Admin Login  
RTI AND HUMAN RIGHTS ONLINE SERVICES
(Starts Online Courses in RTI, Human Rights, Legal Drafting , Facebook Laws, Consumer Laws, Labour Laws)
(RTI EXCELLENCE & AWARENESS AWARDS 2017. SEND NOMINATIONS UPTO 10 OCT 2017 VIA MAIL)
(OUR NAME PUBLISHED IN INDIA BOOK OF RECORDS FOR ONLINE LEGAL SERVICES)

  Skip Navigation Links
 
Judgements
DescriptionLinks
2nd Appeal CIC/RM/C/2013/000440 against Ministry of Human Resources and Development(UCEE Seema Dental College) in Central Information Commission New Delhi.Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://indiankanoon.org/doc/108203719/
2nd Appeal CIC/RM/A/2012/000306/LS against H.N.B Garhwal University Srinagar in Central Information Commission New Delhi.Commission ordered to pay compensation of Rs.25000/- to appellant.Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://indiankanoon.org/doc/154886254/
2nd Appeal CIC/SG/A/2011/002932 against Ministry of Health & Family Welfare in Central Information Commission New Delhi.In it Scam was open in which Commission ordered to disclose file notings regarding that medical colleges which have denied approval by MCI but granted by Ministry.Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://indiankanoon.org/doc/39072531/
2nd Appeal CIC_YA_A_2014_000125 against Medical Council of India in Central Information Commission New Delhi. PIO of MCI has apologize for delayed information. Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_YA_A_2014_000125_M_152114.pdf
Double Bench Case :- 2nd Appeal AC No.85 of 2012 against Director Health & Family Welfare Dept Punjab in State Information Commission Punjab.Commission ordered to provide information regarding rules & list of leaves granted to Adhoc/Short Term Employees .Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://infocommpunjab.com/htm/documents/2009/Orders%2011.04.2012,%202.00%20PM,%20Court-II.doc
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CASE:- The complaint filed by Varun Bansal, resident of House No.124, Street No.2, Green Avenue Bibi Wala Chowk, Bathinda is addressed to Ishaan Publishers, H.O.Jalandhar alleging mistakes in book of Diploma subject computer graphics Edition 2012. The accused is a private firm. No allegation of human rights violation has been attributed to any public servant of the State of Punjab, which is a precondition for taking cognizance of the matter. The complainant may approach Police or seek his remedy from appropriate forum. Hence no action is called for on the part of the Commission in the complaint, which stands disposed of accordingly. Copy of the order be sent to the complainant.http://pshrc.net/html/detail.asp?fn=14527/8/2013
Complaint case No.9352 of 2014 against UCEE Seema Dental College in State Information Commission Uttarakhand. Commission declared ACEE/UCEE a public authority. Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://uic.gov.in/rptComplaintDescPDF.aspx?CaseNumber=9352
2nd Appeal No.7169 of 2012 against Uttrakhand Technical Univ in State Information Commission Uttarakhand. Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://uic.gov.in/frmDecisionsPDF.aspx?CaseNumber=7169
2nd Appeal CIC/YA/A/2015/000419 against Ministry of Health & Family Welfare New Delhi. Case Status Pending
Review Petition:- HNB Garhwal Univ moves review petition against CIC orders for exception in case.Pending(Dairy No. 165215/ 09-09-2013)
 
2nd Appeal AC No.2153 of 2014 against Secretary Finance Dept Civil Secretariat Chandigarh Punjab in State Information Commission Punjab.Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://infocommpunjab.com/htm/documents/2009/23.09.2014Orders(RSN).doc
2nd Appeal AC No.763 of 2015 against Registrar & V.C of Adesh Medical University Bathinda in State Information Commission Punjab. Adesh Univ has appointed Advocate from High Court. They apologize for denied information. Commission has directed to Adesh Univ to disclose all information and fix time for petitioner to go in Registrar office to collect all information. Please Click on Link to view Judgmenthttp://infocommpunjab.com/htm/documents/2009/22.07.2015ORDERS(SP).doc
 
 
 
Complaint against HNB Garhwal Univ in CIC for not complying with orders of Commission. Pending for Hearing(Diary No.167057/16-09-2013)
Appeal No.1001 of 2015 against Principal Health Secretary office and Director Health Services, Double Bench of State Information Commissioners Punjab has issued Show Cause Notice for illegally misplaced the official record and Files. Commission ordered that Department will also clarify that where the relevant record, in connection of which information has been sought for by the appellant, has gone. They will also enlighten regarding the efforts made by him to trace out the relevant record. They will produce supporting documents in connection with any claim, which he will made, to. They will also clarify the fact that if the record, in connection of which the information has been sought for by the appellant, has gone missing then as to what action has been taken by him in that regard. They will also explain that whether he has taken any action against the officials, in whose custody the relevant office record, was lying. Next date oh hearing is 17th Sept.http://infocommpunjab.com/htm/documents/2009/11.06.2015Orders(CP).doc http://infocommpunjab.com/htm/documents/2009/30.07.2015(DB130)Orders(CP).doc
