Skip to main content

Gujarat Information Commission "sitting" on RTI review for three months: Plea on Banaskantha flood relief scam

Banaskantha floods, July 2015
By Pankti Jog*
On one hand, the Gujarat government is selling big dreams of “digital India” through the Digital Saksharat Abhiyaan (DISHA), but, on the other, a Dalit RTI activist from Banaskatha district is waiting for information related to flood relief beneficiaries for the last four months, and is being pressured to withdraw his application by anti-social elements involved in corruption.
Harkhabhai Parmar, filed his RTI on October 12, 2015, when India was celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Act, and the Prime Minister in his address to Chief Information Commission’s (CIC’s) conference appealed for disclosures.
Parmar’s application had sought information regarding the criterion for the selection of beneficiaries, the list of beneficiaries, and the benefits received. He had also sought information on action taken on a complaint filed earlier regarding misappropriation in relief distribution by him and his friend Ratansinh with the taluka development officer (TDO) office as well as the chief minister’s office (CMO).
Banaskantha district is one of the four in Gujarat which received heavy floods in July last year. The Government of India announced a package of Rs 300 crore, which was supposed to be distributed through the state machinery. Villages were surveyed for identifying beneficiaries for different types of relief, like damage to houses and crops, soil erosion, cattle fatalities and cash dole.
Harkhabhai observed that many people, who are eligible for the relief, were not included in the survey, and many received huge relief though their houses hardly suffered any damage. He and his farmer friend Ratansinh brought this to the notice of the village sarpanch, but the TDO who laughed at them. Hence, they decided to go the RTI way.
Within three days of filing the RTI, on October 15, 2015, Ratansinh was fatally attacked by four persons. He was badly injured and died before his son could take him to the hospital. Two was of the accused were arrested, but are out on bail.
The attack took place after a few persons, said to be close to the sarpanch, tried to offer huge bribe to Harkhabhai and Ratansinh. They refused, and vouched that until all the affected persons received justice in this matter, they would not even touch any cheque offered by by the TDO.
Following the incident, Harkhabhai filed a complaint with the Gujarat Informatiion Commission (GIC) and requested for out of turn hearing. Three months have passed, neither the GIC has called for the hearing, nor has it given ex-parte order for disclosure of the list of beneficiaries and the benefits given.
The Mahiti Adhikar Gujarat Pahel (MAGP) helpline tried to contact the taluka development officer (TDO) to inquire about the progress in the RTI application process. TDO said, “I was on leave, now I shall look into pending RTIs, there are many on my table.”
A complaint was also field with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), and a notice was issued to the state government. The state government filed a report, which reportedly said “Ratansinh was not RTI an activist” and he was “not murdered”, but died of an accident. This is what the DSP said on telephone. A copy of the reply filed by the state government, however, is yet to be received.
The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), MAGP, Paryavaran Mitra, Gujarat Lok Samiti and many others, meanwhile, have written to the district collector, Banaskantha, requesting for dislcosure of the list of beneficiaries in the village. However, there is so far no response, even though this information falls under the proactive disclosure category, which needs to be disseminated among people/affected people and needs to be put in public domain.
“Why are they hiding this information? What is the reason, as per your opinion?”, I asked Harkhabhai. His reply was: “This information will prove fatal to corrupt people. Huge corruption has been done by the sarpanch, and a few people who are close to the taluka panchayat president.”
He added, “More than one beneficiary risiding in one house have received relief money in several cases. Hence they do not want to disclose the names of the beneificiaries. They want me withdraw my application.”
“I was offered two houses of Indira Awas and Sardar Awas few days back”, he said, adding, “They are also pressurizing me by sending various people to my house.”
Part of the constituency of Shankar Chaudhary, minister of state for urban housing, health and family welfare and transport, officials of the area are reluctant to disclose information. “Officials directly tell me that I would not get any information at any cost”, Harkhabhai says.
Meanwhile, civil society organizations have decided to go in for a massive RTI drive in Banakantha district, so that more and more people come foreward to raise their voice.
---
*Mahiti Adhikar Gujarat Pahel, Ahmedabad

Comments

TRENDING

Gujarat refusal to observe Maulana Azad's birthday as Education Day 'discriminatory'

By Our Representative
The Gujarat government decision not to celebrate the National Education Day on !monday has gone controversial. Civil society organizations have particularly wondered whether the state government is shying away from the occasion, especially against the backdrop of "deteriorating" level of education in Gujarat.

Rushdie, Pamuk, 260 writers tell Modi: Aatish episode casts chill on public discourse

Counterview Desk
As many as 260 writers, journalists, artists, academics and activists across the world, including Salman Rushdie, British Indian novelist, Orhan Pamuk, Turkish novelist and recipient of the 2006 Nobel Prize in literature, and Margaret Atwood, Canadian poet and novelist, have called upon Prime Minister Narendra Modi to review the decision to strip British Indian writer Aatish Taseer of his overseas Indian citizenship.

Visually challenged lady seeks appointment with Gujarat CM, is 'unofficially' detained

By Pankti Jog*
It was a usual noon of November 10. I got a phone call on our Right to Information (RTI) helpline No 9924085000 from Ranjanben of Khambhat, narrating her “disgraceful” experience after she had requested for an appointment with Gujarat chief minister Vijay Rupani. She wanted to meet Rupani, on tour of the Khambhat area in Central Gujarat as part of his Janvikas Jumbesh (Campaign for Development).

Violent 'Ajodhya' campaign in 1840s after British captured Kabul, destroyed Jama Masjid

Counterview Desk  Irfan Ahmad, professor at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen, Germany, and author of “Islamism and Democracy in India” (Princeton University Press, 2009), short-listed for the 2011 International Convention of Asian Scholars Book Prize for the best study in Social Sciences, in his "initial thoughts" on the Supreme Court judgment on the Babri-Jam Janmaboomi dispute has said, while order was “lawful”, it was also “awful.”

There may have been Buddhist stupa at Babri site during Gupta period: Archeologist

By Rajiv Shah
A top-notch archeologist, Prof Supriya Varma, who served as an observer during the excavation of the Babri Masjid site in early 2000s along with another archeologist, Jaya Menon, has controversially stated that not only was there "no temple under the Babri Masjid”, if one goes “beyond” the 12th century to 4th to 6th century, i.e. the Gupta period, “there seems to be a Buddhist stupa.”

VHP doesn't represent all Hindus, Sunni Waqf Board all Muslims: NAPM on SC ruling

Counterview Desk
India's top civil rights network, National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), even as describing the Supreme Court's Ayodhya judgement unjust, has said, it is an "assault on the secular fabric of the Constitution". In a statement signed by top social workers and activists, NAPM said, "The judgement conveys an impression to Muslims that, despite being equal citizens of the country, their rights are not equal before the law."

Would those charged for illegally demolishing Babri now manage a new Ram temple?

By Fr Cedric Prakash sj*
The long-awaited verdict on the contentious issue of the disputed land in Ayodhya was finally delivered by the Supreme Court on November 9, 2019. The judgement has come after a 70-year-old conflict filled with acrimony, divisiveness, hate and violence between sections of the Hindus and Muslims of the country. At the core of the issue was the Ram Mandir – Babri Masjid dispute: was there a temple on the place where the Masjid was built? To whom should the land be given to?