Under the whistleblower programme, in case a tip-off results in monetary sanctions of over $1 million, individuals concerned can get 10-30% of the sanctions collected
US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has received as many as 18 whistleblower tip-offs from India during the 12-months to end-September. These tips were provided to the SEC for probing into various market related irregularities. UK topped the charts with 66 such tip-offs to SEC.
Overall, the SEC received more than 400 whistleblower tip-offs from various countries during the financial year 2013 (October 12-September 13).
The UK is followed by Canada at the second place with 62 tip-offs on instances of possible wrongdoings, China at 52, Russia at 20, India and Ireland 18 each and Australia at 15.
The annual report is prepared by the SEC staff as part of the US government whistleblower programme. The programme allows individuals to provide information on possible violations of securities regulation, without revealing their identity.
The regulator received 557 tip-offs related to corporate disclosures and financial reports, 553 on fraud, 525 information on manipulation and 196 concerning to insider trading, it said.
“Since the beginning of the whistleblower programme, the Commission has received whistleblower tip-offs from individuals in 68 countries outside the US. In fiscal year 2013 alone, the Commission received submissions from individuals in 55 foreign countries,” the report said.
Among other countries, SEC got 8 tip-offs each from Switzerland and Italy, seven from France, four from Singapore and one from Malaysia.
Besides, the number of tip-offs and complaints received by the US regulator increased to 3,238 in the fiscal year 2013 from the preceding fiscal.
Under the programme, in case a tip-off results in monetary sanctions of over $1 million, individuals concerned can get 10-30% of the sanctions collected.
The regulator paid over $14 million in awards during the year, the report added.
In an essay, Anand Mahindra says the world has a stake in India’s success not just because of the need for someone to pick up the slack from a slowing China
Anand Mahindra, chairman and managing director of Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M), India’s largest utility vehicle maker, feels that India cannot afford to emulate China. "The world has a stake in India’s success—and not just because of the need for someone to pick up the slack from a slowing China. Much of the developing world faces the same challenges India does. The solutions developed here—the answers to almost metaphysical questions about how societies should work and grow—will have worldwide relevance," he said in an essay complied by McKinsey & Co under its ‘Reimagining India’ series.
Sharing his views on India and China, Mahindra said, “If we continue to judge India’s progress by China’s, using metrics like foreign direct investment (FDI) and gross domestic product (GDP) growth, or statistics like the kilometres of highway and millions of apartments built, we will continue to be branded a laggard. India’s messy coalition governments are not suddenly about to become as efficient and decisive as China’s technocrat-led Politburo. Nor should that be the goal.”
“Moreover,” the M&M CMD said, “India simply cannot afford to grow like China has over the last two decades. In authoritarian, tightly controlled China, the costs of that headlong economic expansion are obvious. Unbreathable air and undrinkable milk, slick-palmed officials and oppressive factory bosses provoke tens of thousands of protests each year. In a society as diverse as India’s—driven by religious, community, and caste divides—those kinds of tensions can easily erupt in violence and disorder. Already the battle between haves and have-nots is driving a powerful rural insurgency across nearly a third of the country. Labour riots can turn into religious pogroms. Farmer protests can turn into class wars.”
Mahindra feels for India’s economy to expand as rapidly and yet more sustainably than China’s, we need to make our differences into virtues rather than vulnerabilities. He said, “For too long we have clung to a mind-set shaped by the early independence years, when the areas in the northwest and northeast had become Pakistan, and India’s first government was struggling to weave a patchwork of provinces and maharaja-run kingdoms into a nation. In those days, the risk that India might break apart was very real. One of India’s great accomplishments is that no one worries about that anymore. Indeed, the idea of a united India runs so broad and deep that it allows us to consider a counter-intuitive way of thinking about growth—that the best way to propel the economy may be to encourage different parts of the country to go their own way.”
Courtesy: McKinsey & Co
The CIC asked the PIO to find a way of giving duplicate sales deed marked as original along with a certificate. This is the 191st in a series of important RTI judgements given by former Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi
The Central Information Commission (CIC), while allowing an appeal, directed the Public Information Officer (PIO) at Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD), to find a way of giving a duplicate registered documents marked as original to the appellant along with a certificate. The PIO had stated that they were not able to locate the original sale deed submitted by the appellant.
