RTI activists or RTI blackmailers ??
Sarbajit Roy
Blackmailers using RTI Act to blackmail builders
The dreaded extortion call from a bhai is unsettling for any construction tsar, but Mumbai’s builders are now quivering before far lesser mortals. The violations they indulge in, they gripe, are being ferreted out by a bunch of “professional complainants’’ with the help of the RTI Act, not to expose corruption, but to blackmail them.
Builders manipulating floor space index (FSI) or carrying out gross violations in their projects find themselves more susceptible to this phenomenon. “Unscrupulous builders flouting construction regulations are easy targets and are sometimes forced to shell out a couple of crores to keep extortionists off,’’ said an industry insider, who claimed that even those builders who tried to work within the ambit of the sanctioned plans found themselves at the receiving end.
“A false complaint to the BMC could stall work for a couple of months. Any delay results in a loss. The builder would prefer to pay up,’’ said a developer.
Advocate-activist Y P Singh, however, said this was “inevitable collateral’’. When the statutory authorities themselves are sanctioning illegal plans, naturally, all kinds of unscrupulous people will want to jump on to the bandwagon,’’ he said. He added that sometimes tenants in redevelopment deals also dug out details of government-builder misdemeanours to get a better deal.
Several developers claimed that the sum demanded from them ranged from a few lakhs to Rs 3 crore for big projects. According to allegations, the former head of an ‘anticorruption NGO’, a Malad based advocate and a Kurla slum-dweller are some of the highly successful ‘social workers’ who have brought powerful builders to their knees.
Builders alleged that some employees in the BMC’s building proposals department, which sanctions building plans, were hand-in-glove with extortionists and could well be guiding them. However, V L Joshi, the outgoing chief engineer of the BMC’s development plan department, strongly denied that some of his own staff in the building proposals department were involved.
NEW CON GAME
- ‘Professional complainants’ use RTI Act & corrupt officials’ help to ferret out info on new building projects
- Some of these ‘conmen’ also hire small-time architects to pinpoint violations
- They then target builders who manipulate FSI rules, and demand money, threatening to complain to the BMC
- Builders say the regulations are so convoluted that violations can be found in almost any project
- Fearing that the construction could be stalled, builders pay up to Rs 3 crore per project to silence the extortionists Developers pay up, ‘buy peace’
Mumbai: Extortionists posing as anti-corruption activists are targetting builders who violate FSI norms in their under-constructionprojects , and extracting large sums of money from them. Some builders allege that employees in the BMC’s building proposals department help the blackmailers, but the civic body denied this.
A senior official from the department at Byculla said his office received at least six RTI applications a day. “We cannot refuse information to anyone seeking it,’’ he said.
Sources said the most serious manipulations carried out by some builders were in projects where the BMC permits a car slot on each floor of the building which is free of FSI. This car park area, which could be as big as 2,000 sq ft, is then surreptitiously amalgamated into the housing unit and sold as a large apartment, for whichthe builder charges a premium. In such projects where the violation is blatant, the RTI specialists quickly move in for the kill.
A developer said that extortionists hired small architects to help them find violations in building plans. “If my file gets stuck because of a frivolous complaint, the commencement certificate will be stalled,’’ he said. Another builder told TOI that some also threaten to expose developers in the media. “It is better to buy peace,’’ he said, adding that this ‘business’ has been flourishing for the past couple of years. “It’s all done under the guise of curbing corruption,’’ he said.
“Building regulations are so convoluted that one can find something wrong with every project in the city. Today, every project requires about 60 to 70 approvals, and builders sometimes commence work without the necessary approvals. This is how developers are caught on the wrong foot,’’ said a builder from the western suburbs.
RTI commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said that when the act was framed, queries had been raised about its misuse. “But who can get blackmailed? Naturally, somebody who has done something wrong. And even without RTI, blackmail was possible,’’ he said. “Hopefully, builders themselves will stop taking short cuts when they realise it is not viable anymore.’’
Sarbajit Roy
RTI used to blackmail govt officials
A rising number of cases of blackmail of government officers by using the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, are being reported in RTI circles. Some of these cases came out in the open during the hearing of second appeals by the state information commissioner (SIC) Pune, Vijay Kuvelekar, recently.
After a particularly gruelling hearing, a gram sevak from Satara broke down before the SIC and revealed that in her village a group had repeatedly used the RTI to blackmail government officials.
According to her, members of this group file an RTI application with the village panchayat samiti. The information asked is normally voluminous and, after the application, the group demands money from the official to stop from going for first and second appeal.
If the officer fails to succumb to the blackmail or refuses to comply, the same information is asked by other people at the same time to act as a pressure tactic. This results in the clogging of the appeal systems, with some people filing more than seven or eight appeals for the same case.
Prahlad Kachre, head of the centre for public policy at Yashwantrao Chavan Academy of Development Administration (Yashada), said he was aware of this trend over the past few years. “The problem is acute in Sangli and Solapur districts in Pune division,” he said.
