Dear Gita,
you said:
> If the information in question cannot be published /
> disseminated, then it obviously cannot be provided
> to me. If it can be provided and I obtain it u/s.6,
> while DoC has not published/disseminated it u/s.4,
> then this information affecting/interesting many
> would be in my private possession. This seems
> inconsistent with RTI.
1) RTI by way of sec 6 allows an applicant to obtain
confidential / commercial information. So there will
be numerous situations wherein the public authority
can provide information only to persons with a
bona-fide reason for seeking the information. This is
consistent with several laws of the country - say
inspection of marriage registers, inspection of list
of assets submitted by Parliamentarians etc. There are
clearly spelt out provisions in the ACT concerning 3rd
party privacy rights and decisions of the "competent
authority" before confidential / commercial
information may be disclosed.
2) Once the confidential / commercial information is
provided to the person, it may be subject to various
conditions imposed by the competent authority.
3) Rules for applying / disclosure of confidential /
commercial info are to be framed by the "competent
authority" under the act, and NOT by the public
authority. MoC is NOT a competent authority.
4) BTW if any PIO provides info without a section 6,
he is liable for stringent penalty.
Anything else ??
Sarbajit
--- Gita Dewan Verma <mpisgplanner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Shri Sudhakar Dalela, Deputy Secretary, DoC
> Central Public Information Officer (for Trade Policy
> related issues like WTO, UNCTAD, DFID-DOC Project,
> TRIMS, TRIPs etc)
>
> Dear Sir,
>
> Kindly refer to the message below dated 20.10.05 (in
> reply to mine of 17.10.05), wherein Shri J Sri Raman
> has kindly clarified I need to apply to you and also
> procedures u/s.6 and s.7 in view of which I am
> advised
> to use s.6.
>
> However, I am unable to fathom what requires me to
> use
> s.6 to access or prevents / exempts DoC from
> publishing in terms of s.4(1)c or at least making
> freely accessible with you in electronic format in
> terms of s.4(4) the information in question, viz,
> background papers and basic details of consultations
> leading to sector-specific commitments in Revised
> Offer, Issue Paper, etc.
>
> To me it seems such information falls in the purview
> of s.4 and that the Act does not predicate RTI upon
> s.6 (eg, s.2(j) defines RTI in terms of the Act not
> s.6, s.4 occurs before s.6, s.10(1) and s.19(8)
> envisage also other functions/powers for
> Commissions,
> etc). Moreover, I have reservations about s.6 in the
> instant case, viz:
> 1.
> Two of my letters (dated 12.09.03 and 15.08.05) were
> addressed to Shri R Gopalan, Joint Secretary, who is
> designated as officer senior to CPIO. In my letter
> of
> 15.08.05 I have made already, and while s.4(1)c was
> and s.6 was not in force, a request for the
> information in question.
> 2.
> If the information in question cannot be published /
> disseminated, then it obviously cannot be provided
> to
> me. If it can be provided and I obtain it u/s.6,
> while
> DoC has not published/disseminated it u/s.4, then
> this
> information affecting/interesting many would be in
> my
> private possession. This seems inconsistent with
> RTI.
>
> I hope this clarifies my request for publication /
> dissemination of the information in question. If
> there
> is an error in my reasoning, I would be grateful if
> you would point it out. If there are Rules for
> requests u/s.4, please let me know so I can make a
> compliant application. If DoC is inclined to deny
> this
> request, please let me know with its reasons.
>
> Yours sincerely
> Gita Dewan Verma, Planner
>
> cc:
> Shri J Sri Raman, with many thanks for your response
> Shri R Gopalan, wrt the reference to prior letters
> Architexturez in-enaction, mpisg-media
>
>
> --- "J. Sri Raman" <jsraman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Dear Ms. Verma,
> >
> > Please refer to your message below.
> >
> > 2. As per Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, a person,
> > who desires to obtain
> > any information under this Act, shall make a
> request
> > in writing along with
> > such fee as may be prescribed. In terms of
> > notification dated 16 September
> > 2005, Department of Personnel and Training has
> > prescribed an application
> > fee of Rs. 10/- (Ten rupees only)which shall be
> paid
> > by way of cash
> > against proper receipt, demand draft or bankers
> > cheque payable to the
> > Accounts Officer of the concerned Public
> Authority.