While giving the judgement on 8 July 2009, Shailesh Gandhi, the then Central Information Commissioner said, "As far as the Bench can see the papers may well have been stolen. The public authority appears to have failed in providing service to the appellant and it must find some way of giving the documents and relief to the appellant."
New Delhi residents, Neetu and Neeraj Kumar, on 25 February 2009, sought from the PIO information regarding sale deed that has been executed on 21 August 2007 by Mohan Swaroop in their favour. Here is the information they sought and the reply provided by the PIO...
1. Inform the date and dairy/dispatch no. by which the file was sent to higher authorities.
PIO's Reply- The file was send vide diary no3245 dated 23 August 2007 and again on 29 August 2007 vide no.3279
2. Inform the Name Designation and the complete address of the higher authorities to whom the file was sent.
PIO's Reply- Principal Secretary (Revenue)
3. Inform the efforts made by the department till 7 October 2008 to trace out the original sale deed.
PIO's Reply- All the record has been searched in the office. The matter has been again submitted before Worthy DC (South-West) to resolve the issue.
4. Inform the Name Designation and Posting Address of the erring officials who are responsible for non-delivering of Original Sale Deed to the Applicants till date.
PIO's Reply- As the matter is under process therefore the responsibility has not been fixed by the Department.
5. Inform the action taken/ initiated by the department against the erring official and also inform the outcome of the same.
PIO's Reply- -Do-
6. Inform the efforts made by the department to trace out the Original Sale Deed from 7 October 2008 to i.e. after giving the reply of RTI ID No.1259`
PIO's Reply- As mentioned in point no-'C'.
7. Inform that the department requires how much maximum time to deliver the Original Sale Deed to the Applicants?
PIO's Reply- The matter has been submitted before the Worthy DC (South-West) to resolve the issue and the order is awaited. The matter will be short out after having the directions from the higher authorities.
8. Inform the further course of action in case the Original Sale Deed is not found by the department.
PIO's Reply- -Do-
Not satisfied with the PIO's Reply, the Kumars then filed their first appeal, in which they stated, "It had been informed that the original sale deed was sent to higher authorities by SR-IX. The PIO had neither given the information sought nor gave any satisfactory reply for the same. After five months sale deed had not been delivered to the appellant."
In his order of First Appellate Authority (FAA) said, he was satisfied with the reply provided by the sub-registrar. "However," he said, "the case was more of grievance redressal. The grievance of the applicants was genuine and it was incumbent on the department to come clear on the issue and take necessary action to get their deed registered."
The FAA then directed the sub registrar to immediately put up a note to this effect within a week, so that final decision could be taken expeditiously.
The Kumars then approached the CIC with their second appeal. They said, "The reply of PIO is not at all satisfactory and very vague. The contents of the order of FAA were contrary to what was discussed/ ruled during the course of hearing of the appeal."
During the hearing, Mr Gandhi, the then CIC, observed that both Neetu and Neeraj Kumar had given documents for registration duly stamped with a stamp duty of Rs12,600 on 21 August 2007 and were seeking the registered documents.
"He (the appellants) has been made to run from pillar to post to get the registered documents and he therefore filed a RTI application on 25 February 2009 asking about the fate of this. The PIO has given a reply on 16 March 2009 effectively stating that they are not able to locate the papers. The PIO states that the papers are not available," the Bench noted.
Mr Gandhi said, "As far as the Bench can see the papers may well have been stolen. The public authority appears to have failed in providing service to the appellant and it must find some way of giving the documents and relief to the appellant."
While allowing the appeal, the Bench then directed the PIO to find a way of giving duplicate registered documents marked as original to the appellant along with a certificate stating that the original stamped document has been stolen/ lost.
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001327/4031
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001327
Appellant : Neetu & Neeraj Kumar,
Respondent : Pawan Kumar/ VVJ Rajasekhar,
Government of NCT of Delhi,
Office of the PIO/ADM (South-West),
Old Terminal Tax Building,
Kapashera, New Delhi 110029