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION CASE Case detail of File no. : 12340/2/2014:- The complainant alleges that his father, who is a doctor, has not been transferred to a station of his choice despite fact that only 1½ years are left for his retirement. The action of the government is against the policy framed by them. However, on consideration of the allegations contained in the complaint, the Commission considers it appropriate to send copy of the order along with copy of the complaint to the Director, Health and Family Welfare, Punjab, Chandigarh, to look into the matter at his own level and take appropriate action in accordance with law as per the facts and circumstances of the case after hearing the complainant.http://pshrc.net/html/detail.asp?fn=12340/2/2014
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 7160/7/5/2015:- Victim:- Jai Kumar Gurgaon. Case is regarding non registration of FIR in Police Station by Police officer against Fraudsters for 4 Lakhs Rs.fraud on name of Insurance. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=7160/7/5/2015
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 1057/19/2/2015:- Victim:- Sanmukh Rao. Case is regarding Harassment given to Indian Soldier by their Senior Officers. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=1057/19/2/2015
2nd Appeal CIC/YA/A/2015/000419 against Ministry of Health & Family Welfare in Central Information Commission New Delhi.Commission ordered to to MH&FW to decide the grievance petition of Petitioner which was forwarded by Ministry of Home Affairs New Delhi & President of India to Ministry of Health for necessary action in 2013. Commission directs them to provide action taken report on petition to the appellant within 4 weeks of receipt of this order..Please Click on Link to view Judgment.http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_YA_A_2015_000419_M_174929.pdf
 
 
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 680/2/2014:- The complainant alleges that his father gave resignation from his job on 21.1.1991 doing MS Course in Government Medical College, Amritsar. On 29.1.1993 his father again joined the service and the same was regularized on 29.1.1997, but no past service benefit has been given to his father. A copy of this order and of the complaint be sent to the Director, Health Service and Family Welfare, Punjab, Chandigarh to look into the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law. The complaint is disposed of.http://pshrc.net/html/detail.asp?fn=680/2/2014
HARYANA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. 1219 of 2015:- Victim:- Jai Kumar Gurgaon. Order dated :- 7th Sept 2015. Case is regarding non registration of FIR in Police Station by Police officer against Fraudsters for 4 Lakhs Rs.fraud on name of Insurance. Orders are:- In view of allegations levelled in the Complaint, report be requisitioned from the Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon through Director of Investigation within Eight Weeks. Adjourn to 22-12-2015 (Justice H.S.Bhalla)
2nd Appeal AC No.2949 of 2015 against Varun Bansal Vs Principle Secretary Health & Family Welfare Dept Punjab.Punjab State Information Commission issued show cause notice to Health Department under sec 20(1) of RTI act for penalty and compensation and also directed to appear before commission for personal hearing why maximum penalty should not be imposed to him/her for delay and ignorance. Please click on link to view judgment.http://infocommpunjab.com/htm/documents/2009/11.01.2016(1)Orders(CP).doc
 
 
 
2nd Appeal AC No.2949 of 2015 against Varun Bansal Vs Principle Secretary Health & Family Welfare Dept Punjab. After examining the documents placed on record, it emerges that there is a delay of more than sight months in supplying the requisite information to the information seeker. A copy of order be sent to Ms. Vini Mahajan, Principal Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Health, with the advise to take necessary steps to make PIOs/APIOs/First Appellate Authorities/the officials concerned more sensitive and responsible enough in dealing with the RTI applications filed by the applicants and supply the required information to the information-seekers within stipulated time as per provisions of the RTI Act as per law with utmost care and efficiency. Please click on link. http://infocommpunjab.com/htm/documents/2009/16.02.2016Orders(CP).doc
2nd Appeal CIC/MP/2016/000608 Bharat Khanna The Tribune against State Bank of Patiala Bathinda via Varun Bansal RTI Counsellor for tribune. Commission held that The information which is related to Bank Defaulters can be disclosed to applicant acc to Supreme Court Judgement. But in case if Bank has not declared any person defaulter, then information will comes under exemption law. http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_MP_A_2016_000608_M_195535.pdf
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 571/11/12/2016:- Victim:- Ajith B Anand. Case is regarding Harassment and Negligence by Public Authority of CBSE Board during printing of final marksheet of 10th class of students by doing error in spelling of fathers name ,students name etc. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority of CBSE Board for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=571/11/12/2016
2nd Appeal AC No.3497 of 2015 Daya Sagar Vs Punjab School Education Board. Mr.Varun Bansal RTI Counsellor had appeared on behalf of Daya Sagar and argued that his client has not provided with necessary information within time limits of RTI act. So he suffered mental harassment and financial loss in attending the hearings in commissions. For this appellant demands Respondents be penalized and he be compensated for detriment suffered.Commission orders:- It may observed that appropriate mechanism has not been provided to keep the record properly by public authority due to which information/request under RTI act are not being served properly.However, PIO is warned to be more careful in future while dealing with matters pertaining to RTI act and act swiftly.
