Bonds, Currencies & Commodities
NSEL fiasco: Investors should sue brokers first for mis-selling

Brokers who have an inglorious record of dealing with stock investors are demanding money from, and action against, NSEL. However, it is not only the Exchange that is to blame, but brokers who have mis-sold the NSEL product to investors. They too are liable for legal acton by their clients

Several brokers and their associations are asking the government to take action against National Spot Exchange Ltd (NSEL), which they claim has the financial obligation for paying back to them. However, the fact is that it was brokers, who lured investors in the first place to get risk-free gains from NSEL. Thus, it is investors who should first take action against brokers for giving them the contract note of NSEL. Contract note is certainly a legal document in an exchange that was sanctioned to run by a ministry, in this case, the Ministry of Consumer Affairs.

 

Commodity Participants Association of India along with Association of National Exchanges Members of India and BSE Brokers Forum has also threatened that they will move court if commodities market regulator Forward Market Commission (FMC) cannot give guarantee on repayment. While that may be a valid course of action, the investors have valid grounds for suing their broker for defaulting on their obligation.

 

The reason is simple. Investors were offered the NSEL product with promises of high fixed returns by the brokerages. Investors primarily gave money to brokers for investment. Therefore, in the first place, it was the brokers' duty to check and verify what they were selling, which they failed in the NSEL case. Crying foul about the functioning of the Exchange is valid but can the brokers escape their role in this?

 

These brokers, pretending as if they do not know anything about NSEL operations, are now expressing concerns over quantity and quality of commodities lying in warehouses controlled by NSEL. Brokers are claiming it was NSEL’s responsibility to verify stocks. Brokers have even demanded that the government should take over Financial Technologies India Ltd (FT) the promoters of NSEL as well until the mess is cleaned up.

 

Kirit Somaiya-led Investors’ Grievances Forum (IGF) went further. IGF has filed a complaint with the economic offences wing (EoW) of the Mumbai Police against NSEL. The Forum while demanding police to file first information report (FIR), accused NSEL of cheating, fraud, forgery with the victims being 17,000 small farmers and investors. In all fairness, IGL should add brokers to the list of those who have sold a dubious product to investors.

 

Interestingly, a circular from NSEL says, “Giving / taking delivery of commodities in ‘demat mode’ should be directly to / from the ‘beneficiary accounts’ of the Clients except delivery of commodities to a recognised entity under the approved scheme of the Exchange.”  Did the brokers ensure this, clients can ask.

 

The NSEL circular also says, “Member of the Exchange shall make the Client aware of…the precise nature of business to be conducted, the risk associated with business in trading in contracts permitted in the exchange for Spot Trading, including any limitations on that liability and the capacity in which the Member of the Exchange acts and the Client’s liability thereon.” Was this done by brokers? Most certainly not.

 

The NSEL circular also says, “The Exchange Member shall not furnish any false or misleading information or advice with a view to inducing the Client to do business in particular contract or contracts and which shall enable the Exchange Member to profit thereby.” Making presentations to clients, which gives the impression that NSEL contracts offer a high fixed return while the funds are secured against goods, is clearly a violation of members’ responsibilities, in the eyes of investors.

 

The brokers who are leading the charge do not exactly have a shining record of treating their customers fairly in the stock market. From forging Power of Attorney frauds to unauthorized trading, to illegal selling of shares, they have indulged in multiple misdemeanors. All of them have got away too, thanks to a grievance-handling system of the exchanges and the market regulator that is loaded against investors.

User

COMMENTS

Dayananda Kamath k

4 years ago

first we should sue the regulator and govt departments for not performing their duty. and as tritors of public interest.then only there will be some change in this country. i have already filed a criminal breach of trust complaint with parliament street police station against the former president, primeminister. loka sabha speaker and cabinet secretary public grievances. and almost all regulators for their fuailure to act andcopy is also sent to cheif justice of india on 12.6/2013. but no action till date.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to Dayananda Kamath k 4 years ago

sathyacumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel group

first of all if you want to sue the govt department its is an long drawn process because this clan is so attocratic that they would put all the bottlenecks in various corners and we cannot get justice as such instead of fighting with govt this matter should be made public and it should be published and telecasted in all channel about how the indian administration is and then this would eye opener for all and once this done naturally the opposition party and well wishers of our countries Like Shri Anna hazare and Shri Arvind khejirwal and eminenet Economist like Shri Subramanya Swamy would take up the case unless until it is raised in parliament we cannot get justice otherwise we have one more source instead of confronting with govt and sebi we can appeal to stock brokers on behalf of the investors and ask them to make good of the losses which is feasble solution

