूल के बाहर कचरा

उत्तर प्रदेश के ताजा मामले में 9 साल की ऐश्वर्या शर्मा ने स्कूल के
बाहर पड़े कचरे की शिकायत स्कूल की कापी के पन्ने पर मुख्यमंत्री मायावती
के कार्यालय में की थी।
--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Fwd: Every Citizen Have Right to Information

dear all

a am forwarding a mail from convener of recenty formed rti group -*RTI
Council of* *U.P.* for your valuable comments on the topic.

specifically i would like to have comments of arvind kejriwalji ,
niraj kumarji and bimal khemaniji , who are in the " MARGDARSHAK
MANDAL " of this Council.


regards

urvashi sharma

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Akhilesh Kumar Saxena <akhileshsaxena09@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 16:52:57 +0530
Subject: Every Citizen Have Right to Information
To: urvashi sharma <rtimahilamanchup@gmail.com>
Cc: Himanshu Swarnkar <himan.swarn@gmail.com>, abhishek kumar
<abhishek.glamartist@gmail.com>, nirajklko <nirajklko@yahoo.com>, rti
nirajlucknow <nirajklko@gmail.com>, alokqr <alokqr@gmail.com>,
patrakarsadan <patrakarsadan@gmail.com>, jusufkabir
<jusufkabir@gmail.com>, IZHAR AHMAD <rti.lucknow@rediffmail.com>,
Izhar Ansari <izharansari@rtiactiongroup.org>, rti youth
<rti.youth@gmail.com>, "mahendra@ PROJECT VIJAY"
<mps.simco@gmail.com>, Anil Jani <aniljani1008@rediffmail.com>, bimal
khemani <bimal.khemani@yahoo.co.in>, Parivartan India
<parivartan_india@rediffmail.com>, aksri80 <aksri80@gmail.com>, neel
kamal <shvfoundation@gmail.com>

Dear Urvashi Ji,

In my humble opinion , the CIC of UPSIC is right in his decision . It is
accepted that if a particular law is silent on some provision , then such
interpretation can be drawn from other laws prevailing and referring to such
provisions . RTI Act is silent on " minimum age of the applicant " but other
laws are not which require a deponent to be a major above 18 years of age ,
of sound mind .

It has to be kept in mind that Applicant will soon be Appellant and
Complainant which would require him or her to verify the contents of his
pleadings in appeals and complaints . Verification of legal or quasi-legal
documents require knowledge and capacity to take CONSIDERED independent (
non-tutored) decision - sound mind . A child of tender age can not be
trusted with such decision making .
While the law does give one a right , but at the same time it stipulates one
to use that right judiciously without disrupting the harmony in the system .
Now consider a wrong or frivolous application , Appeal and Complaint by such
child . Issue of information is certainly there , but just imagine the
wastage of time , man-power to the system by some unwise queries . The PIO ,
AA , Commission shall all be scratching their heads just to make the kid
understand the wisdom of their decisions ( though most sane people find it
difficult to understand the wisdom of such decisions many times - just a
joke ) .
Just image - kids sending RTI Applications to school asking why mobiles are
banned in exams , why they have to wear dress , why school does not start
after they get up at 11 AM and the like ...the list can be mind-boggling .
But at the same time, I do not underestimate the significance of queries
raised by some kids . They are capable of raising such issues which can
shake you no ends because these come from unadulterated minds . In such
cases some mechanism should be evolved that the issues of kids can be taken
up suo moto at some level like the Hon'ble High Courts are doing for the
cause of social justice or the Applications to be entertained through an
appointed master in the school or the like . How it will work can be debated
and a mechanism evolved . RTIAct and very basic provisions of IPC , should
be included in syllabus at 8th class level so that they can start filling
RTI Apps when they are 14-15 years , DoPT may certify such RTI KIds after
training them for 2-3 months .
In nutshell , I would be happiest person if kids just know what is
corruption and how it is eating into the national resources . They should be
able to ask - "dad ! how did you purchase the Audi ?"
Purpose of RTI Act would be full-filled ..

