Dharmendra Shukla, a&nbsp;man from Indore city in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh recently received a massive reply to his Right to Information Act (RTI) plea related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The reply was in the form of a staggering 40,000 pages of information, reported PTI news agency.&nbsp;

Dharmendra Shukla had submitted an RTI plea requesting details about bill payments towards materials procured during the COVID-19 pandemic period.

"I had submitted an RTI plea with the Chief Medical and Health Officer (CMHO) of Indore seeking details of tenders and bill payments connected to procurement of medicines, equipment and allied materials during the COVID-19 pandemic period,” Shukla said on Saturday.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/melting-swiss-glacier-coughs-up-body-remains-of-hiker-who-went-missing-in-1986-620545">Melting Swiss glacier coughs up body remains of hiker who went missing in 1986</a>

However, the information he sought was not provided within the stipulated one-month time frame.

<h2>Approaching the appellate officer</h2>

Due to the lack of response within the specified time, Dharmendra Shukla approached the first appellate officer, Dr. Sharad Gupta.

Dr. Gupta accepted the plea and directed that the information should be given to Shukla free of cost.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/asian-masalanomics-for-spice-trade-spiced-up-in-vietnam-2000-years-ago-reveals-study-620534">Asian masalanomics for spice trade spiced up in Vietnam 2000 years ago, reveals study</a>

To deliver the enormous amount of information, Dharmendra Shukla had to use his sports utility vehicle (SUV). The 40,000 pages completely packed the vehicle.&nbsp;"I took my SUV to ferry the documents and the entire vehicle got packed. Only the driver's seat remained free," he reportedly said.

<h2>Information granted free of cost</h2>

PTI news agency said that upon being contacted, Dr. Sharad Gupta, the appellate officer and Regional Joint Director of the state health department, confirmed that he ordered the information to be provided to Shukla without any charges.

<h2>Action against delay</h2>

Even though Shukla got the RTI response, it was not received within the stipulated time period of one month.&nbsp;Dr. Gupta said that an action will be taken against the personnel responsible for the delay in providing the information.&nbsp;

Watch | Rains soak Northern China as Doksuri makes its way to Beijing

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/rains-soak-northern-china-as-doksuri-makes-its-way-to-beijing-620555/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

He directed the CMHO to take appropriate measures to address the situation, as the delay caused a loss of Rs 80,000 to the state exchequer.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Dharmendra Shukla, a man from Indore city in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh recently received a massive reply to his Right to Information Act (RTI) plea related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Dharmendra Shukla, a man from Indore city in the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh recently received a massive reply to his Right to Information Act (RTI) plea related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The reply was in the form of a staggering 40,000 pages of information, reported PTI news agency. Dharmendra Shukla had submitted an RTI plea requesting details about bill payments towards materials procured during the COVID-19 pandemic period. "I had submitted an RTI plea with the Chief Medical and Health Officer (CMHO) of Indore seeking details of tenders and bill payments connected to procurement of medicines, equipment and allied materials during the COVID-19 pandemic period,” Shukla said on Saturday. Also Read | Melting Swiss glacier coughs up body remains of hiker who went missing in 1986 However, the information he sought was not provided within the stipulated one-month time frame. Approaching the appellate officer Due to the lack of response within the specified time, Dharmendra Shukla approached the first appellate officer, Dr. Sharad Gupta. Dr. Gupta accepted the plea and directed that the information should be given to Shukla free of cost. Also Read | Asian masalanomics for spice trade spiced up in Vietnam 2000 years ago, reveals study To deliver the enormous amount of information, Dharmendra Shukla had to use his sports utility vehicle (SUV). The 40,000 pages completely packed the vehicle. "I took my SUV to ferry the documents and the entire vehicle got packed. Only the driver's seat remained free," he reportedly said. Information granted free of cost PTI news agency said that upon being contacted, Dr. Sharad Gupta, the appellate officer and Regional Joint Director of the state health department, confirmed that he ordered the information to be provided to Shukla without any charges. Action against delay Even though Shukla got the RTI response, it was not received within the stipulated time period of one month. Dr. Gupta said that an action will be taken against the personnel responsible for the delay in providing the information. Watch | Rains soak Northern China as Doksuri makes its way to Beijing × He directed the CMHO to take appropriate measures to address the situation, as the delay caused a loss of Rs 80,000 to the state exchequer. WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here. ×

Indore man's SUV fully loaded with 40,000 pages with COVID-19 Right to Information reply

The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that the office of Chief Justice of India is a "public authority" and comes under the ambit of Right to Information (RTI) Act while also adding that the transparency only strengthens the judicial independence.