sathyacumaran

In Reply to Dayananda Kamath k 4 years ago

sathyacumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel group

you cannot expect any justice from Govt Departments especially in the financial service sector and finance department where PM and FM are directly responsible and as far Govt servants are concerned previously there was only allegations of accountability but now there no honesty integrity and dependability when an files from Govt of india with coalgate scam there had been files missing this shows how they keep the records similarily the Income tax returns filed by citizen of india where found bundles in the roads this shows what is the scanctity that govt records are kept and now the govt and chief justice of india should take strict measure if any govt department found guilty the concerned department head and subordinates should be dismissed and their pension and other benefits should be stopped if this is done for dozen of govt officials naturally there would be total conrol we cannot say all the officials are corrupt but some officials are corrupt if the other officials raise their voice their promotion and other benefits is blocked hence they are helpless we need supreme court intervention is sebi and nse bse and restore justice to investors and this organisation should be above corruption

Dayananda Kamath k

In Reply to sathyacumaran 4 years ago

even the courts are of no use.karnatka high court has upheld the decision of management of removing an employee as he is stickler for rules and brings out irregularities in discharge of his duty.

SuchindranathAiyerS

4 years ago

Further proof, if proof was required, that Indian Governance is building on 66yrs of momentum to loot with greater shameless brazenness.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to SuchindranathAiyerS 4 years ago

SATHYACUMARAN
OPERATIONAL HEAD INDIA
SINGAPORE MEDIA AND CHANNEL GROUP
OUR GOVT IS NOT SHAMED OF ANYTHING THE PRESENT UPA GOVT HEADED BY SHRI MANMOHAN SINGH IS FULL OF CORRUPTION AND WHEN WE BRING TO HIS NOTICE HE WOULD SAY I ACCEPT THAT THERE HAD BEEN CORRUPTION AND HE WOULD SET UP AN COMMITTEE AND HE HIMSELF WOULD TRY TO MANIPULATE ITS THE PEOPLE AND OFFICIALS WHO SHOULD BE GOD FEARING AND THEY SHOULD THINK ABOUT THEIR SIBBLINGS FUTURE AND THEY SHOULD THINK AND DO AND THE STOCK BROKERS SHOULD TRY TO BREAK THEIR STIGMA OF LOOTERS IF THAT ONE COMES INTO THEIR MIND AND THEY WORK WE ARE SURE INDIA WOULD PROSPOUR AND ACHIEVE THE DEVELOPED NATION

RUSHABH R SHAH

4 years ago

I just do not understand the attitude of all those who are shouting so loudly to punish NSEL and Mr.Jignesh Shah. What should be the top most priority of all concerned ? They should see to it that whatever money is there, it should be distributed among the parties concerned in the most legitimate way. All other aspects can be taken care of later. May I ask those brokers, who claims themselves to be the saviors of investors that why they are not utilizing all their strength to see that maximum amount is realized by NSEL from the borrowers and that also at the earliest and the same is paid to the investors. It appears that they do not have "Mahajan Vruti" (Gujarati word), which should be there if they consider themselves to be the genuine and honest businessmen.

KIRTI SHAH

4 years ago

Govt should take control of Fintech & MCX as Jignesh Shah is promoter of all three companies and govt should do what it had done in SATYAM case.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to KIRTI SHAH 4 years ago

sathyacumaran
opeartional head india
singapore media and channel group

as far satyam is concerned the chirman Ramalinga Raju confessed about cash manipulation but in this case of jignesh shah with out physical stock he had traded and the stock brokers took advantgaes of this situation and made good bucks and now also in equity market in F&O segment without stock they trade and its the brokers at risk for which they have good brokerage and as such there is no need for SFIO investigation like satyam in this case all the stock brokers should be called and the investors should appeal and get the losses compensated because the broker in india after the advent of digital trading if the client is offline client the stock broking firm themself trade in client name in online trade and make money and vie versa as such there cannot be any physical loss for stock brokers and its loss out of profit and stock brokers if they wish they can make good of the losses

sathyacumaran

4 years ago

sathyacumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel group

instead of sueing the broking community as whole as an investors of affected by this episode would collectively appeal to brokers to make good of the losses as this loss is only out of the profit and as such this would pinch thier purse on behalf of investors i earnestly appeal to stock broking community that without investors there cannot be market and similarily without broker there cannot be stock market please kindly consider us as your brothers and sisters and make good of our losses be kind hearted after all we are not wealth person like stock broker as earnest appeal on behalf of investors we would request you help us rather find faulting each other

Mahesh S Bhatt

4 years ago

Stock Markets have no icons like Warren Buffet who would inspire common man to invest.