I think we need to separate 2 issue - whether a minor CAN make an
application under the RTI Act, and whether a KID should be so allowed.

As far as the validity under present law is concerned, I think the law is
clear enough - section 3 proclaims that All citizens have right to
Information. As RTI Act does not define 'citizen', we can safely infer that
it is the citizen as defined under the Citizen Act, 1955. If the legislature
had intended to confer this right on adults only, it could have very well
said so clearly in the law itself. Neither courts nor the ICs have any right
to put words and stipulations into the act where they do not exist.

On the issue of desirability of kids asking questions under RTI, though I
fully respect your right to hold that view, I disagree with you. About the
objections raised by you, *please note *that anything starting with 'why' is
automatically rejected, without reading any further. And there are
sufficient provisions in the law to protect public authorities to protect
from 'wrong or frivolous' questions, by children as well as adults.


Regard's

Akhilesh Saxena

Convener-*RTI Council of* *U.P.*

Thursday, December 2, 2010

UPSIC order

--
Urvashi Sharma
Founder , Convener - YAISHWARYAJ
 
Vice President - Save Culture Value Foundation
 
Member - NAPM , NCPRI , PUCL , ASHA PARIVAAR ,

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

PTI : Minors cannot use RTI Act, says UPIC; CIC disagrees

http://www.indiareport.com/India-usa-uk-news/latest-news/952557/National/1/20/1

Lucknow, Dec 2 (PTI)

Minors cannot seek information under the RTI Act, the UP information
commission has said while dismissing the plea of a fourth class
student who had sought details of missing documents from the Chief
Minister's Office.

Surprisingly, the Right to Information Act does not have any clause
where age is the criterion for filing information seeking
applications. It only mentions that a"citizen of India"can demand
information from public authorities by paying a fee of Rs 10.

Chief Information Commissioner at Central Information Commission A N
Tiwari also said that the Act does not limit its use by people above
the age of 18 years.

"There is no restriction of age limit. The Act allows a citizen of
India to file the application,"Tiwari told PTI.

The case in point is of a nine-year old Aishwarya Sharma who had
approached Chief Minister Mayawati's office with a hand written
complaint on a notebook page about a garbage dump in front of her
school.

Seeing no initial action, she sent her RTI application seeking to know
rules under which garbage dumps can be allowed in front of schools.
Faced with such uncomfortable questions, the officials informed her
that the RTI application was not received by the office.

Aishwarya shot off another application seeking to know the number of
such letters that have gone missing from the CM's office and officials
responsible for misplacing her letter.

While she was trying to extract information, Lucknow Municipal
Corporation removed the garbage dump but no details about her
questions were provided by the CM's office.

When the case reached the State Information Commission, Chief
Information Commissioner Ranjit Singh Pankaj held that applicant is a
class three student (at the time of filing application) who is
prima-facie minor and does not come under the definition of major in
Indian Majority Act.

Pankaj said any complaint or appeal under the Act is a qasi-judicial
proceeding and any minor person cannot act in the RTI Act. He asked
Aishwarya to present her appeal through her guardian.

Section 22 of the RTI Act says,"Provisions of this Act shall have
effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in
the Official Secrets Act, 1923, and any other law for the time being
in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other
than this Act.

http://www.indiareport.com/India-usa-uk-news/latest-news/952557/National/1/20/1
--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH , Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 11759 of 2010

eLegalix - Allahabad High Court Judgment Information System
(Judgment/Order in Text Format)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic
copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake,
please bring it to the notice of Deputy Registrar(Copying).


HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

Court No. - 27

Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 11759 of 2010

Petitioner :- Dr. Nutan Thakur
Respondent :- Hon'ble Supreme Court Of India Through Registrar General
and others.
Petitioner Counsel :- Asok Pandey
Respondent Counsel :- A.S.G., Manish Kumar

Hon'ble Devi Prasad Singh,J.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Dixit,J.