> >
> > 3. Department of Commerce, has prescribed an
> > application form for making
> > of requests under this Act. A copy of the
> prescribed
> > application form is
> > enclosed. It may be seen therefrom that along with
> > the fee, it has to be
> > certified that the person requesting information
> > under the RTI Act is a
> > citizen of India and that the fee has been
> > deposited. Department of
> > Commerce has further prescribed that all payments
> in
> > the form of Demand
> > Draft or Banker's cheque, under RTI Act will be
> made
> > in the name of Under
> > Secretary (Cash) who is also the Drawing and
> > Disbursing Officer of the
> > Department of Commerce, while cash will be
> deposited
> > with the DDO in
> > Cashier Cell (Room No. 29-A, Udyog Bhavan, New
> > Delhi) by obtaining a
> > proper receipt. Additional fees as presribed
> under
> > section 7 (1) will
> > have to be paid upon processing of your request.
> The
> > fees in this regard
> > have been prescribed by the Department of
> Personnel
> > and Training, vide its
> > notification dated 16 September 2005 mentioned
> > above.
> >
> > 4. In view of the above, it is advised that the
> > registration fee may
> > please be deposited and a copy of the receipt for
> > the payment thereof may
> > be attached with the request for application in
> the
> > prescribed application
> > form along with other certificates, (citizen of
> > India, etc.).
> >
> > 5. The application, complete in all respects as
> > mentioned above, may
> > please be sent to Mr. Sudhakar Dalela, Central
> > Public Information Officer,
> > Department of Commerce, Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi -
> > 110 011.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > J. Sri Raman
> > Central Assistant Public Information Officer
> > Department of Commerce
>
>
> --------------------
> original message at:
> http://plan.architexturez.net/site/anomie/RTI/gats
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/
> _______________________________________________
> mpisgmedia mailing list
> mpisgmedia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
http://mail.architexturez.net/mailman/listinfo/mpisgmedia
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
you said:
> If the information in question cannot be published /
> disseminated, then it obviously cannot be provided
> to me. If it can be provided and I obtain it u/s.6,
> while DoC has not published/disseminated it u/s.4,
> then this information affecting/interesting many
> would be in my private possession. This seems
> inconsistent with RTI.
1) RTI by way of sec 6 allows an applicant to obtain
confidential / commercial information. So there will
be numerous situations wherein the public authority
can provide information only to persons with a
bona-fide reason for seeking the information. This is
consistent with several laws of the country - say
inspection of marriage registers, inspection of list
of assets submitted by Parliamentarians etc. There are
clearly spelt out provisions in the ACT concerning 3rd
party privacy rights and decisions of the "competent
authority" before confidential / commercial
information may be disclosed.
2) Once the confidential / commercial information is
provided to the person, it may be subject to various
conditions imposed by the competent authority.
3) Rules for applying / disclosure of confidential /
commercial info are to be framed by the "competent
authority" under the act, and NOT by the public
authority. MoC is NOT a competent authority.
4) BTW if any PIO provides info without a section 6,
he is liable for stringent penalty.
Anything else ??
Sarbajit
--- Gita Dewan Verma <mpisgplanner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Shri Sudhakar Dalela, Deputy Secretary, DoC
> Central Public Information Officer (for Trade Policy
> related issues like WTO, UNCTAD, DFID-DOC Project,
> TRIMS, TRIPs etc)
>
> Dear Sir,
>
> Kindly refer to the message below dated 20.10.05 (in
> reply to mine of 17.10.05), wherein Shri J Sri Raman
> has kindly clarified I need to apply to you and also
> procedures u/s.6 and s.7 in view of which I am
> advised
> to use s.6.
>
> However, I am unable to fathom what requires me to
> use
> s.6 to access or prevents / exempts DoC from
> publishing in terms of s.4(1)c or at least making
> freely accessible with you in electronic format in
> terms of s.4(4) the information in question, viz,
> background papers and basic details of consultations
> leading to sector-specific commitments in Revised
> Offer, Issue Paper, etc.