Yes but in dubious lists of Gujarati's after Harshad Mehta,Ketan Mehta,Nimesh Kampani now we have Jignesh Shah.How can these smart Guju's feel thatt they will steal big & nobody would watch.Blot on the community/state/country.FT an iconic company in doldrums.Rgds Mahesh Bhatt

Dr anil k kothari

4 years ago

The looting is being done at every place. recently Birla power and Indswift group collected more than Rs 1000/ crore in Fixed deposits and are not paying. SEBI should investigate that a company listed on stock exchange manipulate the share prices and than collect deposits from public and than rush to CLB for restructuring the repayments in 7 years with half interest rate SEBI can atleast do one thing pl donot allow companies to raise deposits from the public.

arun adalja

4 years ago

two companies pd agro an d j projects is a vanishing company and their payment is around 1100 crores so nsel will face more trouble.this is information by zee news.

REPLY

Ashok Patel

In Reply to arun adalja 4 years ago

What is the full name of D J Projects ?

Kamal Kant Mishra

4 years ago

I agree somewhat to this view. M/s MLO, M/s IIFL, M/s AR & maybe few other's may have connived with NSEL - as was shown in the news yesterday when someone claimed that the Driver & Peon of M/s MLO were Director's of a company floated in 2013 having share capital of Rs.5 Lacs was extended facilities from NSEL of appx / over 200 Crores.
If this is correct - those Broker's / Broking Firms should be Penalized.
I for one know & state from personal loss - that IIFL / IICL is a company which has cheated / conned / defrauded me personally. Their Application to RBI for Banking Licence should NEVER be considered as the company & staff (who defrauded me) should be Penalized & money recovered from them by selling their assets & personal property also. I have filed case also against them. ON THE FLIP SIDE - those brokers who were conned by NSEL should be allowed to go free.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to Kamal Kant Mishra 4 years ago

sathya cumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel
Its very diffcult because the broking firms MOL and IIFL are real cheats and they have good political clout infact in one these companies the finance minister mr.Chidamram son Karhik Chidambaram is an partner and due to his patronage neither sebi or stock exchanges of india nor RBi would take any action and now after this episode after so much of voices we can expect some redressal measure otherwise i have to expose this issue from our platform in which case the countries image and indian administration would be collapsed and this an stigma to our country keeping countires image we are just mailing and writing in this blog let it reach the concern person if the brokers like IIFL chairman like Nirmal jain if they have heart and real interest on the affected people they could help instead of depending on sebi and stock exchanges its high time we fix an timing with chairmans of these broking firms and get our problem solved hope this would solve all our problem instead of seeking govt help we cann fall on the feet of our cheater who we are sure to have heart as they also have their family and they knew our plight and try to help us this one suggestion

KK

4 years ago

KK

Its funny this article about suing brokers. I though a magazie like moneylife would be well informed about how financial markets work, but this is certainly a disappointement. No broker in any country in the world can be blamed if an exchange defaults. In this case, it was purely a fraud being done at the exchange's end. Further, there is no way brokers could have gone and personally tallied all the stock. That is the job of regulators who were clearly caught napping as is always the case in India.

Regarding mis selling, people should have the basic knowlegde of products they are investing in. If you don't understand the product the just stay away. First people get greedy and then blame others. This is very wrong.

Moneylife should research first before printing such articles.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to KK 4 years ago

sathya cumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel group
even when MGO like money life bring the brokers are not bothered because they have good clout in finance ministry and these are people who give money for election and as such its only the investors to be blamed but due the eagerness in earning more money they fall pray as an investor we pray to broking community as whole to have kind heart and think the investors as brothers and sister and try to make good of the losses rather pinpointing mistake who is right who is wrong and blaming the govt is waste of time so earnest appeal to all broking community please kindlty consider the investors plight let not all the curses of the investors fall on your next generation please be kind enough to solve this issue we trust if you wish you could help us without pinching your purse