A five-judge Constitution bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices NV Ramana, DY Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna were hearing a petition challenging the January 2010 judgment of the Delhi High Court which ruled that office of CJI comes under the purview of RTI.

The apex court said that the public interest demands that the transparency is maintained.

"Right to privacy and confidentiality is an important aspect and it has to be balanced. There has to be a balance between the right to information and the right to privacy as well as confidentiality and independence of the judiciary,"&nbsp;it said.

Chief Justice Gogoi had earlier observed that in the name of transparency, one cannot destroy the institution.

In November 2007, an RTI activist Subhash Chandra Aggarwal had filed an RTI in the Supreme Court seeking information on judges` assets but the information was denied.

Aggarwal then approached the Central Information Commission (CIC) which asked the apex court to disclose information on the ground that the Chief Justice of India`s office comes within the ambit of the Act.In January 2009, a plea was moved in the Delhi High Court against the CIC order but the latter was upheld.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that the office of Chief Justice of India is a "public authority" and comes under the ambit of Right to Information (RTI) Act while also adding that the transparency only strengthens the judicial independence.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that the office of Chief Justice of India is a "public authority" and comes under the ambit of Right to Information (RTI) Act while also adding that the transparency only strengthens the judicial independence. A five-judge Constitution bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices NV Ramana, DY Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna were hearing a petition challenging the January 2010 judgment of the Delhi High Court which ruled that office of CJI comes under the purview of RTI. The apex court said that the public interest demands that the transparency is maintained. "Right to privacy and confidentiality is an important aspect and it has to be balanced. There has to be a balance between the right to information and the right to privacy as well as confidentiality and independence of the judiciary," it said. Chief Justice Gogoi had earlier observed that in the name of transparency, one cannot destroy the institution. In November 2007, an RTI activist Subhash Chandra Aggarwal had filed an RTI in the Supreme Court seeking information on judges` assets but the information was denied. Aggarwal then approached the Central Information Commission (CIC) which asked the apex court to disclose information on the ground that the Chief Justice of India`s office comes within the ambit of the Act.In January 2009, a plea was moved in the Delhi High Court against the CIC order but the latter was upheld.

RTI Act applicable to office of Chief Justice: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will, on Wednesday, pronounce the verdict on whether or not the office of Chief Justice of India comes under the ambit of Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The order will be passed by a five-judge Constitution bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices NV Ramana, DY Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna on a petition filed by a Supreme Court Secretary-General challenging the January 2010 judgment of the Delhi High Court.

The High Court in its order had declared the CJI's office a "public authority" and said that it should come under the RTI Act.

The bench had reserved the order on April 4. Chief Justice Gogoi had earlier observed that in the name of transparency, one cannot destroy the institution.

In November 2007, an RTI activist Subhash Chandra Aggarwal had filed an RTI in the Supreme Court seeking information on judges'&nbsp;assets but the information was denied.

Aggarwal then approached the Central Information Commission (CIC) which asked the apex court to disclose information on the ground that the Chief Justice of India's office comes within the ambit of the Act.

In January 2009, a plea was moved in the Delhi High Court against the CIC order but the same was upheld.

The Supreme Court will, on Wednesday, pronounce the verdict on whether or not the office of Chief Justice of India comes under the ambit of Right to Information (RTI) Act.

The Supreme Court will, on Wednesday, pronounce the verdict on whether or not the office of Chief Justice of India comes under the ambit of Right to Information (RTI) Act. The order will be passed by a five-judge Constitution bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices NV Ramana, DY Chandrachud, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna on a petition filed by a Supreme Court Secretary-General challenging the January 2010 judgment of the Delhi High Court. The High Court in its order had declared the CJI's office a "public authority" and said that it should come under the RTI Act. The bench had reserved the order on April 4. Chief Justice Gogoi had earlier observed that in the name of transparency, one cannot destroy the institution. In November 2007, an RTI activist Subhash Chandra Aggarwal had filed an RTI in the Supreme Court seeking information on judges' assets but the information was denied. Aggarwal then approached the Central Information Commission (CIC) which asked the apex court to disclose information on the ground that the Chief Justice of India's office comes within the ambit of the Act. In January 2009, a plea was moved in the Delhi High Court against the CIC order but the same was upheld.

