Speed Post A.D.

Right to Information
PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
South Bfock
New Delhi - 110011
No. RTI/1613/2012-PMR
Dated:) ~ June, 2012
To:
Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal
1775, Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
Delhi - 110006
Subject: Follow-up on appeal decision.
Sir,
In continuation of letter of even no. dated 8.6.2012, the relevant document as sought
in point no. 2 of your application is enclosed herewith (19 pages).
Yours faithfully,
Encl: As above (19 pages).
h
(Sanjukta Ray)
Deputy Secretary and
Central Public Information Officer
~ : 23074072
\
qm:r Picff'b/ PI anm
J
/
Dr:-r.;. Quraishi
Election Commission of India
Chief Commissioner of India
D.G.No.3/ERlSDRJ20l21
Dated: 13
th
April, 2012
Respected Pradhan Mantri Ji,
I recall with gratitude your wise counsel and support for this Commission's
long pending electoral reforms proposals, during every meeting that I had with
you. Hence allow me Sir, to place before you the Commission's deep
disappointment over the fact that a necessary legislation in this regard is yet to be
materialised despite an assurance given to us by the Hon'ble Minister of Law and
Justice.
2. Our elections have received global acclaim for being free, fair and credible,
thanks to the sagacity of the Constitution, supplemented by successive
governments, legislatures, the judiciary, the civil services, political parties and the
citizens at large. However, the quality of our elections often gets questioned on
account of certain weaknesses in pur electoral process. Commission's reform
proposals have always aimed at addressing this predicament. Though certain
minor reforms have been adopted by Government and Parliament, the substantial
ones have been actually left out allowing the allegations that politicians are not
keen about the reforms because oftheir vested interest.
3. A stark example of what I am seeking to underline is the Commission's
proposal of 1998, seeking a temporary suspension of the right of persons facing
.trial in heinous crimes to contest elections. This proposal, you would appreciate,
aimed at decriminalization of politics, a truly national concern and a declared
concern of your government. The number of elected members with criminal
antecedents is on the mcrease, undermining the stature of our great legislative
.. Nirvachan Sadan, Ashoka Road, New Delhi 110001, Tel: 237200.13. : 23355631
OJ> Email: syquraishi@eci.goy.in. syquralshl@oIC.In, WebsIte: www.eci.ruc.m
A
,'"
en (J cer
:<, ,,' ,,:- .>,.' '" ::..
institutions. This proposal has since been moderated to only inc1ude charges
framed in a Court and that too before six months. The Commission strongly feels
that when thousands of under - trial accused are denied even some fundamental
rights, besides the right to vote, it is high time that those with severe criminal
charges are debarred from contesting.
4. Another example is the pernicious role played by big money in elections. It
is a cause of great concern not only to us, but also to the general public, civil
society organizations, and other stakeholders in political process. As you may be
aware that through heightened vigilance of the Commission in recent times, there
has been substantial seizure of cash, liquor and drugs during the elections process,
purported to be going around as inducement. The proposals of the Commission
aiming at transparency in the functioning of political parties and the auditing and
publication of their accounts seek to address the problem.
5. The Constitution provides some sound safeguards to insulate the
Commission from executive interference. These safeguards have, however,
naturally fallen short with passage of time and changing situations. A point in case
is the extent of protection enjoyed by the members of the Commission. As per the
Constitution, the Chief Election Commissioner cannot be removed from office
except through the process of impeachment as in the case of a Judge of the
Supreme Court. However, the existing provision for the other Election
Commissioners is that they cannot be removed except on the recommendation of
the Chief Election Commissioner. This is an anomaly. The protection for only the
CEC was written down at the time, when the Election Commission only consisted
of him. Now, the same protection needs to equally extend to other two
Commissioners, as the protection is meant for the Institution, and not for a person.
6. Similarly, it is an aberration that the expenses of ECI are 'voted' while the
budget of all constitutional authorities like CAG, Supreme Court, UPSC and even
of a relatively young statutory organization like the CVC have their expenses
'charged' upon the Consolidated Fund of India for very valid reasons. The
Commission does not experience comfort in ignoring these administrative and
financial controls particularly in the light of some of the recent utterances and
communications from the Ministry of Law and Justice, which I have separately
taken up with you.