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 54/19/2/2016:- Victim:- Aman Garg. Varun Bansal(Human Rights Protector) represents the said case. Case is regarding Hair found in 50-50 Biscuits Britannia Company and food safety rules violation. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter. Commission directed the Secretary Ministry of Health & Family Welfare New Delhi for the same. http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=54/19/2/2016
Punjab State Information Commission 2nd Appeal Case No.682 of 2016 Yashpal Garg Vs Municipal Corporation Bathinda. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate, pleads the case. In this case MC had harassed the Senior Citizen of India by not providing information and withheld decision on 1st Appeal. Commission directs the respondents to furnish information within month and also direct them to remove deficiencies point out by RTI ADV Varun Bansal in provided Information. AT last case closed in favor of Yashpal Garg by provided full flashed information.Judgement Narration:- 1. Sh. Varun Bansal, counsel, authorized by the appellant files deficiency in the information which is taken on record and copy thereof has been provided to the respondent. 2. The respondent states that the information has been provided to the appellant vide letter dated 07.06.2016 and on pointing out the deficiency therein, he undertakes that the deficiency shall be removed before the next date of hearing. 3. On next day of hearing The perusal of files shows that the part information was provided by the respondent vide letter dated 29.03.2016 to the appellant. It is ascertained that the point-wise information comprising 20 pages has been provided to the appellant vide letter dated 07.06.2016. It is further ascertained that the deficiency pointed out, in the information already provided, by the appellant has also been removed vide letter dated 08.07.2016 by the respondent. The appellant has also expressed his satisfaction qua the information provided to him. No further action is required in this Appeal Case which is hereby disposed of and closed.
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 962/19/2/2016:- Victim:- Mausamy Sen. Case is regarding Harassment & Negligence given to Dance Teacher by their Principal of School at workplace and same was neglected by Police of City. Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender drafted and filed the case in commission. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority i.e S.P Bathinda for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=962/19/2/2016
Grievance Petition No. DARPG/E/2015/16720 and DHLTH/E/2016/00060. Victim- Aman Garg from Tappa Mandi. Counsel for victim is Varun Bansal. Food Safety and Standards Authority of India under Food Safety act 2006 made orders in case of Sub-Standard quality of Britannia 50-50 Biscuits dated 02-Feb-2016 (File No.3(12)2016/CPGRAM/Enf/FSSAI)Director of FSSAI directed the Commissioner of Food Safety Sh, Hussan Lal, IAS Punjab to investigate the matter and take necessary action on the matter of Hair found in biscuits under intimation to complainant and FSSAI
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 2014/25/10/2015-WC:- Victim:- Anita Biswas. Case is regarding Harassment/Domestic Violence/Dowry .Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=2014/25/10/2015-WC
Punjab State Information Commission 2nd Appeal Case No.1140 of 2016 Rajesh Negi Dainik Bhaskar Reporter Vs Indian Red Cross Society Bathinda. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate, Filed & pleaded the case. In this case Red Cross Society had misused powers of demand of Money under RTI. PIO Demanded Rs. 300/- for 150 pages, whenever pages was 50 only. By Notice of Commission , said PIO had also provided 2nd RTI application info of pages 7000 free of cost under Threat of fine. Appellant wins the case and also DC had requested to drop the said case.Judgement Narration:- The case has been heard through Video Conferencing. The appellant acknowledges the receipt of the information to his satisfaction. No more intervention of the Commission is required. Disposed. Sd/- 27.07.2016 (Yashvir Mahajan) State Information Commissioner
State Information Commission Complaint Case No.518 of 2016 Varun Bansal Vs Civil Surgeon Civil Hospital Bathinda. Orders:- The RTI application is dated 10.10.2015. The complaint with the Commission is dated 25.02.2016. The complainant, Sh. Varun Bansal, is not present in today’s hearing. Sh. Tirth Ram, Steno, who appeared on behalf of the respondent in today’s hearing, submits a reply dated 04.05.2016 signed by Dr. S. K. Raj Kumar, Assistant Civil Surgeon, Bathinda. It is taken on record. He also submits another reply dated 05.05.2016 signed by Dr. S. K. Raj Kumar, showing his inability to attend today’s hearing. It is also taken on record. Sh. Tirth Ram states that requisite information would be supplied to the complainant, Sh. Varun Bansal within three weeks from today ‘free of cost’ and seeks an adjournment in this case. The case is adjourned to 15th June 2016(Wednesday) at 11:00 A. M. in Chamber, S. C. O. 32 – 34, Sector 17 – C, Chandigarh. (Chander Parkash) 10th May, 2016 State Information Commissioner
Uttarakhand Human Rights Commission:- Case No.1606/2016 Varun Bansal Vs H.N.B Garhwal Univ. Varun Bansal Human Rights Protector Drafted and Filed the same for justice in commission. Matter is that Garhwal Univ Dy.Registrar Brij Mohan had spoiled the career of 150 MBBS students by issuing the wrong certificate to college by misused his powers.Orders are:-Complainant Sh.Varun Bansal filed complaint in commission that he was student of Narayan Swami Medical College Dehradun which is not in existence as now. Complaint Copy is hereby directing to Registrar HNB Garhwal Univ to submit his explanation in this regard within 6 weeks before next date of hearing. Adjourn to 6-2-17...Sd/- Dr.HemLata Dondiyal (Member)
State Information Commission Punjab Complaint Case No.511 of 2016 Usha Devi Vs Mata Gujri Sen Sec School. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate filed and plead the case. In this case said school had demanded Rs. 1500 for information, when applicant had submitted money, then said school returns back said money with RTI reply that our school does not comes under RTI. When we file case. On Notice of Commission, said school had issued and provided full flashed information to applicant free of cost before date of hearing in advance under threat of fine.Commission disposed off matter.State Information Commission Punjab Complaint Case No.511 of 2016 Usha Devi Vs Mata Gujri Sen Sec School.