Supreme Court to pronounce judgment on inclusion of CJI's office under RTI Act tomorrow

Union Home Minister Amit Shah said on Saturday that the RTI Act was a big milestone in the country's journey of democracy and has helped bridge the gap between the people and administration.

Addressing the 14th annual convention of the Central Information Commission (CIC) here, Shah said the Right to Information Act has also instilled confidence among people.

"I feel that in our democratic journey, RTI is a big milestone. We can provide good administration on the basis of transparency and accountability. RTI has helped a lot in giving a boost to transparency and accountability," Shah said.

He said the RTI Act has helped to bridge the gap between the people and the administration in the last 14 years.

"It has also increased the confidence of people towards administration," he said.

Shah said that the RTI Act has achieved its goals and instilled the confidence among the citizens.&nbsp;

Union Home Minister Amit Shah said on Saturday that the RTI Act was a big milestone in the country's journey of democracy and has helped bridge the gap between the people and administration.

Union Home Minister Amit Shah said on Saturday that the RTI Act was a big milestone in the country's journey of democracy and has helped bridge the gap between the people and administration. Addressing the 14th annual convention of the Central Information Commission (CIC) here, Shah said the Right to Information Act has also instilled confidence among people. "I feel that in our democratic journey, RTI is a big milestone. We can provide good administration on the basis of transparency and accountability. RTI has helped a lot in giving a boost to transparency and accountability," Shah said. He said the RTI Act has helped to bridge the gap between the people and the administration in the last 14 years. "It has also increased the confidence of people towards administration," he said. Shah said that the RTI Act has achieved its goals and instilled the confidence among the citizens.

RTI Act a milestone in India's democratic journey: Amit Shah

The Centre is committed to reducing to a "minimum," the number of applications filed under the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/rti-act-a-milestone-in-indias-democratic-journey-amit-shah-255417">Right to Information</a> as it is working towards putting maximum information in the public domain so that people do not feel the need to seek information through RTIs, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said here on Saturday.

Shah said this during his address to the inaugural session of 14th annual convention of Central Information Commission (CIC).

"All the countries have stopped after creating an RTI Act. They feel that they have done their responsibility but the Indian government doesn't think so. Prime Minister Narendra Modi government wants to give such an administration that applications made under RTI should be reduced to a minimum. Nobody should be required to file the RTI application," said Shah.

"The success of government does not lie in how many applications were filed under RTI but rather in giving such a system that the number of applications under RTI should be minimal despite channels being open to doing so," said Home Minister."The government should itself give all the information to the public so that people do not feel the need to file RTI application," he said.

He said that till 2005 when the RTI Act came into being, attempts were made to "widen the rift" between people and the administration.

"Before Independence and even after that till 2005 when the RTI Act came into being, attempts were made to widen the rift between the administration and people. But in the last 14 years, a lot of work has been done to fill the gap that has been created," said Shah emphasising that RTI Act is essential in ensuring "accountability" and "transparency" in the system.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

The Centre is committed to reducing to a "minimum," the number of applications filed under the Right to Information as it is working towards putting maximum information in the public domain so that people do not feel the need to seek information through RTIs, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said here on Saturday.

The Centre is committed to reducing to a "minimum," the number of applications filed under the Right to Information as it is working towards putting maximum information in the public domain so that people do not feel the need to seek information through RTIs, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said here on Saturday. Shah said this during his address to the inaugural session of 14th annual convention of Central Information Commission (CIC). "All the countries have stopped after creating an RTI Act. They feel that they have done their responsibility but the Indian government doesn't think so. Prime Minister Narendra Modi government wants to give such an administration that applications made under RTI should be reduced to a minimum. Nobody should be required to file the RTI application," said Shah. "The success of government does not lie in how many applications were filed under RTI but rather in giving such a system that the number of applications under RTI should be minimal despite channels being open to doing so," said Home Minister."The government should itself give all the information to the public so that people do not feel the need to file RTI application," he said. He said that till 2005 when the RTI Act came into being, attempts were made to "widen the rift" between people and the administration. "Before Independence and even after that till 2005 when the RTI Act came into being, attempts were made to widen the rift between the administration and people. But in the last 14 years, a lot of work has been done to fill the gap that has been created," said Shah emphasising that RTI Act is essential in ensuring "accountability" and "transparency" in the system.

