India, Maharashtra, vijay kumbhar, News, Governance, RTI, Transparency, Civic Issues, Real Estate

Monday, July 27, 2015

Chikki that nourished malpractices in Maharashtra Mantralay – Maharashtra Chikki Scam Part 2

In February 2013 Pankaja Munde awarded 76 crore chikki contract to Suryakanta Mahilaa Audyogik SahkariSanstha SMASS . Earlier in 2013 also SMASS had bagged 38 crore chikki contract in Congress - NCP run government, obviously without tender , competitive bids and despite of clear objections from commissioner , Adivasi welfare . Afterwards order was stayed and High level inquiry was in this case. On account of objections raised by then BJP member’s .Interestingly Not ruling party nor opposition followed the case.

Then BJP came in to the power and Pankaja Munde awarded exactly double amount i.e 76 crore chikki contract similar way and same contractor, Despite Supreme court order and High Court directives, Clear opinion of then commissioner (industries) and decision of a committee headed by Chief secretary on 27 June 2013 ( Anne -8) to not to purchase Items on Rate Fixation and

off course without tender or competitive bids .Wasn’t that interesting ?

Actually as per supreme court and Central government directives the food to be provided should be fresh, hot and local. Accordingly government of Maharashtra on 6 July 2009 appointed a committee to decide rates, quantity of recipe of food that was to be provided anganwadis as Take Home Ration (THR) and to eat at anganwadi itself (Anne - 10) . Accordingly a GR was issued on 24 august 2009 directing quantity and recipe of food that was to be provided to anganawadi children.

In This GR there was no mention of any type of Chikki or ayurvedic biscuits. (Anne -11).Ground nut laddu was there in that list. Then how come chikki was introduced in anganwadi children supplimentary nutrition food?. Story is interesting on 2nd June 2011 then government decided that instead of sweet ground nut laddus chikki will be provided to children and pregnant ladies anganwadi in rural and urban areas. ( Anne - 12) .Which dietitian or doctor recommended it? Was impact of eating chikki on malnourished children studied ?.There is no answer to that. However interesting part of the story is there no chikki item in SMASS’s product list and it has never introduced chikki in open market. What does that mean ?

However the rate given as per tender for ground nut laddu was Rs. 1.27 for 10 gram i.e. Rs 12.70 for 100 grams and it was kept the same for chikki in June 2011.

In February 2012 government suddenly reserved several items like mango pulp, pickles, amala- kokam sharbat including Chikki to be purchased from Suryakanta Mahilaa Audyogik Sahkari Sanstha SMASS only. (Anne - 13).Don’t ask why this privilege was given to SMASS . Now how and why some items were reserved to be purchased from SMASS is matter of investigation. What were its credentials?. . But when organization

belongs to political person then nothing is impossible.

In august 2012 rates for chikki’s to be purchased were fixed and they almost almost double the rate in 2011. ( Anne - 14). Rates decided for SMASS were applicable to 30 June 2013 only.

On 29 April 2013 work orders of supply of chikki was issued to SMASS, obviously without tender , competitive bids and despite of clear objections from commissioner , Adivasi welfare . (Anne -15, Page 1) . Even then Purchase orders were issued. Afterwards orders were stayed on 14 June 2013. On objections raised by then MLC on 16th July 2013 and Minister had assured High level inquiry in this case. ( Anne – 15, page 7) .

On 3 june 2013 Radika rastogi then Development commissioner (Industries) had clearly opined “The CSPO has not done any Rate contract for chikki. There is only Rate fixation. In case of rate fixation it is not done competitively as in an RC ( I.e by way of open tenders).it only means that rate are reasonable, it does not mean that rates are competitive. Rate fixation is only meant for small orders & reservation is given for the certain items produced by women’s groups, societies, organizations of ex servicemen, blind/handicapped persons etc. In the present case, where purchase is to the tune of 37 crores, it is advised that purchase based on rate fixation would not be appropriate. Open tender procedure need to be followed wherein the specification and & standard are clearly spelt out. “( Anne – 15, page 6)

Accordingly One man High level committee of P.S Meena was appointed to inquire in to the matter on 20 November 2013 . But as the matter was High profile committee didn’t find time to enquire into it.(Anne -16 ) Hence again extension was given to committee till May 2014.( Anne - 17 ) But what happened to committee report no one knows.

Interestingly inquiry committee on chikki was appointed on complaints of BJP members, none of them followed it. Even after they came in to the power in October 2014 they didn’t do anything. Moreover one of their colleagues Pankaja Munde awarded contract to SMASS. What does that mean? .Allegations were baseless or contractor was powerful enough to silence everybody?