Karnataka State Human Rights Commission Case No. HRC.68/10/31/2016(BB-II). C.Ravishankar Vs Bangalore Development Authority. Case is related to Violation done by BDA in rights of land and shelter for HUman Body. BDA had acquired land of victim and did not issued any compensatory land or money for said acquired land from last 20-25 years. Varun Bansal Human Rights Adv drafted and filed case in Commission. orders:- Complaint against BDA regarding not allotting alternative sites or not returning the land. The complainant submits that the land was acquired by BDA and same was transffered to Vijaya Bank.It is ordered to send the Commissioner of BDA Bangalore, for enquiry and suitable action and to file action taken report in commission within 6 wks.
2nd Appeal AC No.1715 of 2016 Butta Singh Vs Principal Govt Sen Sec School Mandi Kalan Bathinda. Our team represents the Punjab Govt side as a Respondent in this case. Varun Bansal Advocate appears and plead the case and safe guarded the future of 13 students who are minor in age. Information was related to these 13 students, if said information disclosed by school, the career of 13 students spoiled. Punjab State Information Commission Uphold our decision regarding Exempted information. Judgement Narration:- 1. Sh. Varun Bansal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of Respondents and submitted that the information is exempted, so can not be disclosed under RTI act as career matter of minor aged students involved. Also the information which was not related to students has already been supplied. After heard the arguments of learned counsel and appellant, Commission has observed that information which was possible to supplied has already been disclosed, rest of information is exempted. No further action is required in this Appeal Case which is hereby disposed of and closed.
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 6471/30/3/2016:- Victim:- Ankith Jain. Varun Bansal(Human Rights Protector) drafted the said case. Case is regarding Defective & toxic creams was being selling by VLCC Company by which skin diseases and allergies occurring to human body and food safety rules violation. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority i.e Ministry of Health & Family Welfare for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter. Commission directed the Secretary Ministry of Health & Family Welfare New Delhi for the same.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=6471/30/3/2016
Haryana Human Right Commission Case No.1529 of 2015 Lekh Raj Verma Vs HUDA Panipat. Varun Bansal Human Rights Advocate Drafted and filed case. Haryana Human Rights commission directed HUDA officers to appear before commission due to non compliance of orders of Commission in case of Mr.Lekh Raj Verma ( matter of right of shelter , house completion certificate). Rti online services safe guards right of shelter.Orders:- The Commission had disposed off the matter earlier by directions that Complainant will supply some documents to HUDA and concern authority will take appropriate action after that and decide the case. But not complainant has filed application by pleading that he had submitted all requisite documents to HUDA but no action has been taken so far whenever HUDA had submitted in early hearing that if necessary documents will be submitted then we will take action. In this condition we have no option left but to direct HUDA to appear in commission personaly in next date so that matter can be resolved.
Notice To Punjab Technical University from Varun Bansal RTI Advocate/Human Rights Protector:- Dates of Final year Btech Final Exams and CAT Exams had been clashed. College authorities and CAT authorities was not listening requests of students for amendment in datesheets. So upon receipt of complaints from students, Our team has served notice to Punjab Technical University for amendments in datesheets of said exams whose dates had been clashed with CAT. so that future of students can be protected. Reply from Registrar & Exam Controller of PTU in respond to our notice:- Dear Varun Bansal Ji, Keeping in view of career of students, the changes of dates of examination has been done in final date sheet i.e for exam 28-11-15 has been rescheduled to 3-12-15. So here career of all over punjab students has been successfully safe guarded by us.
Punjab State Information Commission Complaint Case No.1504 of 2016 Bharat Khana Vs Punjab Agriculture Univ Ludhiana & Directorate Agriculture Mohali. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate, pleads the case. In this case Complainant demanded information regarding Number of Licenses issued to delaer/Manufacturers/Retailers for supply of BT Cotton seeds, No.of pesticides recommended etc. PIO had provided incomplete information. As information was related to Scam of BT Cotton seeds and pesticides due to which farmers lost their cotton etc. Hence Complaint in Commission.Orders:-1. The RTI application is dated 22.12.2015 whereby the information-seeker has sought information as mentioned in his RTI application. He filed second appeal in the Commission on 05.08.2016 under the Right to Information Act, 2005. 2. Notice of hearing issued to the parties for 17.11.2016 to appear before this Commission. 3. Sh. Varun Bansal appears on behalf of complainant with an authority letter, which is placed on record and states that the incomplete information is given to him by the PIO. 4. Dr. R.K Raheja, OSD-cum-PIO appears and states that the requisite information deals with BT Cotton, so complete information cannot be supplied. 5. PIO is ordered to provide the remaining information to the complainant within a period of seven days through Registered Post and via E-mail on 91varunbansal@gmail.com to the complainant and the same is to be reported to the commission. 6. In view of above hearing no further action is required in this complaint case so the case is disposed off and closed. (Prof. Viney Kapoor Mehra) State Information Commissioner
Complaint Case No.511 of 2016 Usha Devi Vs Principal Mata Gujri Sen Sec School Sangrur. Mr.Varun Bansal RTI Advocate had filed and plead on behalf of Usha Devi and submitted in complaint that said respondent private school has not provided information to Usha Devi, at first they demanded Rs.1550 to provide information acc to photocopies of record. When Usha devi submitted demand draft, then said school said that we are private authorities hence not comes under RTI act. So information can not be provided.Hence Aggrieved and present Complaint in commission. Commission orders:- Upon complaint submission, commission has served notice to parties for hearing. Upon receipt of notice, said private school immediately handed over information to Usha Devi via speed post next day. So no need of our presence in hearing. On the day of hearing Commission ordered that Complainant is not present during hearing and respondents are present. Said Respondents submits that information has already been provided to appellant free of cost via speed post, but our school is private school so does not covers under RTI act.It is ascertained by the Commission that the respondent has still provided the information to the complainant. The complainant has not attended the hearing of the Commission consecutively twice entailing thereby that she does not want to pursue her case further. In wake of aforementioned, therefore it is hereby disposed of and closed. 6. Announced in the Court. Copy of the order be sent to the parties. Sd/- (Parveen Kumar) State Information Commissioner Chandigarh Dated: 03.08.2016.