Dr anil k kothari

4 years ago

Why should govt bail out the brokers who have earned crores in a new avatar of badla. My relative was offered a 2% monthly return by a broker if she start dealing in NSEL. Fortunatly enough i just refused her.
I request that all investors who have deposited money at arecognised stock broker must approach to SEBI and lodge a complain against the broker. These brokers should have verified that whether the goods are available in the warehouse or not.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to Dr anil k kothari 4 years ago

sathya cumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel group
even if we give any complaint to sebi or aany stock exchanges india the investors are the fools because all these looting are hand in glow with sebi and its the officials of sebi who lure the broker to cheat customer and they need not be bailed out by govt because all HNI investors are linked to central minsiter and state minister and their black money is rotated in the stock market and innocent small investors are looted and cheated and govt should come out and bailout the small investors is earnest appeal on behalf of our group

Responsible indian

4 years ago

What wonders me is the fact that how do people like Jignesh Shah and his associates can make irresponsible statements and still have no shame. How can such people be so disgusting. Why do they love to cheat other people of money.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to Responsible indian 4 years ago

sathyacumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel group

as far the stock brokers are concerned they main motto is cheat the customer and thrive and they donot have any ethics or morale that they living on others people curse and that is reason that community had never raisen and that also one the reason why the stock market is in the hands of few choosen others are not prepared to take up this profession even though if they do honestly and with good integrity they can do good business but they have no morale hence its in the hands of choosen few who loot the people and they also doesnot grow

Reeta

In Reply to Responsible indian 4 years ago

In case of a bank default all depositors are given 1 lac each by RBI not on pro-rata basis. It is a similar situation now at NSEL. Why cant the FMC distribute in a similar way ?

Reeta

4 years ago

Is there a legal liability on FT being the promoter company to pay or lend money to NSEL ? Why is the Department of Consumer Affairs not taking any action now.

Request the Investors grievance forum to convince the brokers to give a little consideration to small investors. If HNI investors can accept 2.5% instead of 3% per week, Small investors would get 10% instead of 3% per week.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to Reeta 4 years ago

sathya cumaran
singapore media and channel group

all these are real gimmick the payment would be made to HNI investors who are all ministers of central govt and big industrialist and they pretty well knew this catstrophe and as such small investors would be left in traught is my surmise

Dee

4 years ago

brokers should be sued first. Rather brokers are trying to escape here with loading full blame on NSEL. sue them hard as they are the only one to be blamed here. investors dont deal directly with the exchanges & instead they just look up to the brokers, i guess the brokers were the one minting money out of this. Government should check their accounts first and double the money of the actual payouts can come thru their bank accounts...
no need to go to the exchange monies will be sorted out by these money minting freaks.

vivek shah

4 years ago

I completely agrees to the fact that the brokerages are no saints. In their search for income other than broking (which is shrinking) they resort to all sorts of tactics to lure investors and earn their fat commissions. In this case it is all the HNIs who are at the receiving end.

REPLY

sathyacumaran

In Reply to vivek shah 4 years ago

sathyacumaran
operational head india
singapore media and channel group

the brokers are considered as cheats and they main intention right from the inception of the stock market this attitude had not changed and as such the governing bodies such sebi and nse bse are also puppets in the hands of big broking firm and they never implement the law and once if we expose this episode how the rule makers are rule brakers this would speak very bad about indian administration because even the chairman of sebi is an IAS and when he himself party to the law brakers all the departments of indian administration would also lack this and total indian adminsitration should be blamed and as such main accuse goes to nse bse and sebi for not implementing their rule infact they are afarid of stock brokers mainly because the fringe benefits they derive after their retirement lucartive post in stock broking house inorder to hush up the case and drag the case and that is reason why in delay in going for media presentation we need the matter to be solved without media and without hitting the market