Despite Supreme court and High Court directives, Clear opinion of then commissioner industries and decision of a committee headed by Chief secretary on 27 June 2013 ( Anne -8) to not to purchase Items on Rate Fixation .The extension was given to rates fixed for SMASS on 1 September 2014 (Anne -18)

On 12 February 2015 pankaja munde had a meeting with principal secretary (WCD) and as per her orders and Principal secretaries guidelines, all previous proposals were rejected and fresh proposal were submitted . And accordingly three work orders were issued First one was for 6 month to 3 year old and amount was 23 , 85, 65,763/- (Anne - 19)

Interestingly in this order word ( amaranth) rajgira laddu/ chikki were there but afterwards only word chikki was mentioned in work order awarded. And accordingly only chikki was provided . There is difference between preparation of laddu and chikki . There was no mention of any rajgira Item in recipe GRs

Through second GR she ordered purchase of micronutrient chikki/ laddu but actually chikki was provided . Interestingly rates of groundnut chikki and and micronutrient chikki were different. Ground chikki / laddu rate 210 / kg while micronutrient chikki was 285/kg.This procurement was of 79, 81.42,671/- for for children of 3 to 6 year and pregnant and lactating women. (Anne -20 )

Through third GR she proposed to purchase of coconut chikki of 10,41, 55,260 for children of 3 to 6 years (Anne - 21)

This all purchase was for for year 2014- fifteen i.e. for only thirty days following chikki items were

Rajagira chikki 6 months to 3 years children

quantity 1109608 kg rate Rs 215/ kg = 238565720

Micronutrient 3 to 6 yrs 1909513 kg Rate 285/kg = 544211205

‘’ women 890987 rate 285 /kg = 253931437

Coconut chikki 3 to 6 yrs 520776 Rate 200/kg = 104155260

Total chikki kg 4430884 (forty four lakh thirty thousand eight hundred eighty four kg)

Rupees 1140863622 ( one hundred fourteen crore eight lakh sixty three thousand six hundred twenty two Rupees) amount actually sanctioned earlier was next day revised to 75 five crores ( Anne – 23 A) and also items micronutrient chikki for women and coconut chikki for 3 to 6 years children were cancelled. Don’t ask Why nutrition was denied to pregnant and lactating women and children of of 3 to 6 years group. Reason was obvious some more contractors who were sniffing in Mantralay corridors had also got clue of funds allocated to WCD. They also needed to be nourished. And only contractors do have approach in Mantralay and not the malnourished children and women.

Does the SMASS has capacity to prepare 30 lakh kg chikki ? . can a six month old infant eat chikki ? Why Pankaja Munde awarded contract to tainted contractor violating all the norm and directives and that too to a contractor against her own collogues had raised fingers. These are are the question she has to answer now.

This Scam Has a History,Maharashtra Chikki Scam Part -1

After firm denials of any malpractices in purchases contracts worth Rs 206 crore in a single day Pankaja Munde has now partly admitted her misdeeds. While doing so she also admitted that a company that provided chikki and khichadi of substandard quality in past was again given a contract. In her partial confession she cleverly has tried to put curtain on bigger wrongs. Not a single procurement of 206 crores she has done in February 2015 is free from scam.

Photo courtesy NDTV.com

It seems that this business of siphoning public money was going on in WCD since last many years. They wait for money to be allotted under integrated child Development Scheme ( ICDS ) and then distribute money amongst themselves. To do that they ignored, broke all procurement rules and guidelines. They arbitrarily made rate contracts; did rate fixation gave extension to it. And as all the ministers and senior officials were equally party to it no complaint helped break this racket.

As far as purchases of chikki and ayurvedic biscuits are concerned it also amounts to contempt of Supreme Court orders in 2004 and 2006. Supreme court had banned private contractors for supply of nutrition and directed use of village communities, self help groups and mahila mandals. On 7th of October, 2004 Supreme court ordered that the contractors shall not be used for supply of nutrition in Anganwadis and preferably Integrated child development scheme (ICDS) funds shall be spent by making use of village communities, self-help groups and Mahila Mandals for buying of grains and preparation of meals.

On 13th of December, 2006 Chief Secretaries of all State Governments/UTs were directed to submit affidavits giving details of the steps taken with regard to the order of supreme Court of October 7th, 2004 . After that all the States and Union Territories were directed to provide supplementary nutrition in the form of a morning snack and a hot cooked meal to the children in the age group of 3 to 6 years.

Photo Courtesy Mid Day

But government of Maharashtra instead of hot cooked food provided chikki and biscuits as a supplementary nutrition awarded work to “ Mahila Sanstha’s” instead of mahila mandals or self help groups gave it Mahila sanstha or mahila institutions

Principal adviser to the commission that Supreme court of India had appointed to monitor the implementation of the food and work related schemes in the country (Anne - 1 ) had pointed out that Following the Supreme Court orders of 2004, the Government of Maharashtra attempted a system of decentralized supply through women’s Self Help Groups (SHGs) . To ensure that big contractors did not come in, they passed a Government Resolution that no single SHG should supply more than five anganwadis. (Anne 2 )

While this system was beginning to work, the Government of Maharashtra in 2009; once again introduced a new system through which it allowed backdoor entry of big private contractors with only commercial interests. Then GR in that regard was issued in 2011 ( Anne -3)