7. There are other reforms, too, that require to be addressed urgently so that our
democracy becomes qualitatively that much better. I have enclosed these
proposals along with explanatory notes in three categories: those requiring
Constitutional amendments, those requiring amendment of the Law and those
requiring amendment of Rules. I would like to bring to your kind notice that some
proposals which are of technical nature and require only amendment of Rules
within the competence of the Ministry of Law and Justice, have also been pending
for a long time. This raises questions about the lack of political will, which causes
us deep distress.
8. The Commission became greatly hopeful following the initiative taken by
Dr. Veerappa Moily, former Minister for Law & Justice, who jointly with ECI held
countrywide consultations for forging a consensus on electoral reforms, during
December 2010 to June 2011. This hope became even stronger when his successor
and the present Minister promised the necessary legislation. A national
consultation was scheduled to be held at New Delhi in July 2011; that is almost a
year back. It was later understood that the Government is instead thinking of
holding an all-party meet. While the all-party meeting is the appropriate and
welcome forum for finalizing and accepting the reform proposals, we are anxious
about the inordinate delay in the outcome. Besides, the Commission would like its
professional views to be placed before any all-party meeting, whenever it takes
place.
~
9. I am sure under your able stewardship and guidance, the Government and
Parliament would pay an immediate attention to the long pending reforms, lest
these issues again become a subject of public ridicule and agitation. We are
already witnessing signs of such restlessness and some of the leading civil society
groups, who are in the forefront of Lokpal related agitation, have already met the
Commission weeks back, and are repeatedly demanding an urgent time-bound
action. This aspect needs to be taken seriously.
The Election Commission of India most sincerely looks forward to your
intervention in this matter.
With kind regards,
Yours sincerely,

?--t("
(S.Y. Quraishi) e-
Dr. Manmohan Singh,
Hon'ble Prime Minister of India,
South Block,
New Delhi.
Sec:tlClf}.
Prime :';; eli:
to.: .,\/ 1);,J.lli
Electoral Reforms Proposals
A. Proposals involving amendment of the Constitution
1. Constitutional protection for all members of the Commission and independent
Secretariat for the Commission
Commission is now a three member body comprising the Chief Election
Commissioner (CEC) and two Election Commissioners (ECs).
ECs are at par with the CEC asfar as decision making power is concerned.
In order to ensure independence of the Commission and to keep it insulated
from external pressure, clause (5) of Article 324 of the Constitution provides
protection to the CEC In the matter of removability from office; CEC enjoys
same protection as available to a Judge of the Supreme Court. However, ECs
do not have such protection. Constitutional provision with regard to ECs is
that they shall not be removed from office except on the recommendation of
the CEC.
Proposal of the Commission is to provide same protection to ECs as
provided to the CEC in the matter of removability from office. This will
strengthen the independence of the Commission. Independence envisaged in
the Constitution is for the institution and not for individual alone. Therefore,
for ensuring total independence of the Commission, it is necessary to provide
the same protection to all members of the Commission.
Date ofproposal-15
th
July, 1998.
Reiterated in 22
nd
November, 1999, July 2004 & 22 January 2010
2. Budget of the Commission to be 'charged'
The administrative expenditure of the Commission is a voted expenditure.
1
The Commission has proposed that the expenditure of the Commission
should be charged on the consolidated fund. A charged budget would also
symbolic of the independence of the Commission.
The govt. had accepted the Commission's proposal in 1994 and introduced a
Bill titled the Election Commission (Charging of Expenses on the Consolidated
Fund of India) Bill 1994 , in the House of the People, but the Bill lapsed
without being passed on the dissolution of that House in 1996.
Date of proposal-.July 2004
3. Independent Secretariat for the Commission
Commission should have an independent Secretariat on the lines of the lok
Sabha, Rajya Sabha and Registries of the Supreme Court and High Courts. An
independent Secretariat will enable the Commission to choose and appoint
officials considered suitable by the Commission without any interference from
the executive.
Date of proposal- is" July, 1998.
Reiterated in July, 2004.
B. Proposals involving amendment of Act
1. De-criminalization of politics
For preventing persons with criminal background from becoming
legislators, the Commission has made a proposal for disqualifying (from
contesting election) a person against whom charges have been framed
by a Court for an offence punishable by imprisonment of 5 years or
more.
Under the existing law (secnon-s, ROP Act, 51) there is a disqualification
once a person is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment of two years or
2
' ~ ..... :
C)("n" . ,'-- .