State Information Commission Punjab Complaint Case No.1554 of 2016 Vasudha Soni Vs PIO O/o D.C. Bathinda. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate appeared and plead the case on behalf of Complainant. Case was related to Harassment of Vasudha Soni and her husband Sanmukh Rao (Gunner Indian Army). Indian Army officers was harassed to them and they registered case in police station and with DC Bathinda. Upon no action, RTI was filed seeking Action Taken Report, File Noting etc. When no reply was received, then Complaint was done directly.Orders:- 1. Sh. Varun Bansal authorized by the complainant files authorization letter which is taken on record. He states that the complainant has sought information vide her RTI application dated 03.12.2015 from the PIO o/o Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda to whom the matter for taking action has been sent by the office of SSP, Bathinda vide letter dated 28.07.2015. He further submits that penal action against the PIO o/o Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda should be taken under the RTI Act. 2. Sh. Gurmail Singh, Hawaldar o/o SSP, Bathinda files reply to the Notice of the Commission and copy thereof given to the authorized representative of the appellant. He states that the office of Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda has referred the matter to the office of PIO, SSP, Bathinda vide letter dated 20.10.2016 that is why he has come to attend the hearing. 3. The PIO o/o Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda is hereby directed to be present personally on the next date of hearing along with the reply to the Notice of the Commission. Sd/- Sh.Praveen Kumar State Information Commissioner
State Information Commission Punjab Complaint Case No.1554 of 2016 Vasudha Soni Vs PIO O/o D.C. Bathinda. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate appeared and plead the case on behalf of Complainant. Case was related to Harassment of Vasudha Soni and her husband Sanmukh Rao (Gunner Indian Army). Indian Army officers was harassed to them and they registered case in police station and with DC Bathinda. Upon no action, RTI was filed seeking Action Taken Report, File Noting etc. When no reply was received, then Complaint was done directly.Orders on 2nd Hearing of case:- 1. This above said appeal was earlier allocated to the bench of Sh. Praveen Kumar, SIC. After his demitting the office, this case has now been allocated to the bench of the undersigned. 2. Sh. Varun Bansal, counsel for the complainant states that he is not satisfied with the information provided by the respondents. 3. Since alternative and efficacious remedy of 1st appeal has not been availed and the FAA has not had the occasion to review the decision of the PIO. 4. In view of the aforesaid, the instant matter is remanded to the FAA. The Commission hereby directs the FAA to treat the copy of the Complaint as the First Appeal and decide the matter in accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act after giving all concerned parties an opportunity to be heard. 5. The FAA is directed to peruse all the relevant documents and examine whether the information provided by the PIO is complete, relevant and correct. In the event, there are any deficiencies in the information provided by the PIO, the FAA shall direct the PIO to provide the complete information in reply to the RTI application to the Complainant. 6. Complainant is at liberty to file a Second Appeal after that. sd/- (Preety Chawla) Dated: 15.02.2017. State Information Commissioner
Assam Human Right Commission Case No.1843/5/16-17 Dhanjit Khatanair Vs CISF. Varun Bansal Human Rights Advocate Drafted and filed case. Rti online services safe guards fundamental rights of one soldier.Orders of Assam Human Rights:- Shri Dhanjit Khatanair R/o Dibrugarh being a CISF constable at Dibrugarh has lodged the instant complaint dated 14.10.2016 accusing therein the Dy.Commandant of CISF of harassing and neglecting the complainant at his workplace besides complaining of not taking any action by the S.P Dibrugarh regarding the complaint filed on 07.10.2016 in that regard. Since the complaint has been directed, in the main, against said CISF personnel being under Central Govt. The case be therefore placed before the Division Bench of State Commission for active consideration. Dated:- 01-11-2016 Hon'ble Mr.T.Phookan Commissioner
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 388/19/15/2017:- Victim:- Anupam Singla (NRI). Case is regarding Harassment to NRI by NRI Wing Patiala and Mohali i.e on account of wrong complaint and without way of natural justice, harassed said person. Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender Drafted and filed the case in commission. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority i.e higher officials for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=388/19/15/2017
Haryana Human Right Commission Case No.1982/20/2016 Charanjeet Kaur Vs Haryana Police Sirsa. Varun Bansal Human Rights Advocate Drafted and filed case. Rti online services safe guards right of shelter.Orders are:- In view of allegations levelled in the Complaint, report be requisitioned from the Superintendent of Police, Sirsa through Director of Investigation within Eight Weeks. (Justice H.S.Bhalla)
Haryana Women Commission Case No.280/16 Charanjeet Kaur Vs Haryana Police Sirsa. Varun Bansal Human Rights Advocate Drafted and filed case. Rti online services safe guards right of shelter.Orders:- Women Commission ordered the D.C Sirsa to take suitable and necessary action against the said accused levied in complaint accordingly and inform the commission by submitting report in this regard.