Meanwhile They cleverly used word ‘Mahila sansthas’/ ‘woman’s institutions’in tender process . Mahila sansthas’/ ‘woman’s institutions’ includes not just SHGs/Mahila Mandals but any entity that has women in it, irrespective of size and turnover. By including Mahila Sansthas the government of Maharashtra opened the door for private companies and contractors. And the contract was awarded to three mahila sansthas

The said report also observed following irregularities , in contract given to these santhas

• The contracts for supply of THR ( Take home ration) under supplementary nutrition project ( SNP) has been given to Mahila Mandals which are further sub-contracting the responsibility of production of THR to private units. This is in violation of the spirit of the Supreme Court order that production and distribution should be decentralized and private contractors kept out

• The private units that have been leased by the Mahila Mandals for production of THR are owned by family members of the members of the Mahila Mandal who have the controlling authority over all organizational and financial matters in relation to the said lease agreement.

• In spite of many complaints regarding the quality of THR, there has not been any serious investigation or suspension of contracts. Lab reports on quality submitted by the Mahila Mandals are suspicious as all three mahila mandals approach the same lab and when the quality is tested in a government lab through picking a random sample, the THR failed to meet the nutritional norms. Further, even an independent checking by investigation bureau of the newspaper, Daily News and Analysis, Mumbai through a private lab showed that the THR being supplied does not meet nutritional norms.

• Two of the units (Paras Foods and Indo Allied Protein Foods) that have been leased by the Mahila Mandals for supply of THR are already under scrutiny following an FIR and Charge sheet by the CBI on charges of corruption in supply of food for the Tribal Department.

• Many of the transactions by the Mahila Mandals through the sub-committees have been done without informing and taking consent of the Co-operative Societies Department, as required by law.

• Although the ( Expression of interest ) EOI was invited for each district separately, the entire responsibility has been given to only three mahila mandals who are producing the THR in a total of less than ten units for the entire State, out of which one unit is based out of the State in Rajasthan.

Contract awarded to three mahila sansthas were front originations of private contractors.(Anne -4) The report also throws light on names of private contractors. Interestingly according to media reports most of these contractors were near and Dear ones of Munde family. (Anne -5 ).That may the reason suryakanta is now blaming gujrati marwadi ( Anne – 6)

Before going to actual procure procere we must see what is Rate Contract and Rate Fixation

A Rate Contract is an agreement between the purchaser and the supplier for supply of specified goods at Specified price and terms & conditions during the period covered by The Rate Contract (Normally it is always One year) . No quantity is Mentioned nor is any minimum drawal Guaranteed in the Rate Contract. The Rate Contract is in the nature of a standing offer From the supplier firm. But there is always limit on maximum purchase on Rate Contract

All government purchases in Maharashtra above Rs 3 lakh are mandated to be made after inviting tenders. This provision is there since 1993 . earlier purchase worth Rs 500/- at a time and Rs 20000/- of as ingle item in a year was allowed on rate contract . But above that, tender process was mandatory. Gradually this limit and provision was increased to 3 lakh till December 2014. (Anne – 7)

Rate fixation is only meant for small orders & reservation is given for the certain items produced by women’s groups, societies, organizations of ex servicemen, blind/handicapped persons etc. Nagpur bench of Bombay high court declared rate fixation illegal (2545/2012).Accordingly on 27 June 2013 in a meeting held chairmanship of chief secretary it was decided that as HC order henceforth Rate fixation will not be done. Attachment.(Anne - 8).

Earlier there were two major categories of children 6 months to 2 Years and 2 – 6 years. As per guidelines for children between 6 months to 2 years supplementary nutrition was to be provided in form of paste. It was also condition that food provided to children below 3 years should be light to eat and digest. Recipe for such food had been also given n this GR ( Anne - 9). There was no chikki, biscuits, eternal feed powder or protein powder in this chart.

Items like chikki , biscuits were never in this scheme but were procured for children in 6 month to 3 years range without adopting any procedure or considering it effect on children’s health.

Friday, July 3, 2015

Maharashtra governments attempt to amend CrPC 156 shows lack of confidence in the competence of courts of law

Maharashtra Cabinet recently decided to amenda provision of the Criminal Procedure Code to prevent filing of an FIR against a 'public servant' without the sanction of a competent authority. However this amendment is not only against the principal of equality before law and illegal but also shows lack of confidence in the competence of courts of law. It may be possible that some lower courts may have made some errors while delivering decision as per section 156 (3) of CrPC. But there is appellate mechanism to deal with it.

With the amendments to the CrPC (156) (3) courts would not be able direct Police to file FIR without the sanction of the competent authority. This is clear attempt to shield both government servants as well as elected members. This will make it harder for government servants and public representatives to be made accountable. Indian bureaucracy has maintained its “worst in the world “tag intact for many years, rating more than 9 points out of 10. Any more shields from being accountable will make bureaucracy even worst.

