Only a strong event or news can drive the market significantly higher
In line with what we mentioned in Tuesday’s closing report, the Indian indices opened higher and broke the previous lifetime high it hit on Monday. However, lower volumes supported the rise today on the Nifty. The surge in the morning session to the new lifetime high was followed by a gradual move down. However, the benchmark indices managed closing in the green.
S&P BSE Sensex opened at 27,959 and moved from a high of 28,126 to a low of 27,959 and closed near the day’s low at 28,009 (up 99 points or 0.35%). NSE’s CNX Nifty opened at 8,379 and hit a high of 8,415, and moved lower to the level of 8,371 finally closing at 8,383 (up 21 points or 0.25%). NSE recorded a lower volume of 92.07 crore shares. India VIX fell 2.47% to close at 14.4350.
The government unveiled industrial production data for September 2014 today. IIP growth for September 2014 was at 2.5%, compared to 0.4% recorded in the month of August. September IIP was above estimates.
The CPI (consumer price index) inflation stood at 5.52% in the month of October as compared to 6.46% reported in the month of September.
The empowered committee of state finance ministers on goods & services tax (GST) at its meeting held on Tuesday reportedly agreed on the 'place of supply' rules that form the backbone of the proposed GST.
The Petroleum Ministry, in a notification, relaxed rigid timelines prescribed in the production sharing contract (PSC) for development and production of oil and gas.
Bayer CropScience (10.35%) was the top gainer in the ‘A’ group on BSE. The stock hit its 52-week high today. After market hours on Tuesday, the company came out with its September 2014 quarter results. It posted a net profit of Rs 176.10 crore for the September 2014 quarter, compared to Rs 116.50 crore for the September 2013 quarter.
Sales increased from Rs 1,050.40 crore to Rs 1,241.00 crore for the relevant period.
Hindustan Construction (4.49%) was the top loser in the ‘A’ group on BSE. It informed BSE that Lavasa Corporation Limited, its subsidiary, received observation letter from SEBI for its proposed initial public offering of equity shares, for an amount not exceeding Rs 750 crore.
Axis Bank (3.02%) was the top gainer in the Sensex 30 pack. It hit its 52-week high today. Cipla (3.06%) was the top loser among the Sensex 30 stocks.
US indices closed in the positive on Tuesday. The National Federation of Independent Business said that its small-business optimism index rose 0.8 points to 96.1 in October, a two-month high.
Philadelphia Fed's President, Charles Plosser, today said US interest rates should be raised "sooner rather than later." In a speech in London, Plosser said rising rates are not inconsistent with a continuing recovery.
Asian indices showed a mixed performance. Shanghai Composite (1%) was the top gainer while Taiwan Weighted (1.28%) was the top loser.
There is a growing anticipation that Japananese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will postpone a planned sales tax hike to avoid damaging a fragile recovery.
European indices were trading in the red. US Futures too were trading lower.
In a major boost to citizens and activists, a Committee set up by DoPT has recommended that there is no provision in the RTI Act or Rules to make any standard format for applications and so it should be done away with
Many Right to Information (RTI) applicants in Maharashtra and perhaps in other States where a standard format has been laid out by the respective governments face problems if they do not abide by it. Now, however, they are not bound by such a diktat, as a Committee appointed by the Department of Personnel & Training ( DOPT) has made it clear that no such provision (for specific format) exists in the RTI Act.
In the summary of the report issued by DoPT on 11th November, which will soon be circulated to the Public Authorities as guidelines, the Department clearly stated, “There should not be a model/ standard format for reply to the RTI application, as there is no such provision in the RTI Act or the RTI rules.”
The observations/ recommendations of the DoPT appointed Committee, instituted to evolve model format for RTI replies, comprised representatives of the Department, Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Central Information Commission (CIC) and was submitted on 29th October.
Similarly, the Committee has recommended that the Public Information Officer (PIO) too need not have any typical format for replying though relevant details should be given in the reply and relevant sections should be quoted in case of denial of information.
After the circular of 17th October in Maharashtra by the state government, regarding, non-disclosure of “personal” details under RTI Act, there has been a lot of confusion and suppressing of information by the PIOs. Now, that this relevant and pro-public guidelines have been uploaded on the DoPT website, one hopes the Maharashtra government would issue a formal note.
Leading RTI activist Vijay Kumbhar, says, “The state government, which has been issuing circulars by the dozens on issues like removing Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) from the RTI Act or confusing PIOs with the ‘personal’ information circular, should now gracefully make this important pro-people circular known through media and official websites of all public authorities. People are still harassed in case they do not file the RTI application in the required format as has been laid down by the state government.”