Government committed to reduce RTI use, putting max info in public domain: Amit Shah

The Supreme Court Friday directed the <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/rbi-asks-banks-to-disclose-ilfs-provisions-in-q4-accounts-213288&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjutpmwou3hAhXd6XMBHeEhANgQFjABegQIEBAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw1L07xkBtRV2Orfg5PrMmsB">Reserve Bank of India</a> (RBI) to disclose information pertaining to its annual inspection report of banks under the Right to Information (RTI) Act unless they are exempted under law.

A bench headed by Justice L Nageswara Rao also directed the federal bank to review its policy to disclose information relating to banks under RTI, saying "it is duty bound under the law".

The bench, which did not go ahead with contempt proceedings against the RBI, made it clear that it was giving a last opportunity to it to comply with provisions of the transparency law.

The bench said it would have taken a serious view to the refusal of the RBI to part with information under RTI.

"Any further violation shall be viewed seriously," the bench said.

In January this year, the top court had issued contempt notice to RBI for not disclosing annual inspection report of banks under RTI.&nbsp;

Earlier, the apex court and the Central Information Commission, both had held that the RBI cannot deny information to an information seeker under the transparency law unless the material is exempted from disclosure under the law.&nbsp;

The RBI, in its defence, had said that it cannot disclose information as the annual inspection report of the bank contained "fiduciary" information as defined under the transparency law.&nbsp;

The bench was hearing a contempt petition filed by RTI activist S C Agrawal against the RBI.&nbsp;

Agrawal had sought complete information including related documents from RBI on the imposition of fines on some banks for violating rules.

He had also sought the list of banks and the default for which show cause notices were issued to them before the fine was imposed.

Despite the apex court's judgement for disclosure of such information, the RBI had issued a "Disclosure Policy" under which it has listed certain information as being exempted from being disclosed of the RTI Act.

"It is to be noted that this specific information are similar to what were held not to be exempted by the Supreme Court," claimed the plea.

The RBI had refused to disclose such information on the grounds of economic interest and holding such information in a fiduciary relationship with these individual banks.

"Such reason is in direct contempt with this court's judgment. The information titles which are in contempt belong to the Department of Banking Regulation, Banking Supervision, Cooperative Banking Regulation/Department of Cooperative Banking Supervision and Consumer Education and Protection Department.

"This exempted information under the policy was held to be not exempted by the Supreme Court.

Thus, this exemption leads to contempt of this court's order," the plea has said.

The Supreme Court had in 2015 held that RBI should take rigid action against those banks and financial institutions which have been indulging in "disreputable business practices" and said it cannot withhold information on defaulters and other issues covered under the RTI Act.

It had further clarified that RBI cannot withhold information under the "guise" of confidence or trust with financial institutions and is accountable to provide the information sought by the general public.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court Friday directed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to disclose information pertaining to its annual inspection report of banks under the Right to Information (RTI) Act unless they are exempted under law.