Government claims that the amendments are in line with the 2013 Supreme Court order in the Anil Kumar vs MK Ayappa case. However it is wrong interpretation of the apex court's orders. In that judgment court hasn’t said anything about amendment in law but in a recent judgement given on 19^th March 2015 apex court has given direction to lower courts on how to deal with cases related to section 156.

In a decision given in Mrs. Priyanka Srivastava Versus State of U.P. Apex court has observed that power under Section 156(3) warrants application of judicial mind. A court of law is involved. It is not the police taking steps at the stage of Section 154 of the code. A litigant at his own whim cannot invoke the authority of the Magistrate. A principled and really agrieved citizen with clean hands must have free access to invoke the said power. It protects the citizens but when pervert litigations takes this route to harass their fellows citizens, efforts are to be made to scuttle and curb the same.

The Supreme Court has further said that applications u/s 156 (3) are to be supported by an affidavit duly sworn by the applicant who seeks the invocation of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. That apart, in an appropriate case, the learned Magistrate would be well advised to verify the truth and also can verify the veracity of the allegations. This affidavit can make the applicant more responsible. It is because once an affidavit is found to be false; he will be liable for prosecution in accordance with law. This will deter him to casually invoke the authority of the Magistrate under Section 156(3)”

After delivering this judgment court asked its registry to send copy of judgement to the Chief Justices of all the High Courts by the so that the High Courts would circulate the same amongst the learned Sessions Judges who, in turn, shall circulate it among the learned Magistrates so that they can remain more vigilant and diligent while exercising the power under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C.

That means even though Supreme Court has observed some misuse of section 156 (3), it has not asked the amendment in law. But has categorically asked lower courts to take adequate precaution while dealing with the applications u/s 156. In that case there is no reason that government should make any amendment to the law. Doing so will be like, showing lack of confidence in the competence of courts of law

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website – http://surajya.org

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

Twitter - https://twitter.com/Vijaykumbhar62

Monday, June 29, 2015

Pankaja Munde don't Make A Fool of People,Come Clean in the Purchase affairs

Pankaja Munde, accused of involvement in a 'scam' for purchases worth Rs 206 crore without inviting tenders claims that she tried to break contractors' lobby. But documents show that instead of breaking “the lobby” she pampered same old tainted contractors whose “rate contracts’ (RC) were expired long back. She didn’t explain how come issuing contracts to same old tainted people is going to break “the lobby”?.

The contracts of chikki and ayurvedic biscuits were awarded to “Suryakanta mahila audyogik sahakari santha” ( SMASS) and “Gowardhan ayurfarma “ respectively. SMASS’s RCexpired in June 2013 and Gowardhans’ in July 2014. There were also severe allegations against both the contractors, even then Munde awarded it to them in February 2015.

Before going to discrepancies in awarding contracts let us see what is Rate contract. A Rate Contract is an agreement between the purchaser and the supplier for supply of specified goods at Specified price and terms & conditions during the period covered by The Rate Contract (Normally it is always One year) . No quantity is Mentioned nor is any minimum drawal Guaranteed in the Rate Contract. The Rate Contract is in the nature of a standing offer From the supplier firm. But there is always limit on maximum purchase on Rate Contract

All government purchases in Maharashtra above Rs 3 lakh are mandated to be made after inviting tenders. This provision is there since 1993 . erlier purchase worth Rs 500/- at a time and Rs 20000/- of as ingle item in a year was allowed on rate contract . But above that tender process was mandatory. Gradually this limit and provision was increased to 3 lakh till December 2014.

As far as SMASS’s case is concerned in 2011 government decided that instead of sweet ground nut laddus chikki will be provided to children and pregnant ladies anganwadi in rural and urban areas. The rate given as per tender for both items was Rs. 1.27 for 10 gram i.e Rs 12.70 for 100 grams. This happened in June 2011. In February 2012 government suddenly reserved several items like mango pulp, pickles, amala- kokam sharbat including Chikki to be purchased from SMASS only. In august 2012 rate for chikki to be purchased was decided as Rs 21 /- per 100 grams i.e almost double the rate in 2011. Now how and why some items were reserved to be purchased from SMASS is matter of investigation. But when organization belongs to political person then nothing is impossible. Rates decided for SMASS were applicable to 30 June 2013 only.

Meanwhile two work order of supply of chikki were issued to SMASS on 29 April 2013 ,but despite of clear objections from commissioner , Adivasi welfare nashik , purchase orders were issued. Afterwards orders were stayed on 14 June 2013. On objections raised by then MLC Nitin Gadkari, Vinod Tawade and Ashish Shelar on 16^th july 2013 Minister assured High level inquiry in this case. Accordingly One man High level committee of P.S Meena was appointed to inquire in to the matter on 20 November 2013 . But as the matter was High profile committee didn’t find time to enquire into it. Hence again extension was given to committee till May 2014. But what happened to committee report no one knows.