Officers have been complaining about blatant blackmail by certain RTI users. Usually departments dealing with procurement and distribution of grants — such as agriculture and public distribution systems — are susceptible to blackmail. “I might almost say that this is socialisation of corruption,” he said.
Veteran activist Vijay Kumbhar has noticed this disturbing trend in the past few months. He suggested suo motu declaration of information to prevent blackmail by unscrupulous RTI users.
“Section 4 of RTI talks about suo motu declaration of 17 types of information held in the office. If this is done and put in the public domain, the number of applications received under RTI will go down drastically,” he said.
Suo motu declaration will also save officers from blackmailers, Kumbhar said.
Kachre’s advice to the officers facing blackmail is to file criminal complaints. “But in many cases, the officers themselves have certain things to hide and thus refrain from lodging a complaint,” he noted.
In order to deal with the nuisance of multiple RTI applications for the same information, RTI drafting committee member, Nikhil Dey, suggested creating a pool of applications received and answers to them. This would put in public domain the people who are habitual RTI applicants, he said.
“A simple website can be hosted for all the government offices in the state. Once the applications are in the public domain, it would automatically act as a deterrent for people with ulterior motives to apply. However, this suggestion has found very few takers,” he admitted.
Sarbajit Roy
Mon, Jun 16 02:21 AM
The Chhattisgarh State Information Commission has ordered an inquiry into complaints of misuse of the Right to Information (RTI) Act by an applicant.
The applicant, who is a member of a Janpad Panchayat, allegedly blackmailed officials of village panchayats into purchasing insurance policies after seeking information about them through RTI applications.
Chief Information Commissioner A K Vijayvargiya directed the Chief Executive Officer of Kanker district panchayat to conduct an inquiry against the applicant and to take appropriate action under the Panchayat Act.
The matter came up before the CIC when Sriniwas, a Janpad Panchayat member, filed second appeals with the SIC, pointing out that gram panchayat secretaries, who are also designated as public information officers of 36 panchayats under Koilibeda development block, have failed to provide information sought under the RTI Act within the stipulated timeframe.
All the 36 appeals, filed by the same person, were clubbed together and taken up for hearing. In their replies, gram panchayat secretaries concerned informed the commission that the applicant was asked to pay the fees prescribed for supplying copies of the documents. They alleged that the applicant in turn forced panchayat officials and even elected sarpanchs to pay up and to purchase insurance policies.
In their replies, panchayat officials also alleged that the applicant had threatened action against them if they failed to accept his demands. In some cases, they pointed out, the applicant had later submitted letters stating that the information sought earlier were no more required.
The CIC in his order stated: "It appears that these second appeals were filed to mount pressure on gram panchayat secretaries. It seems to be an effort to fulfil vested interest in the guise of public interest".
"It is unfortunate that RTI is being misused in such a manner and the image of panchayat bodies is being tarnished," Vijayvargiya said in his order which dismissed all the 36 second appeals filed by the appellant.
However, the commission directed the appellant that he could go through the relevant records, as per the rules, of the gram panchayats concerned.
Sarbajit Roy
Activist or blackmailer?
By: Savie Karnel
 |
|
Running away from truth? Alagusundaram ran away when he realised his picture was being taken |
B S Alagusundaram, editor of Rama Ravana paper, is one of the two people who have a RTI cell specially set up for them to give in applications. The other regular is V Bhaskar, editor of a tabloid called Mahanagara Palike.
The special cell was set up after BBMP commissioner S Subramanya was tired of the many applications the duo filed each day at the BBMP office. Alagusundaram claims that he has filed more than 600 RTI applications so far.
Gowramma, an accountant in BBMP has accused Sundaram of blackmail and harassment. She got a job as a peon in the BBMP on compassionate grounds after her husband, a BBMP employee, died. "I joined as a Group D employee and later appeared for SSLC exams and cleared the departmental exams to get the job of a second division clerk," she said.
 |
|
A special cell (below) was allotted to him after BBMP commissioner was tired of the many petitions he filed |
Alagusundaram got some documents through RTI and he alleges that Gowramma has forged documents. But Gowramma claims that Alagusundaram has been harassing her and demanding Rs 1 lakh.
"This has been happening for the past six months. He calls me and demands money. Where can I get it from? I have to take care of three children. I get Rs 6,000 as salary with which I have to pay my rent and maintain household expenses too," she said.
She alleged that he calls her to places alone and then does not meet her, if she took anyone along. "He had called me to Hebbal some days ago. I had gone there with my brother. He didn't meet me. Instead he called and yelled."
Alagusundaram said that the picture in the SSLC hall ticket and marks card is not that of Gowramma, but she insists it is hers.
When MiD DAY contacted Alagusundaram, he was in denial mode. "I have not blackmailed her. I don't even have her number," he said.
Not eligible
He claims that he is using the RTI to find unworthy people in government service.
"She is not eligible to be a clerk. She doesn't know her job. Paying her is a waste of public money. I have got documents from Karnataka Exam Board, copies of the school where the SSLC exams were held and photos. My investigations show that she has forged documents. If I wanted to blackmail her why would I file a complaint?