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 2182/13/23/2016:- Victim:- Mangal More. Case is regarding Bigamy i.e double Marriage done by Husband. Harassment given to first wife on account of 2nd marriage whenever 1st wife is still alive. Varun Bansal Human RIghts Defender Drafted and filed the case in commission. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority i.e S.P Police for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=2182/13/23/2016
Consumer Case Notice:- Victim Ramachandran Melethat R/o Kerala Vs IFB Industries Ltd. Matter is that Sh.Ramachandran Kerala had purchased one New Washing Machine Model No. IFB Senator Aqua SX, Serial No.12389161224102788 dated 04-01-2017 worth Rs. 35790/- and same is in warranty. On the very next day of purchase, said machine had given leakage problems and done malfunctioning. Sh.Ramachandran had done communication with IFB Customer Care regarding this immediately. Technician from IFB team visited at their home and inspected the said defected washing machine. But they all are unable to pinpointed the leak problem. No resolution has been given by your company on said issue. So Varun Bansal Human Rights Protector issued notice to said company for the same and company done the needful on the very next day.Mail from Mr.Ramachandran with thanks to us:- From: "Ramachandran Melethat"..... To: support@rtionlineservices.com.... Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:15:48 +0530.... Subject:Re: Notice To IFB... Dear Sir, Today afternoon the IFB technician had dropped in and changed the rubber pipe. After a few cycles of testing not a single drop of water has leaked from the machine. Due to your combined efforts this hurdle has finished and I would like to close the case as of now. Thank you very much. Much appreciated. Yours sincely, Ramachandran Melethat.
PUNJAB RIGHT TO SERVICE COMMISSION Case No.pbrts1511:- Pardeep Singh. Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender filed matter. Matter is that Pardeep Singh's mother and father had died and pardeep singh was dependent on his parents. So after their death, department had ready to gave him job on basis of sympathy, but they demand dependency certificate. But D.C office Moga had not issued the same on time and harassed him without any reason. So matter was filed to RTS Commission Punjab.Orders are:- Commission considers the matter seriously and complaint has been forwarded to DC Moga for Necessary Action and Report in the matter. Before next hearing of case, DC office Moga issued Dependency Certificate to Mr.Pardeep Singh in very polite manner.
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 233/3/5/2016:- Victim:- Dhanjit Khatanair. Case is regarding Harassment given to CISF Constable by their Senior Officers at workplace and by neglecting his medical condition of epilepsy, suspend him. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority i.e Director General CISF HQ New Delhi for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=233/3/5/2016
Notice To Punjab Technical University from Varun Bansal RTI Advocate/Human Rights Protector:- Some Students of final year batch 2012 supplementary exams result was not declared by Univ without any reason, whenever regular and others students results was declared . College authorities and PTU authorities was not listening requests of students for declaration of results. So upon receipt of complaints from students, Our team has served notice to Punjab Technical University for Declaration of results of said students, So that future of students can be protected. Univ have replied us on the very next day of notice and declared result in advance.Mail from Punjab Technical Univ to Us:- From:"Rishi Gupta" (rishigupta@ptu.ac.in).... To:support@rtionlineservices.com... Date:Wed, 16 Mar 2016 05:41:25 +0000.... Subject: Re: Regarding issue of result of subject M-II of student (SaurabhGoyal Roll No.1244651 in CSE trade final year)..... Resp Sir, The student which you have mentioned in your mail got 58 marks and the result has been declared with in 10 days. Rishi Gupta (Assistant Registrar) I.K Gujral Punjab Technical University Jalandhar Kapurthala Highway Kapurthala (Punjab). For Regular Examination Query call at 9478098139, 9465884819 For DEP Examination Query call at 9465884817, 9465884818 Landline : 01822-662511
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 632/19/2/2016:- Victim:- Sheela Devi Vs Police Rampura. Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender drafted and filed case in commission. Case is regarding Harassment & Negligence done by Police Dept of Rampura Phul in matter of Sheela Devi senior citizen by non registration of FIR and also acquired her in police station in night without lady constable illegally and also matter was filed against Indian Postal Service Post man for non distribution of Daks properly. Orders are :- The complaint be transmitted to the concerned authority i.e S.P of Police Bathinda and Secretary of Indian Post Dept New Delhi for such action as deemed appropriate. The authority concerned is directed to take appropriate action within 8 weeks and to inform the complainant of the action taken in the matter.http://nhrc.nic.in/display.asp?fno=632/19/2/2016
Notice To IFB COmpany from Varun Bansal RTI Advocate/Human Rights Protector:- Legal Notice Issued to IFB Comapnay in Case of Microwave Defect and Negligence. Victim is Makhal Lal Mangal Bathinda. Reply by IFB Company Advocate that IFB is ready to Repair Microwave free of cost. So time and date was demanded from Victim in said matter for repairing of Microwave.