RTI activist and research scholar, Venkatesh Nayak though says that the DoPT did not do public consultation, before issuing the note. “The Government has issued guidelines for PIOs on how to reply to RTI applications. Strangely, the Committee comprising of a few government representatives has issued these guidelines without any consultation with others on the supply and demand side of information. While the guidelines are not bad, they are minimalistic. Civil society organisations (CSOs) and activists could have provided better advice to the Committee, if only if they had advertised this Committee's constitution. So much, for compliance with the consultation policy that was announced in January this year.”
Following are the observations of the Committee:
I. There is neither any provision in the RTI Ad or RTI Rules for a model/standard format of RTI application nor any provision for a model/standard format for reply to the RTI applications.
II. Presently, neither any standard practice nor any standard format is being used by the CPIOs in reply to the RTI applications.
In view of the above observations, the Committee has made the following recommendations :
a) There should not be a model/standard format for reply to the RTI application, as there is no such provision in the RTI Act or the RTI rules.
b) Moreover, keeping in view that there is no standard format for RTI applications, there could not be a standard format for their reply.
c) However, the following points can be uniformity adopted by the CPIOs while replying to the RTI applications:
i. The name, designation, official telephone no. and email I.D. of the CPIOs should be clearly mentioned.
ii. In case the information requested for is denied, reasons for denial quoting the relevant sections of the RTI Ad should be clearly mentioned.
iii. In case the information pertains to other public authority and the application is transferred under section 6 (3) of the RTI Act, details of the public authority to whom the application is transferred should be given.
iv. In the concluding para of the reply, there should be clearly mentioned that the First Appeal, if any, against the reply of the CPIO may be made to the First Appellate Authority within 30 days of receipt of reply of CPIO.
v. The name, designation, address, official telephone no. and e-mail I.D. of the First Appellate Authority should also be clearly mentioned.
vi. Wherever the applicant has requested for certified copies of the documents or records, the CPIO should certify the documents or records by putting a seal of his name, designation and signing with date. Above the seal, the remarks that "documents/records provided under the RTI Act" should be endorsed.
(Vinita Deshmukh is consulting editor of Moneylife, an RTI activist and convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book “To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte” with Vinita Kamte and is the author of “The Mighty Fall”.)
BSE has placed 34 companies exclusively listed on the OTC Exchange as well as 20 companies on the Bangalore Stock Exchange on its DB that allows buyers and sellers to disseminate their bids/ offers using the services of trading members
To safeguard interests of investors of firms listed solely on exiting stock exchanges, BSE has placed as many as 54 companies listed on the Bangalore Stock Exchange and OTC Exchange of India to the Dissemination Board (DB).
The move, which is effective from Wednesday, would allow buyers and sellers of the securities of these companies to disseminate their bids/ offers using the services of trading members at BSE.
In separate notices, BSE said it is placing 34 companies exclusively listed on the OTC Exchange as well as 20 companies on the Bangalore Stock Exchange on its DB.
Of these, six entities -- CF Technologies, Essemm Information Systems, Krisn Information Technologies, Scarlet Flowers & Agritech, Thungabadra Pulps & Boards Mills and Union Home Products -- listed on the Bangalore Stock Exchange are "vanishing companies", BSE said.
Some of companies on OTC Exchange which have been moved are: Zim Laboratories, Allied Stock Investors, Aditya Coating, Electronica Industries, Cherry Polypack and Hindustan Biotech.
BSE dissemination board is an information disseminating mechanism made available on the bourse's website for buyers and sellers of companies, which are listed exclusively on exiting or de-recognised Regional Stock Exchanges (RSEs) and have failed to obtain listing on any RSE.
The board is required to be set up by stock exchanges having nationwide trading terminals such as BSE.
"Trading Members are requested to note that the companies admitted to BSE Dissemination Board are not listed with BSE (are treated as unlisted companies)," BSE said.
"There will be no listing agreement executed by BSE with these companies," it added.
The exchange also said that there would be no monitoring of any compliance with respect to filings made by these firms and that information received from them would be disseminated on the DB platform.
Under the BSE dissemination board, brokers of the exchange would act as "point of contact" for registered client, for executing the bid/offers placed.
Under the mechanism, there is no matching of trades on the board and they are cleared and settled outside BSE/Indian Clearing Corporation.
Investors, on their part, also do not have any recourse to the investor grievance redressal mechanism, including arbitration and investor protection fund.
As per regulator SEBI's norms, companies listed exclusively on exiting or de-recognised Regional Stock Exchanges (RSEs) are required to seek listing on at least any other RSE that is not seeking de-recognition and exit.
However, those companies which fail to list on any other RSE are treated as unlisted entity and have to be moved to dissemination board.