venkatesh puthige

In Reply to sathyacumaran 4 years ago

i AGREE THAT BROKERS ARE NOT SAINTS, THE SAME IS WITH THE EXCHANGE AND THE MINISTRY.
ONE BASIC QUESTION IS A STOCK EXCHANGE IN INDIA HAS COMPULSORILY GIVE SOME THING CALLED TRADE GAURENTEE IN NSEL CASE THEY HAD THIS TRADE GAURENTEE IT MEANS THAT EXCHANGE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TRADES & SETTLEMENT THAT TAKES PLACE ON THE SYSTEM OF THE EXCHANGE. SO THE SAME IS THE CASE WITH BSE OR NSE . TOMMOROW IF BSE OR NSE DEFAULTS THE BROKERS CANNOT BE BLAMED AS THE EXCHANGES PROVIDE FOR GAURENTEE. IT IS RESPONSIBLE OF THE EXCHANGE AND THE MINISTRY OR THE AUTHORITY WHICH COMES HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MONITOR.MORE OVER THE GOVERNMENT WAS SLEEPING ALL THROUGH THIS YEARS WHEN A LEGAL EXCHANGE IS PROVIDING 45 DAYS CARRY FORWARD TRADE OPENLY THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND THE EXCHANGE SAYS IT HAS THE PERMISSION FOR THE SAME. THE MINISTRY SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED 4 MONTHS TIME TO THE EXCHANGE TO BRING THE ENTIRE CARRY FORWARD POSITIONS TO ZERO (WITH NO FRESH POSITIONS TO BE CREATED)INSTEAD OF ABRUPTLY STOPPING THE TRADING CYCLE AND CREATING THE PANIC.

venkatesh puthige

In Reply to sathyacumaran 4 years ago

i AGREE THAT BROKERS ARE NOT SAINTS, THE SAME IS WITH THE EXCHANGE AND THE MINISTRY.
ONE BASIC QUESTION IS A STOCK EXCHANGE IN INDIA HAS COMPULSORILY GIVE SOME THING CALLED TRADE GAURENTEE IN NSEL CASE THEY HAD THIS TRADE GAURENTEE IT MEANS THAT EXCHANGE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE TRADES & SETTLEMENT THAT TAKES PLACE ON THE SYSTEM OF THE EXCHANGE. SO THE SAME IS THE CASE WITH BSE OR NSE . TOMMOROW IF BSE OR NSE DEFAULTS THE BROKERS CANNOT BE BLAMED AS THE EXCHANGES PROVIDE FOR GAURENTEE. IT IS RESPONSIBLE OF THE EXCHANGE AND THE MINISTRY OR THE AUTHORITY WHICH COMES HAS THE AUTHORITY TO MONITOR.MORE OVER THE GOVERNMENT WAS SLEEPING ALL THROUGH THIS YEARS WHEN A LEGAL EXCHANGE IS PROVIDING 45 DAYS CARRY FORWARD TRADE OPENLY THROUGH THE SYSTEM AND THE EXCHANGE SAYS IT HAS THE PERMISSION FOR THE SAME. THE MINISTRY SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED 4 MONTHS TIME TO THE EXCHANGE TO BRING THE ENTIRE CARRY FORWARD POSITIONS TO ZERO (WITH NO FRESH POSITIONS TO BE CREATED)INSTEAD OF ABRUPTLY STOPPING THE TRADING CYCLE AND CREATING THE PANIC.

Navy orders board of inquiry into INS Sindhurakshak explosion

A Board of Inquiry is being instituted to investigate the explosion and subsequent fire onboard INS Sindurakshak, a Kilo class submarine of the Indian Navy

The Indian Navy on Wednesday ordered a board of inquiry to probe the explosion and subsequent fire on-board its submarine INS Sindurakshak, which has sunk. The fate of 18 persons on-board the submarine is being ascertained, a Navy official said.

 

An explosion resulting in a major fire took place on board INS Sindhurakshak, a Kilo class submarine of the Indian Navy, shortly after midnight.

 

Fire tenders from the Naval dock yard as well as the Mumbai Fire Brigade were immediately pressed into action. However, due to the explosion, the submarine has submerged at the dock with only a portion visible above the surface.

 

A Board of Inquiry is being instituted to investigate into the causes of the accident, he said.

User

RTI Judgement Series: Appellant harassed by the PIO gets Rs2,000 compensation

Despite the order from the FAA, the PIO refused to give information. He even tried to mislead the CIC by making false statements. The CIC while issuing a show cause to the PIO, awarded a compensation of Rs2,000 to the appellant. This is 155th in a series of important judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi that can be used or quoted in an RTI application

The Central Information Commission (CIC), while allowing an appeal, directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) and assistant officer for value added tax (AVATO), in the Department of Trade and Taxes at Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) to provide complete information. The CIC also asked the PIO to pay Rs2,000 as compensation to the appellant for the loss and detriment suffered by him of having to file the appeals and not getting information in time. 