DISTT.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, Court Bathinda Case No. CC/17/18 Ashish Devgan Vs Motorola Sh. Varun Bansal, A.R. Of complainant Orders :- It is proved that Motorola have failed to repair the Mobile Handset. For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is partly accepted with Rs.3000/- as cost and compensation against opposite parties. Opposite parties are directed to handover the mobile handset in question to the complainant after its repair as per terms and conditions of warranty. The compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=12%2F56%2FCC%2F17%2F18&dtofhearing=2017-07-03
Karnataka Human Rights Commission:- Case No. HRC No.157/10/31/2016(SB-III) dated 25.6.2016. Victim Narendra Kumar Vs Bangalore University. Matter is that Bangalore Univ declared results of final exams and in one student result's subject named Microbial Biot, code- MBP403 result has not been declared by Univ and declared as NP i.e Not processing due to non availability of marks. So Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender drafted and filed the case in commission and protects the interest and future of student. Karnataka Human Rights Commission Orders are:- Commission taken up matter for hearing and considered the same in serious view. Vice Chancellor of Univ has directed to look into matter so that result of students can be declared and compliance report of the same should be reach in commission as soon.
Punjab Human Rights Commission:- Case No.6045/2/2016 Sheela Devi Vs Patwari Land...Varun Bansal Human RIghts Defender drafted and filed matter in commission. Matter is that Patwari of area of said victim has harassing the old aged lady and tried to acquired her land illegally.Orders are:- The Primary Grievance of complainant Sheela Devi W/o Jagdish Rai of Bathinda wants action against the accused Patwaris who are helping the other party in forcibly taking possession of her land. Commission considers it appropriate to send the complaint to Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda to look into the matter and dispose of the complaint at his end in acc with law. The complainant may be given a patient hearing. Complaint is disposed of. Sd/- Justice Ashutosh Mohunta(Acting Chairperson) and Sd. Avinash Kaur(Member) Dated- 23.02.2017
NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : SB-II/Law Division No.632/19/2/2016:- Victim:- Sheela Devi Vs Police Rampura. Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender drafted and filed case in commission. Case is regarding Non Compliance of orders passed by Commission earlier in same matter to S.P Bathinda for Harassment & Negligence done by Police Dept of Rampura Phul in matter of Sheela Devi senior citizen by non registration of FIR and also acquired her in police station in night without lady constable illegally. S.P Bathinda made excuse that they have received only copy of order but original complaint was attached with order was different. So they sent orders back in commission. Hence Non Compliance was filed.Orders:- Dated 07.11.2016 To The Senior Superintendent of Police Bathinda. Asst Registrar of Human Rights was directed to forward herewith a complaint of Smt.Sheela Devi alongwith earlier orders for necessary action at SSP end at most urgent.
National Women Commission New Delhi:- Case No. 8/C160002758/2016/NCW/AR/NMG..Victim:- Vasudha Soni Vs Central Board of Film Certification and Ministry of Information & Broadcasting. Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender drafted and filed the matter in commission. Matter is that Film Named Mastizade was released and passed by Govt of India. But the contents of movie was very wrong and hurts the sentiments of Indian Army and Women of Indian Army. So complaint was raised against them to stop the said movie or cut the said wrong contents from movie. Orders:- The Present complaint pertains to the alleged right to live with dignity. Hence matter is Entertainable. So Complaint along with orders is forwarded to an authority i.e Secretary Ministry of Information & Broadcasting Govt of India New Delhi for needful action in the matter.