The Supreme Court Friday directed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to disclose information pertaining to its annual inspection report of banks under the Right to Information (RTI) Act unless they are exempted under law. A bench headed by Justice L Nageswara Rao also directed the federal bank to review its policy to disclose information relating to banks under RTI, saying "it is duty bound under the law". The bench, which did not go ahead with contempt proceedings against the RBI, made it clear that it was giving a last opportunity to it to comply with provisions of the transparency law. The bench said it would have taken a serious view to the refusal of the RBI to part with information under RTI. "Any further violation shall be viewed seriously," the bench said. In January this year, the top court had issued contempt notice to RBI for not disclosing annual inspection report of banks under RTI. Earlier, the apex court and the Central Information Commission, both had held that the RBI cannot deny information to an information seeker under the transparency law unless the material is exempted from disclosure under the law. The RBI, in its defence, had said that it cannot disclose information as the annual inspection report of the bank contained "fiduciary" information as defined under the transparency law. The bench was hearing a contempt petition filed by RTI activist S C Agrawal against the RBI. Agrawal had sought complete information including related documents from RBI on the imposition of fines on some banks for violating rules. He had also sought the list of banks and the default for which show cause notices were issued to them before the fine was imposed. Despite the apex court's judgement for disclosure of such information, the RBI had issued a "Disclosure Policy" under which it has listed certain information as being exempted from being disclosed of the RTI Act. "It is to be noted that this specific information are similar to what were held not to be exempted by the Supreme Court," claimed the plea. The RBI had refused to disclose such information on the grounds of economic interest and holding such information in a fiduciary relationship with these individual banks. "Such reason is in direct contempt with this court's judgment. The information titles which are in contempt belong to the Department of Banking Regulation, Banking Supervision, Cooperative Banking Regulation/Department of Cooperative Banking Supervision and Consumer Education and Protection Department. "This exempted information under the policy was held to be not exempted by the Supreme Court. Thus, this exemption leads to contempt of this court's order," the plea has said. The Supreme Court had in 2015 held that RBI should take rigid action against those banks and financial institutions which have been indulging in "disreputable business practices" and said it cannot withhold information on defaulters and other issues covered under the RTI Act. It had further clarified that RBI cannot withhold information under the "guise" of confidence or trust with financial institutions and is accountable to provide the information sought by the general public.

Supreme Court directs RBI to disclose information on bank inspection report under RTI

Two years ago, India's Supreme Court had declared that the decisions of its collegium — the body of SC judges that decides the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and the country's high courts — will for the first time be made public. Now, a constitution bench of the Supreme Court is examining whether the office of the Chief Justice Of India comes under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

Attorney General KK Venugopal argued before the constitution bench that such RTI disclosures might affect the independence of the judiciary.

"The law (the Right to Information Act) is in existence since 2005 and it sets out as to what would be the rights to information and what would be the restrictions on that right. A totally new environment has come into existence by passing this law which invokes the constitutional provisions," Venugopal said on Wednesday.&nbsp;

The constitution bench — headed by Chief Justice of India <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/go-to-shillong-it-is-a-cool-place-cji-ranjan-gogoi-to-cbi-kolkata-police-commissioner-195460">Ranjan Gogoi</a> — was hearing an appeal filed by the Supreme Court secretary general against the January 2010 verdict of the Delhi High Court which had declared that the CJI’s office was a “public authority” under the RTI Act, 2005. In other words, that it comes under the purview of the act.&nbsp;

The bench is also examining the crucial question of whether communications/ file notings between the collegium and the government on the appointment and transfer of judges come under the act, as do judges' assets.&nbsp;

"Independence of judiciary is part of the basic structure and even while deciding on this Act it had to be done by keeping in mind the various constitutional provisions. If information under RTI is sought relating to official secrets, then it will have to be seen to what extent can the right to information be allowed," Venugopal said. &nbsp;

Two years ago, India's Supreme Court had declared that the decisions of its collegium — the body of SC judges that decides the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and the country's high courts — will for the first time be made public.

Two years ago, India's Supreme Court had declared that the decisions of its collegium — the body of SC judges that decides the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and the country's high courts — will for the first time be made public. Now, a constitution bench of the Supreme Court is examining whether the office of the Chief Justice Of India comes under the purview of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Attorney General KK Venugopal argued before the constitution bench that such RTI disclosures might affect the independence of the judiciary. "The law (the Right to Information Act) is in existence since 2005 and it sets out as to what would be the rights to information and what would be the restrictions on that right. A totally new environment has come into existence by passing this law which invokes the constitutional provisions," Venugopal said on Wednesday. The constitution bench — headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi — was hearing an appeal filed by the Supreme Court secretary general against the January 2010 verdict of the Delhi High Court which had declared that the CJI’s office was a “public authority” under the RTI Act, 2005. In other words, that it comes under the purview of the act. The bench is also examining the crucial question of whether communications/ file notings between the collegium and the government on the appointment and transfer of judges come under the act, as do judges' assets. "Independence of judiciary is part of the basic structure and even while deciding on this Act it had to be done by keeping in mind the various constitutional provisions. If information under RTI is sought relating to official secrets, then it will have to be seen to what extent can the right to information be allowed," Venugopal said.

Does office of CJI come under RTI Act? Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice examines

rti-act

Rti Act, News on Rti Act, stories on Rti Act, articles on Rti Act, Rti Act stories at Wion, Rti Act news, Rti Act latest news

rti act