Interestingly inquiry committee on chikki was appointed on complaints of BJP members Gadkari, Tawade and shelar on 20 November 2013. But none of them followed it. Even after they came in to the power in October 2014 they didn’t do anything. Moreover one of their colleagues Pankaja Munde awarded contract to SMASS. What does that mean? .Allegations were baseless or contractor was powerful enough to silence everybody?

In Gowardhan biscuits case Rate contract was for three years i.e from july 2011 to july 2014 .Meanwhile therewere allegations of Supply after expiry date. But there was no inquiry ordered.Crores of rupees tenders were awarded to Gowardhan.

There are following possibilities in these cases .

1) Inquiry committee gave clean cheat to SMASS .but even then rate contract was expired and it was necessary to renew it.

2) ) Inquiry committee held SMASS guilty then question of Rate contract doesn’t arise at all

3) Even if there was a fresh Rate contract for year 2013-14 question of purchases more than 3 lakh was not allowed.

4) There were no fresh rate contracts on Governments official website. So purchases done without rate contract or tender are illegal.

5) Suppose if they feed, chikki or biscuits of entire year in a single month, what will happen to children?. But who cares?

There are several other allegations against her. But asking for the proof from others is not going to help her. One thing is clear as mandated by RTI act and other Government resolutions the documents related to all government affairs should be placed on website. Instead of doing that asking proof from others is raising doubts over her credentials.She also puts blame on her predecessors.However she should not forget that, they made mistakes and hence she is there. Hiding behind their sins is not a good idea.Instead of making fool of people, she should Come Clean in the Purchase affairs.

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website - http://www.surajya.org

https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

https://twitter.com/kvijay14

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

This week Maharashtra Government may notify some services under Right to Public Services Act

This week or next Government of Maharashtra may notify some services, that are to be provided under "Maharashtra Right to Public Services Act” ( MRTPS) .According to reliable sources formalities regarding this have been completed. To avoid delay in implementation, templates have been prepared and public authorities have been asked to notify their services in that format.

Interestingly the period of providing same service may vary in different public authorities. Because they are at liberty to frame time period as per their strength and available of resources. i.e The period within which specific services will be provided from various departments, The type of services that will be provided, The documents that will be necessary to provide such services, The person to be contacted if the service is not provided in specified time.

MRTPS was the dream project of Chief Minister Devendra Fadnvis. In his first press conference he had announced, Right to Services Bill on the lines of the Right to Information Act enabling people to demand services from the government. The bill was supposed to be brought before the legislature and passed in March session. But bureaucracy didn’t allow this to happen. Hence he had to take ordinance rout to introduce it.

The CM may be having good intentions but there are several loopholes in the Bill. No compensation if service not delivered in time, feathery penalty provisions to erring public servants, unnecessary layer of appeal, and only internal appeal mechanism that may cause damage to very object of the act.

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website - http://www.surajya.org

https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

https://twitter.com/kvijay14

Thursday, June 18, 2015

18th anniversary of "Cheat India Movement” Started by Public Servants of Independent India

Nobody celebrated or observed openly but it was 18^th anniversary of cheat India movement started by bureaucracy in hand in gloves with politicians on 24 may 1997. Actually this movement started immediately after independence, but got recognition on 24^th May 1997. This day all chief ministers’ conference held at Delhi recognized that as the country completes 50 years of independence and as the people are assailed by growing doubts about the accountability effectiveness and moral standards of administration. Central and state governments should move together to justify the trust of faith of the people in the government by taking up the implementation of the action plan endorsed by the conference in a time bound manner

Earlier conference of chief secretaries held in November 1996 had realized the importance of changing the present negative perception and felt that blame has to be shared by political, bureaucratic elements. The chief minister’s conference on 24 May 1997 resolved that the central and state governments would work together to concretize the Action Plan dealing with the Accountable and citizen-friendly Government, Transparency and Right to Information and Improving the performance and integrity of the public service.

On feb 19, 1999 : then prime minister in his address to national development council felt that people’s perception had become that bureaucracy was an agent of exploitation rather than a provider of service, corruption had become a low risk and high reward activity. He also felt that political executive should first critically review its own performance before expecting discipline and diligence from the administration.

Meanwhile several committees were set up, action plans were decided but instead improving system deteriorated more. More and more scams happened after that. Reason behind that was simple, nobody wanted it from bottom of heart. One interesting point was discussed in this connection was, for people-friendly and effective administration depends on elimination of corruption in the public service through prevention, surveillance and deterrent prosecution and dealing ruthlessly with the nexus among politicians, civil servants and criminals.

Since then and earlier also Indian bureaucracy has maintained its “worst in the world “ tag intact for many years, rating more than 9 points out of 10. American businessman, investor and author Jim rogers say India Has the Worst Bureaucracy in the World.

On its golden anniversary of independence they started cleansing the administration. In last 18 years nothing has happened .Now let us see what happen till diamond anniversary.