. :c;;r
: .,[
:\.
1
more (in the case of certain offences mentioned in sub-section (1) of
Section-8, conviction itself leads to disqualification, even without any
sentence of imprisonment).
The Commission's proposal is for disqualification even prior to conviction,
provided the Court has framed charges. The Commission is of the view
that keeping a person, who is accused of serious criminal charges and
where the Court is prime facie satisfied about his involvement in the crime
and consequently framed charges, out of electoral arena would be a
reasonable restriction in larger public interest.
The argument against the Commission's proposal is that under the judicial
philosophy in the country, a person is deemed to be innocent until proved
gulltv. In this context, it needs to be noted that 2/3
rd
of the prisoners in
India are under trials, yet to be convicted. However, their fundamental
rights are curbed even before conviction by keeping them in prison.
Therefore, temporarily suspending the right to contest election pending
final order of the Court should not be seen as a major issue.
As a precaution against foisting false cases on the eve of election, it was
suggested that only those cases in which charges are framed six months
prior to an election may be taken into account for that election.
Date on which proposal was made - is" July, 1998.
Reiterated in November, 1999, July 2004 and October 2006.
2. Political parties reforms
Political parties are registered with the Commission under the provisions
of Section 29A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Under this
Section, any group of citizens can be registered as a political party by
moving an application with the Election Commission giving the requisite
particulars and documents. There are nearly 1300 registered un
recognized political parties apart from the 52 recognized political parties.
3
A large number of registered un-recognized political parties do not seem
~
to have serious interest or desire to contest elections. At the 2009 Lok
Sabha elections, only 322 registered un-recognized political parties put up
candidates.
There is no provision in the law to de-register a party even if it does not
contest any election for decades. Political parties which have become
defunct also stay on the rolls of the Commission.
The Commission has proposed that under Section 29A of the
Representation of the People Act, 1951, another clause may be
introduced authorizing the Election Commission to issue necessary
orders regulating registration and de-registration of political parties.
The political parties should be legally required to get their accounts
audited annually and to publish the audited accounts so that the accounts
are in public domain for scrutiny. The Commission is of the view that
there should be transparency in the fund raising and expenditure of
political parties.
Political parties should be required to conduct periodic internal elections
in free and fair manner.
Income tax exemption for donations should be given only for those
political parties which contest election and win seats in the
Parliament/State Legislature.
Date of proposals _15
th
July, 1998.
Reiterated in July, 2004 and in March and July, 2006.
3. Misuse of religion for electoral gain
The Uberhan Ayodhya Commission of Inquiry recommended, inter alia,
that complaints of misuse of religion for electoral gain should be speedily
investigated into by the Election Commission.
4
Section Officer
The Commission has communicated its view that such investigation
should be carried out by the investigating agencies of the State as the
commission does not have the wherewithal to conduct such investigation.
A Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in 1994 (R.P. (second amendment)
Bill, 1994], in which an amendment was proposed providing for provision
to question before a High Court, acts of misuse of religion by political
parties. The Bill lapsed on the dissolution of the Lok Sabha in 1996. The
Commission has suggested that the provisions proposed in that Bill
should be considered again.
Date of proposal _29
th
January, 2010.
4. Amendment of law to make 'paid news' an electoral offence
The Commission is of the view that 'paid news' plays a very vitiating role in
the context of free and fair elections. The public, in general attaches
greater value in news report as distinguished from advertisements by
political parties and candidates. 'Paid news' is masquerading as news and
publishes advertisements in the garb of news items, totally misleading the
electors. To make matter worse, the whole exercise involves use of
unaccounted money and under reporting of election expenses in the
accounts of election expenses of the candidates indulging in the
malpractice. The Commission sees 'paid news' as a deceit on adversely
affected contesting candidates and the electorate. This needs to be dealt
with firmly.
The Commission has proposed that amendment should be made in the
Representation of the People Act, 1951, to provide therein publishing
and abetting the publishing of 'paid news' for furthering the prospect of
election of any candidate or for prejudicially affecting the prospect of
election of any candidate as an electoral offence under chapter-tll of
5
\'0
Part-VII of Representation of People Act, 1951 with exemplary
punishment of a minimum of two years imprisonment.
Date of proposal- 3,dFebruary, 2011.
