Skip to main content

Govt of India rejects RTI plea for Cabinet note on 10% quota to EWS, survey, if any, on it

By A Representative
The Government of India has rejected a right to information (RTI) plea, sent to the Social Justice Ministry for seeking Cabinet note, along with Annexures, if any, submitted to the Union Cabinet for securing the Constitutional amendment for providing 10% quota to the economically weaker sections (EWS), saying, as per the provision under Section 8(1)(i) of RTI Act, 2005, it is not obligatory “to give any citizen Cabinet papers including records of deliberations of the Council of Ministers, Secretaries and other officers”.
The GoI has also rejected senior RTI activist Venatesh Nayak plea to receive copies of “correspondence and file notings pertaining to the subject”, copies of “any census or survey data or study or research report along with recommendations received from any committee or commission that constitutes the material which formed the basis of the said proposal to amend the Constitution”, and copies of “correspondence received from the office of the Prime Minister in relation to the proposal to amend the Constitution.”
Belonging to the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative, Nayak said, the rejection goes against a June 2012 decision of the Central Information Commission (CIC) that all Cabinet Notes and materials related to Bills tabled in Parliament must be placed in the public domain within the next seven days.
Claims Nayak, “The entire legislative exercise surrounding the 10% quota law lacked any kind of transparency or a consultation process with the people of India”, insisting, “The 10% quota amendment proposal did not comply with the Pre-Legislative Consultation Policy adopted by the Central Government in 2014.”
As per this policy every department mooting a legislative proposal is required to place the draft text of the legislation in the public domain for thirty days, invite people's suggestions and views, incorporate any, if so determined, tabulate all the suggestions received and attach it to the Cabinet Note along with the suggestions received in the Inter-Ministerial Consultation on the draft Bill. “However, none of these measures were complied with in relation to the 10% quota proposal”, Nayak adds.

Comments

Post a Comment

NOTE: Hateful, abusive comments won't be published. -- Editor

TRENDING

Bihar’s land at ₹1 per acre for Adani sparks outrage, NAPM calls it crony capitalism

By A Representative   The National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM) has strongly condemned the Bihar government’s decision to lease 1,050 acres of land in Pirpainti, Bhagalpur district, to Adani Power for a 2,400 MW coal-based thermal power project. 
Post a Comment
»

"Forcible" tribal eviction: Central India village draws international attention following NGO representation

Government building in Amravan By A Representative A small village of about 200 in Central India, a majority of whose residents is dependent on mining as the main source of livelihood, is all set to become a major focal point, nationally and internationally. Reason: Allegations of refusal of the Madhya Pradesh government to protect them from forcible eviction from their land.
Post a Comment
»

An open letter to PM: Before you forgive, ask for forgiveness

By Martin Macwan*  Respected Prime Minister,  The first step toward true forgiveness is asking for it, and it is out of respect for the Constitution that the title "Honourable" is used for the office of the Prime Minister. Every abuse is "dirty" because almost all abuse is uttered with the conscious intention of publicly humiliating a woman, much like the disrobing of Draupadi in the royal court. This includes remarks like "Jersey Cow," used at public meetings on the Gujarati land of Gandhi and Sardar; comparing a female MP's laughter in India's Parliament to "Surpanakha's laugh"; and using a vulgar address like "Didi O Didi" for a Chief Minister who holds a respected position in a democracy—along with every other such remark. In the 79-year history of independent India, you are better placed than anyone to say which Prime Minister has used such language against women.
2 comments
»