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website – http://surajya.org

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

Twitter - https://twitter.com/Vijaykumbhar62

Wednesday, June 17, 2015

To show insubordinate public servants their real position Activists seek Anna Hazare’s support

Bureaucrats never allowed democracy to flourish in this country. And hence common person, the real owner of this country always remained deprived of his legitimate rights. They confiscated common person’s rights in hand in gloves with people’s representatives. They have forgotten that they are servants of citizens of India. To make realize their real positon members of “Mahiti Adhikar Katta” have decided to write “public servant” or its abbreviation P.S before or instead of H’ble , Mr. or Mrs. while writing to any public servant. Katta members communicated this to Anna Hazare yesterday.

Yesterday ( 15^th June ) members of RTI katta extended birth day greeting to legendary social worker Anna Hazare at Ralegan siddhi. Activists informed him about new initiative they have taken to show their place to insubordinate public servants. (Reproduced below is letter written to Anna Hazare).Anna frankly spoke to activists present. Anna’s aid Datta Awari informed them about living History of transformation Ralegan Siddhi, Janlokapal andolan and Anna’s life “ Media center” . This media center is amazing, once you watch it, nothing remain to ask about Anna’s extraordinary work. You become speechless.

Here is letter written to Anna

H’ble Anna

The conference of chief ministers held on 24 may 1997, recognized that as the country completed 50 years of independence and as the people were assailed by growing doubts about the accountability, effectiveness and moral standards of administration and hence , central and state governments should move together to justify the trust of faith of the people in the government by taking up the implementation of the action plan

The conference also resolved that the central and state governments would work together to concretize the Action Plan dealing with the following themes

I. Accountable and citizen-friendly Government

II. Transparency and Right to Information and

III. Improving the performance and integrity of the public service.

Citizens’ Charter, Redressal of Public Grievances, Peoples Participation, Decentralization and Devolution of Powers,

In order to carry forward the Action plan for immediate as well as long term improvement in administration, it was decided to set up a Committee under the Cabinet Secretary including some of the Chief Secretaries representing the different regions of the country as well as some senior officials of Government of India

The states welcomed the initiatives by the Prime Minister towards more effective and responsive administration and stated that these initiatives are important and timely.

There after central and state governments introduced so many so called pro people legislations that too because of pressure from noted activists like you. But outcome was zero. Because there was lot of difference in what was written in the laws and actual situation on ground zero. Even if some pro people legislations were introduced they made sure that those will not be implemented properly. And hence you will see lot of former bureaucrats occupied most of the authorities after retirement.

Politicians and babus never tried to earn citizens faith back, they just eye washed it. The real culprit in this process was bureaucracy. Babudom is not willing to loosen its grip on the neck of democracy. It is not ready to decentralize powers. Hence even 18 years after all chief ministers’ resolution in presence of then prime minister things didn’t change.

They never allowed democracy to flourish in this country. And hence common person , the real owner of this country was always remain deprived of his legitimate rights. they confiscated common persons rights in conspiracy with peoples representatives.

However, what is the solution to come out of this situation?. Lot needs be done to achieve this. But we can start with small thing. Normally we use abbreviation like h’ble, Mr., Mrs. Etc. while writing to public servants. This has created superiority complex in their mind, and as a result they are not giving any heed to common person’s problems. To overcome this common person should now start showing Public servant their real place.

If we write P.S for public servant before or instead of other abbreviation like H’ble, Mr. Mrs. Etc., we guess that will definitely make some difference. We don’t want to insult or abuse them but to show their place that they have forgotten. Hence if one who wish may write h”ble P.S or P.S Mr/Mrs etc . We the members of “Mahiti Adhikar Katta” have decided to do so immediately. We request you to support us on this issue.

As well it is almost 10 years that our parliament passed Right to Information act on 15 June 2015. On 15^th June 2005 parliament passed RTI and after that 120 were given to public authorities to comply with section 4 of the said act. But total state of the act in India is miserable. We have planned some events on account of 10^th anniversary of RTI act from 15 June to 12^th October. We seek your support for this also.

Thursday, April 23, 2015

MRTPS Act 2015, babudom is not willing to loosen its grip on the neck of democracy

Maharashtra Government has decided to bring an ordinance to enforce The Maharashtra Right to Public Services Act 2015 (MRTPS). The decision regarding this was taken in the recent cabinet meeting.However, if enacted as it is, the act will have disastrous effects on delivery of public services. It seems that babudom is not willing to loosen its grip on the neck of democracy. MRTPS 2015 has so many loopholes.

As we all know how babudom is stifling Right to information act (RTI).Though RTI act says The Chief Information Commissioner (CIC) and Information Commissioners (IC shall be persons of eminence in public life with wide knowledge and experience in law, science and technology, social service, management, journalism, mass media or administration and governance. All over India we see all the CIC and IC’s are from the bureaucracy only exept few.