PUNJAB HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 8737/2/2016:- Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender filed the case in commission. Orders are :- Mousmi Sem resident of House No. 5747, Back side of Qilla Mubarak, Tehlian Wala Mohalla, Bhatinda has sent this complaint alleging therein that while in service as Dance teacher, the Principal of Gem Public School Bhatinda harassed her and she had reported the matter to the DC and SSP of Bhatinda; the SSP had marked the same to the DSP but no action taken till date though her family is living under immense threat from that Principal.The cause of action raised in the complaint clearly indicates that there is an allegation regarding in action on the part of the police , so cognizance is taken and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhatinda is directed to hold enquiry and submit report on or before the next date of hearing.http://pshrc.net/Home/CaseInfo?fno=8737/2/2016&ano=1
PUNJAB HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 2931/2/2016:- Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender filed the case in commission. Orders are :- The RamSaroop Jethi alleges that he was hit by the Gypsy bearing Registration No.PB-08-3044 of Avtaar Singh and his wife Sandeep Kaur at about 2 P.M on 22.03.2016. Accused Avtar Singh alighted from the gypsy and he started using abusive language and attacked him. The complainant was got admitted in Civil Hospital, Rampura Phul in the Emergency Ward at 02:45 P.M. The incident was reported to the Police, but no case against the accused has been registered.The Police is harassing him and they are not registering any case against accussed. The Commission finding a prima facie case, takes cognizance of the matter and seeks report from the Punjab Govt in the Home Department through the SSP, Bathinda, under Section 17[i] of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, positively, one week before the next date of hearing.http://pshrc.net/Home/CaseInfo?fno=2931/2/2016&ano=1
PUNJAB HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION Case detail of File no. : 7028/18/2016:- Varun Bansal Human Rights Defender filed the case in commission. Orders are :- This complaint has been filed by Hitesh Kumar s/o Surinder Kumar r/o FC-6, Times of India, Film City Sector 16-A, Noida. The complainant has alleged that his wife has filed a false complaint regarding Domestic Violence, Demand of more Dowry and mental harassment and the police is harassing his parents by calling them at the P.S. The complainant prays for some action. The Commission considers it appropriate to send a copy of the order and of the complaint to the SSP Sangrur to look into the matter and take action in accordance with law after hearing the complainant. The complaint is disposed of.http://pshrc.net/Home/CaseInfo?fno=7028/18/2016&ano=1
DISTT.CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, Court Bathinda Case No. CC/16/519 Kiran Bansal Vs Ebay India Sh. Varun Bansal, A.R. Of complainant Orders :- The product was purchased by the complainant for Rs. 39,999/-. Thus, she is entitled to the refund of this amount along-with compensation and cost of litigation. In view of what has been discussed above, this complaint is partly accepted with Rs. 2,000/- as cost and Rs. 5,000/- as compensation. The opposite parties are directed to refund the amount of Rs. 39,999/- to complainant. The compliance of this order be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which the amount of Rs. 39,999/- will yield interest @ 12% p.a. till realization.http://cms.nic.in/ncdrcusersWeb/GetJudgement.do?method=GetJudgement&caseidin=12%2F56%2FCC%2F16%2F519&dtofhearing=2017-02-03
Punjab State Information Commission 2nd Appeal Case No.1308 of 20167 Anupam Singla Vs NRI Wing Mohali. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate has drafted the case. In this case NRI Police had harassed the Complainant by not providing information and withheld information regarding FIR status filed by Anupam Singla.Hence filed 2nd Appeal in Commission Orders :- In this case, Appellant, vide his RTI Application, dated 06.01.2017, addressed to the PIO, sought Action Taken Report in respect of FIR, UID No. 20162996, dated 21.09.2016. On receiving no information, he filed first appeal with the FAA vide letter dated 03.03.2017 and then approached the Commission vide letter dated 01.05.2017. Accordingly, a Notice of Hearing was issued to the parties for today. 2. A letter No. 15111, dated 05.06.2017 has been received from AIGP, NRI and Women Wing, Phase-7, S.A.S.Nagar informing that the information is ready and the appellant can collect information after depositing Rs. 58/- as document charges. 3. Today, the representative of the respondents informs that the information is ready but could not be supplied to the appellant as he has not deposited Rs. 58/- as document charges. During hearing it transpires that the appellant was asked to deposit Rs. 58/- as document charges in April, 2017. Since the appellant has not been asked to deposit document charges within prescribed time limit, the respondent PIO is directed to supply the information to the appellant, free of cost, by registered post and the appellant is directed to revert back to the authorities in case of any deficiency. Sd/- Dated : 07.06.2017 ( S.S. Channy) Chief Information Commissioner Punjab
Punjab State Information Commission 2nd Appeal Case No.3605 of 2016 Sunaina Kaur Sethi Vs Punjab Technical Univ Jalandhar. Varun Bansal RTI Advocate has drafted the case. In this case Univ had harassed the Complainant by not providing information and withheld information regarding DMC, Final Degree Issuance status of Complainant which was delayed by 7 years. Hence filed 2nd Appeal in Commission.Orders:- 1. Sh. Kishore Kumar Luthra, Asst Registrar submits stating that the applicant Ms. Sunaina Kaur Sethi has not enclosed her self attested ID proof with RTI application and same was intimated to the applicant letter no. 4405 dated 07.06.2016 to provide her self attested ID proof through registered post which was returned back by the postal department with comments “Returned back due to incomplete address” along with copy of rejection letter and copy of postal envelope mentioning comments, which is taken on record. 2. Ms.Sunaina Kaur Sethi, the applicant is present for today’s hearing states that my address is correct and demanded the requisite information. 3.The respondent asked for the provisional result card and correct address from the applicant. 4. After hearing both the parties and going through case file. 5.On this, the applicant handed over to the respondent, the provisional result card and correct address where the applicant can receive the information from the respondent during the hearing. A copy of address and ID proof provided by the applicant also taken on record. 6.The respondent PIO is directed to provide the requisite information to the applicant by the next date of hearing positively. 7. The matter is adjourned for further hearing on 03.04.2017 at 11:30 AM 8. On the Next Date of Hearing Matter is disposed off as information has been supplied. Chandigarh (Dr. Pawan Kumar Singla) State Information Commissioner
  
 
IP Address
Unique Hits
Reserved @ 2015-2020


Clipart