Heard Mr. Ashok Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and Dr. Ashok Nigam, learned Additional Solicitor General of India.
The petitioner is said to be an social activist associated with
different organisations and wife of a police officer, has approached
this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the
following reliefs :
"(a) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents to kindly
direct the concerned respondents to initiate suitable legal and
Constitutional actions to remove all those Judges of the High Court of
Allahabad, including its Lucknow Bench against whom complaints have
been received by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as mentioned in its
judgment dated 26.10.2010 in Civil Appellate Jurisdiction in Special
Leave Petition (Civil) No.31797 of 2010 Raza Khan versus U.P. Sunni
Central Waqf Board and another.
(b) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents that all those
Judges against whose conduct serious complaints have been received to
the Supreme Court be not allotted any judicial work during the
pendency of the enquiry and impeachment process.
(C) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to stop all
the pension and other benefits of those of the retired Judges who are
found to be gravely indicted in such enquiries by these Enquiry
committees.
(d) Issue a writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondents to initiate
criminal proceedings against all those Judges who are found to be
gravely indicted to the extent of criminal misconduct in such
enquiries by these Enquiry committee.
(e) Issue any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem
fit in the circumstances of the case."

It appears that the petitioner had taken note of the recent judgment
of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Special Leave Petition (Civil)
No.31797 of 2009 Raja Khan versus U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board and
another. It has been submitted by Mr. Ashok Pandey, the petitioner's
counsel that since the Hon'ble Supreme Court has made certain
observations with regard to Allahabad High Court and its Lucknow
Bench, appropriate action may be taken against all such Judges against
whom some material exists. He further submits that all those Judges
against whom observation has been made by Hon'ble Supreme Court
raising doubts upon their integrity may be removed.
On the other hand, Dr. Ashok Nigam, learned Addl. Solicitor General of
India submits that Special Appeal was filed against the orders of
Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court before a Division bench of this
Court at Allahabad. The Special Appeal was allowed by the Division
Bench of this Court and the orders passed by Hon'ble Single Judge were
set aside. He furthers submits that the error committed by the learned
Single Judge was set at right by the Division Bench of this Court
while sitting in appellate jurisdiction by setting aside the orders
passed by learned Single Judge. It is the appellate order passed by
the Division Bench which was subject matter of dispute before Hon'ble
Supreme Court.
It appears that the petitioner has made vague allegations. No cogent
material has been put forth by the petitioner while raising her
grievance . The petitioner seems to be interested for publication of
her name in the newspaper while approaching this Court under Art. 226
of the Constitution of India. The writ petition exclusively seems to
be based on the observation made by Hon'ble Supreme Court which cannot
be the subject matter of adjudication by this Court, more so when no
material has been placed while preferring the writ petition. In case,
the petitioner feels that the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
requires some consideration at any level, then she may approach
appropriate forum.
The writ petition, being mis-conceived, is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Order Date :- 1.12.2010
kkb/


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit http://elegalix.allahabadhighcourt.in/elegalix/StartWebSearch.do
for more Judgments/Orders delivered at Allahabad High Court and Its
Bench at Lucknow. Disclaimer
--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )

newsxlive : 9 year old's RTI plea unheard - A 9-year old's RTI application in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh has punched holes in the government's tall claims of transparency.

newsxlive : 9 year old's RTI plea unheard - A 9-year old's RTI
application in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh has punched holes in the
government's tall claims of transparency.

news video links

http://forceindya.com/content/9-year-olds-rti-plea-unheard

http://alpha.newsx.com/videos/9-year-olds-rti-plea-unheard?quicktabs_6=0

9 year old's RTI plea unheard
Tuesday, November 30, 2010 - 23:17
(01:43) newsx.com

--
Urvashi Sharma

RTI Helpmail( Web Based )
aishwaryaj2010@gmail.com

Mobile Rti Helpline
8081898081 ( 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. )