In MRTPS they have eliminated all other fields except Governance from the Right to Public services Commission that is to be established under MRTPS. Section 13 (5) this act. It says The chief commissioner or commissioners shall be the persons of eminence in public life with wide knowledge and experience in administration in government or public authority. That means there will be only babus as CICs and ICs of commission.Hence there will be no independent and impartial appellate mechanism.

First and second appellate mechanism under this act is with senior officers of the same public authority or the department only, and third appeal is with Right to Public services Commission .That means first and second appeals will be heard by working babus and third appeal will be heard by retired babu. Applicants will have to depend on the mercy of babu’s only.And so many appeals may frustrate prevent the applicants from filling the appeals.

As per section 2 (j) of the act ““Public Authority” means,-

(a) any Department or authorities of the Government;

(b) any organization or authority or body or institution or a local authority, established or constituted,-

(i) by or under the Constitution of India, in the State;

(ii) by any other law made by the State Legislature;

(iii) by notification issued by the Government;

(i) any institution , a co-operative society , Government Company or a authority owned, controlled or financed by state government ; or

(ii) any non-Governmental organization receiving financial aid the State Government.

This definition is almost copied from Right to information act. But that is not sufficient because bureaucracy thinks that system has already been overloaded. They are also speaking of dedicated machinery, outsourcing and outside funding for providing public services. In this case terms “private institution financed by the state government” or “NGOs “ receiving financial aid” may harm the very cause of the act. Here one can see that the term, “directly or indirectly finance by state government’ is missing here .That means institutes providing public services with outside finance or managing the services with the fees for providing public services will not attract provisions of MRTPS act.

Another hurdle is section 4 of this act. It says (1) subject to legal, technical and financial feasibility, every eligible person shall have right to obtain public services in the state

(2) Subject to legal, technical and financial feasibility, every Designated Officer of the Public Authority shall provide the notified services specified in the notification to the eligible Person, within the stipulated time limit. We know how words “technical and financial feasibility ‘ have become obstacle in obtaining information under RTI specially in rural areas . And as far as legal feasibility is concerned one should not forget that in past government had tried taking Declaration that the case relating to Information sought for, has not been ﬁled previously/pending with any court/any Authority before filling appeal under RTI. Yes there must be some restrictions, however those should be very clear so that nobody will misuse it.

Section 10 (1)(a) of this bill says Where the First Appellate Authority is of the opinion that the Designated Officer has failed to provide notified service without sufficient and reasonable cause, then he shall impose a penalty subject to such maximum amount as may be specified by the State Government from time to time by notification in the Official Gazette.

This is the trick to kill the act before its inception. If penalty provision is not fixed in the act itself, babus will time and again try to minimize or remove it completely by mere notifications. And what is not provided in the act cannot be added or changed by mere notifications. We also should not forget that babus have tried to weaken the RTI by mere office orders, circulars and notifications.

Section 11 of this act says , Designated Officer or First appellate authority as the case may be shall pay the amount of penalty within period of thirty days , failing which competent authority shall recover the amount of penalty from salary of Designated Officer or First appellate authority as the case may be. This clause is likely to be misused by corrupt officer, they would not mind depositing any amount in cash if it is not to be recorded in his/her service book. So amount of penalty shall be recovered from salaries only.

As well as there is no provision of any compensation or cost if applicant doesn’t receive desired service in stipulated time.

There so many other loopholes in the act. This act was dream and first announcement made by chief minister Devendra fadnavis. If enacted properly this act has power to change the future of the state.

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website – http://surajya.org

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

Twitter - https://twitter.com/Vijaykumbhar62

Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/user/kvijay14

Monday, March 2, 2015

To protect fellow officers, Government Officers tend to frustrate the basic intention of RTI - Mumbai High Court

Mumbai High Court recently ordered State Government of Maharashtra to File FIR in case of missing file, passed serious strictures and also awarded 15000/ ( Rupees fifteen thousand ) as cost to the applicant Vivek Kulkarni. The high court ( WP NO 6961/2012) also said the case in hand was a classic example, as to how the Government officers for protecting their fellow officers tend to frustrate the basic intention of the legislature behind the enactment of the Right to Information Act, 2005.

Brief history of the case

Mr Vivek Kulkarni had filed an application dated 5th September, 2008 with Urban development department of Maharashtra ( UDD) the for seeking information under the RTI in respect of the Government Resolution dated 21st August, 1996. The said resolution was pertaining to the release of various lands in and around the vicinity of Sangli city which were acquired by the Government under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. He had sought information about the Government notings and other documents on the basis of which the said Government Resolution was issued. The details of the lands released on the basis of the said Government Resolution were also sought.