>
> To me it seems such information falls in the purview
> of s.4 and that the Act does not predicate RTI upon
> s.6 (eg, s.2(j) defines RTI in terms of the Act not
> s.6, s.4 occurs before s.6, s.10(1) and s.19(8)
> envisage also other functions/powers for
> Commissions,
> etc). Moreover, I have reservations about s.6 in the
> instant case, viz:
> 1.
> Two of my letters (dated 12.09.03 and 15.08.05) were
> addressed to Shri R Gopalan, Joint Secretary, who is
> designated as officer senior to CPIO. In my letter
> of
> 15.08.05 I have made already, and while s.4(1)c was
> and s.6 was not in force, a request for the
> information in question.
> 2.
> If the information in question cannot be published /
> disseminated, then it obviously cannot be provided
> to
> me. If it can be provided and I obtain it u/s.6,
> while
> DoC has not published/disseminated it u/s.4, then
> this
> information affecting/interesting many would be in
> my
> private possession. This seems inconsistent with
> RTI.
>
> I hope this clarifies my request for publication /
> dissemination of the information in question. If
> there
> is an error in my reasoning, I would be grateful if
> you would point it out. If there are Rules for
> requests u/s.4, please let me know so I can make a
> compliant application. If DoC is inclined to deny
> this
> request, please let me know with its reasons.
>
> Yours sincerely
> Gita Dewan Verma, Planner
>
> cc:
> Shri J Sri Raman, with many thanks for your response
> Shri R Gopalan, wrt the reference to prior letters
> Architexturez in-enaction, mpisg-media
>
>
> --- "J. Sri Raman" <jsraman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Dear Ms. Verma,
> >
> > Please refer to your message below.
> >
> > 2. As per Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, a person,
> > who desires to obtain
> > any information under this Act, shall make a
> request
> > in writing along with
> > such fee as may be prescribed. In terms of
> > notification dated 16 September
> > 2005, Department of Personnel and Training has
> > prescribed an application
> > fee of Rs. 10/- (Ten rupees only)which shall be
> paid
> > by way of cash
> > against proper receipt, demand draft or bankers
> > cheque payable to the
> > Accounts Officer of the concerned Public
> Authority.
> >
> > 3. Department of Commerce, has prescribed an
> > application form for making
> > of requests under this Act. A copy of the
> prescribed
> > application form is
> > enclosed. It may be seen therefrom that along with
> > the fee, it has to be
> > certified that the person requesting information
> > under the RTI Act is a
> > citizen of India and that the fee has been
> > deposited. Department of
> > Commerce has further prescribed that all payments
> in
> > the form of Demand
> > Draft or Banker's cheque, under RTI Act will be
> made
> > in the name of Under
> > Secretary (Cash) who is also the Drawing and
> > Disbursing Officer of the
> > Department of Commerce, while cash will be
> deposited
> > with the DDO in
> > Cashier Cell (Room No. 29-A, Udyog Bhavan, New
> > Delhi) by obtaining a
> > proper receipt. Additional fees as presribed
> under
> > section 7 (1) will
> > have to be paid upon processing of your request.
> The
> > fees in this regard
> > have been prescribed by the Department of
> Personnel
> > and Training, vide its
> > notification dated 16 September 2005 mentioned
> > above.
> >
> > 4. In view of the above, it is advised that the
> > registration fee may
> > please be deposited and a copy of the receipt for
> > the payment thereof may
> > be attached with the request for application in
> the
> > prescribed application
> > form along with other certificates, (citizen of
> > India, etc.).
> >
> > 5. The application, complete in all respects as
> > mentioned above, may
> > please be sent to Mr. Sudhakar Dalela, Central
> > Public Information Officer,
> > Department of Commerce, Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi -
> > 110 011.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > J. Sri Raman
> > Central Assistant Public Information Officer
> > Department of Commerce
>
>
> --------------------
> original message at:
> http://plan.architexturez.net/site/anomie/RTI/gats
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/
> _______________________________________________
> mpisgmedia mailing list
> mpisgmedia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
http://mail.architexturez.net/mailman/listinfo/mpisgmedia
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com