 

While giving this judgement on 3 June 2011, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central Information Commissioner said, “The PIO did not give any justification for refusing to give the information initially and even after the order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA) he did not give the information. Even before the Commission, he was not willing to give the exact position. It does not need too much imagination to guess why there was such a resolute refusal to provide the information.”

 

Delhi resident LG Dass, on 22 November 2010, sought from the PIO information about action taken on a complaint he filed against a particular dealer who was using different series of retail invoices and not charging VAT on the car accessories. Here is the information he sought under the RTI Act...

 

1. Please inform the progress in the matter and particulars of action taken by this public authority against the dealer in pursuance of the aforesaid complaint dated 4 October 2010 followed by the, addendum dated 21 October 2010.

2. Please also supply copies of documents, correspondence, replies and file notings etc. in respect of enquiries & investigation initiated and/or conducted by this public authority till date in this regard.

 

In his reply on 24 December 2012, the PIO said, "This office has received your letter dated 4 October 2010. However, further details in this regard cannot be disclosed as these are prohibited under Section 8(1) (h) of the RTI Act, 2005 which inter alia states:

8 (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen, -

     h)information which would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders;"

 

Again in a reply on 3 March 2010, the PIO stated, "However, in your case the status of enquiry or verification has changed since the date of providing information to you in response to your original application. Now, in this regard, the application has been forwarded to the VATO (KDU)/ Assessing Authority for further necessary action at their end. Since the matter pertains to third party information, a submission of TR Sawhney is being sought as stipulated under section 11 of the RTI Act. After the comments or submissions are received, you will be accordingly informed."

 

Dass, the applicant, citing information denied filed his first appeal. In his order the First Appellate Authority (FAA), said, "The PIO shall have the re-look into the issue and act in accordance with the law laid down by the High Court of Delhi. He shall furnish the information or respond the appellant as within 15 days."

 

Even after the FAA's order, the PIO did not provide the information. Dass then approached the CIC with his second appeal.

 

During the hearing, Mr Gandhi noted that the appellant (Dass) had filed a complaint on 4 October 2010 followed by an addendum on 21 October 2010. He had complained that a particular dealer was using different series of retail invoices and not charging VAT on the car accessories. Thus the appellant had filed a complaint about somebody fraudulently depriving the state of revenue. Through this RTI application he sought the action taken on this complaint, the CIC noted.

 

Mr Gandhi said, "The PIO has not provided the information as per the order of the FAA and Subhash (the PIO) has been trying to mislead the Commission by making false statements." 

 

The FAA had ordered that the information should be provided within 15 days considering the order of the Delhi High Court in the Bhagat Singh Case.

 

"It is apparent that the PIO had made up his mind not to provide the information. Initially he refused to give the information claiming exemption under Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act, without giving any reasons as to how disclosing the information would impede the process of investigation," Mr Gandhi said.

 

Under Section 19(5) of the RTI Act, the onus to prove the denial of information was justified and is on the PIO. "The PIO did not give any justification for refusing to give the information initially and even after the order of the FAA he did not give the information. Even before the Commission, he was not willing to give the exact position. It does not need too much imagination to guess why there was such a resolute refusal to provide the information," the CIC noted.

 

The Bench said, "The appellant has been unnecessarily harassed by the actions of the PIO and put to trouble by having to file the first and second appeal. An ordinary citizen instead of complaining and fighting succumbs to the pressure of undesirable functioning in offices instead of standing against it. Therefore, the award of compensation for harassment by public authorities not only compensates the individual, satisfies him personally but helps in curing social evil. It may result in improving the work culture and help in changing the outlook."

 

While allowing the appeal, Mr Gandhi directed the PIO to provide complete information available on records. Exercising its powers under Section 19(8)(b) of the RTI Act, the Bench awarded a compensation of Rs2000 to Dass for the loss and detriment suffered by him of having to file the appeals and not getting the information in time.

 

In addition, the CIC also issued a show cause notice to the PIO after finding him guilty of not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. "He has further refused to obey the orders of his superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be malafide," the Bench noted.

 

CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION

 

Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000897/12692

http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SG_A_2011_000897_12692_M_57661.pdf

Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000897

 

Appellant                                            : LG Dass,

                                                                 Delhi-110 092

 

Respondent                                       : Subhash

                                                               Public Information Officer & AVATO (HQ)

                                                               Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCTD

                                                               O/o Commissioner (Enforcement- I),

                                                               Vyapar Bhawan, IP Estate,

                                                              New Delhi-2

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)