By a communication dated 22nd September, 2008 UDD informed the Petitioner that the required information sought for by the Petitioner is pertaining to file No. ULC/1089/2123//ULC- 2 which was not available on the record of the Urban Development Department and therefore, the said information cannot be furnished to the Petitioner. By the said communication dated 22nd September, 2008 it was informed to the Petitioner that the other information which was sought for by the Petitioner vide his point No.4 in his application dated 5th September, 2008 is in connection with the office of the Deputy Collector and competent authority, Sangli and the said application to that extent has been transferred / transmitted to the said authority for further action in the matter

Aggrieved by the said decision mr. Kulkarni then filed first appeal with the Appellate authority (FAA) Deputy Secretary. FAA partly allowed the said appeal thereby directing the Information Officer along with the Section Officer ULCA-2 to take search of the concerned file bearing No. ULC/1089/2123//ULC-2 and to submit the file or information in connection with the file to the Petitioner immediately . It was further directed to the Deputy Collector and Competent Authority, Sangli Urban Agglomeration to provide the information in respect of the lands returned to the owners as per the Government Resolution dated 21st August, 1996. FAA had observed that as the Government Resolution dated 21^st August, 1996 was a policy decision taken by the Government. FAA also observed that the information which was sought for by the Petitioner was not available with the Public Information Officer and therefore the said information was not made available to the Petitioner and the Public Information Officer did not have any intention to deny the said information sought for by petitioner .

Petitioner then filed second appeal with pune bench of information commission (IC). The then IC Mr.Vijay Kuvalekar had orally directed the Public Information Officer and the First Appellate Authority to take all the steps for tracing out the necessary and required files and also directed that in case the said files were not traced out then to register offence / criminal complaint against all the concerned as contemplated under the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Records Act, 2005 and to submit a report to the IC.IC then its order recorded its conclusion that the documents in respect of which the information was sought by the Petitioner were required to be preserved as the same were public documents within the meaning of the Maharashtra Public Records Act, 2005. It was observed that the fact that the said public record is not available was serious and it amounts to denying information on decisions taken by he state to citizens.

IC also directed to initiate action against all the concerned by registering an offence under the MaharashtraPublic Records Act, 2005. The said direction was issued to Mr. Suresh Kakani ( Joint secretory Government of Maharashtra ) by specifically mentioning his name and compliance report was sought thereon.

As the information commissions order was not complied with Mr.Kulkarni filed a writ in Mumbai High court. In an affidavit filed by Mr.Suresh Kakani in high court it was revealed that, instead of submitting the compliance report of the order passed by the State Information Commissioner, the Respondent Deputy Secretory had only given several excuses and the difficulties which he has allegedly faced while attempting to comply with the order passed by the State Information Commission.

High Court also observed that

1) Directions which were issued by the State Information Commission in the order had been casually treated by the Respondents.

2) That affidavit files by Mr.Suresh Kakani was conspicuously silent about the registration of the First Information Report and/or the criminal complaint against the concerned persons. He himself had tried to give a clean chit to all the concerned including himself. This approach of the Respondent No.3 Mr.Suresh Kakani is reprehensible and cannot be countenanced. HC was also not satisfied about the fact that the State had made genuine efforts to comply with the order dated 18th August, 2011 passed by the State Information Commission.

3) Mr.S.K. Salimath ( Deputy secretory UDD government of Maharashtra) instead of implementing the order passed by the State Information Commission in its true letter and spirit has proceeded to give a go-bye to the order of the Second Appellate Authority. Mr.S.K. Salimath on his own has come to a conclusion that it was very difficult for his department to fix the responsibility on any member of the staff for misplacing the documents in question.

4) While exhibiting over enthusiasm, Mr. Salimath has taken to himself the task of the investigator and the fact finding authority. He has made a bold statement that since no deliberate attempt by any officer or employee of his department to purposely misplace or destroy the record in question has been noticed, the department has not lodged any criminal complaint against any member of the staff

5) Mr. Salimath has exceeded his jurisdiction and has tried to overreach the order passed by the State Information Commission dated 18th August, 2011. Mr. Salimath has no authority to decide nor to register an offence. Mr. Salimath was expected to follow the order passed by the State Information Commission in its true letter and spirit.

6) Respondents cannot be allowed to raise or take a spacious plea that the order passed by the State Information Commissioner dated 18th August, 2011 cannot be complied with. The State Information Commissioner has passed the said order which binds the Respondent No.3.

7) In view of the clear direction issued by the Second Appellate Authority, they were bound to set criminal law in motion as the documents could not be traced within the stipulated time.

HC directed Deputy secretory UDD to set the criminal law in motion as directed under the judgment and order passed by Information commission

HC further directed that after the First Information Report is registered by the State of Maharashtra, the investigation shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and preferably within the period of six months from the date of registration of the First Information Report. The concerned Commissioner of Police shall consider of entrusting the investigation to an officer of a higher rank and not below the rank of a Deputy Commissioner of Police

Subscribe for Free

To receive free emails or free RSS feeds, please, subscribe to Vijay Kumbhar's Exclusive News & Analysis

RTI KATTA

Vijay Kumbhar

RTI Resource Person, RTI Columnist

Phone – 9923299199

Email – kvijay14@gmail.com

Website – http://surajya.org

Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/kvijay14

Twitter - https://twitter.com/Vijaykumbhar62

Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/user/kvijay14