5. Government sponsored advertisements
Govt. departments publish advertisements through Print & Electronic
Media on achievements of the Government, new schemes/programmes,
etc.
For ensuring level playing field in elections, the Commission has suggested
that for six months prior to the date of expiry of the term of the House,
there should be a ban on advertisements on achievements of the
Government.
Advertisements/dissemination of information on poverty alleviation and
health related schemes could be exempted from the ban.
Date of proposal- s"July, 2004.
6. Punishment for electoral offences to be enhanced
Undue influence and bribery at elections are electoral offences under
Sections 1718 and 171(, respectively, of the IPC. These offences are non
cognizable offences, with punishment provision of one year's
imprisonment, or fine, or both.
Under Section 171-G, publishing false statement in connection with
election with intent to affect the result of an election, is punishable with
fine only.
Section 171 H provides that incurring or authorizing expenditure for
promoting the election prospects of a candidate is an offence. However,
punishment for an offence under this Section is a meager fine of Rs.500/
6
, , "',7' .-' ...-.... -:'"
.." U
\\
These punishments were provided as far back as in 1920. Considering the
gravity of the offences under the aforesaid sections in the context of free
and fair elections, the punishments under all the four sections should be
enhanced and these offences should be made cognizable.
Date of proposal- February, 1992
7. Prohibition of Campaign during the Last 48 Hours
Section 126 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, prohibits
electioneering activities by way of public meetings, public performance,
processions, advertisements through cinematograph, television or similar
apparatus during the period of 48 hours before the time fixed for
conclusion of poll.
Political advertisements in TV and Radio are prohibited during these 48
hours under the above provisions.
Since this Section does not refer to print media, the political parties and
candidates issue advertisements in newspapers during this period
including on the day of poll. They also undertake house to house visits.
Section 126 should apply equally to the print media also. A distorted
advertisement in print media on the poll day leaves the other candidates
with no opportunity to undo the damage.
House to house visits by candidates/supporters should also be
specifically prohibited during the said period of 48 hours, to allow the
electors period of tranquil to decide their option. Necessary
amendments should be carried out in Section 126.
Date of proposal- This proposal was made in the background note for the
regional consultations on electoral reforms in December, 2010.
()ffIGCr
Prime OfIie
L.>e,;ll::.i
7
\
'V
-_ 8. Punishment for false affidavit by candidates
Section -125A of R.P. Act, 51, provides that furnishing false information in
the affidavit filed by the candidate is an offence punishable by
imprisonment upto six months or with fine.
There is no clear provision for follow-up action in the event of candidates
filing false affidavits.
There are several complaints of false statements in affidavits. False
statements mislead the electors.
In order to strengthen the disclosure provision, the Commission has
recommended that Section-12SA of R.P. Act, 51, should be amended to
provide that any complaint regarding false statement in the affidavit
filed by the candidates in connection with the nomination paper shall be
filed before the Returning Officer (RO) concerned within a period of 30
days from the date of declaration of the election and that it shall be the
responsibility of the ROto take proper follow-up action.
Alternatively, complaint can lie directly to the Magistrate Court.
Date ofproposal- 3,dFebruary, 2011
9. Negative/neutral voting
In the ballot paper and on the ballot unit, after the particulars relating to
the last candidate, there should be provisions for a column 'none of the
above' to enable a voter to reject all candidates if he so desires.
If an elector does not want to vote for any of the candidates, he may
either not turn up for voting, or he may come to the polling station and
have his name entered in the register of voters and then inform the
presiding officer that he does not want to vote for any candidate. In this
process, the decision of the elector is known to those present in the
polling station, thus violating the secrecy of his decision. If the elector
8
decides to stay away from polling station, there is a danger that someone
may attempt to cast vote against the name of such elector by
impersonating.
'None of the above' option' would protect the interest of the electors.
Date of proposal-10
th
December, 2001.
Reiterated in July, 2004.
10. Amendment of law to provide for filing of election petition even against defeated
candidates on the ground of corrupt practice
As per the existing law, election petition (EP) can be filed only for
challenging an election.
If a defeated candidate has indulged in corrupt practice, there is no
provision for election petition or a declaration against such candidate.
The Commission has recommended that the law should be amended to
provide for filing of EP in cases of commission of corrupt practice by a
losing candidate.
In this context, Commission has also suggested that the period by which
the candidates are required to file their account of election expenses
should be reduced to 20 days from the present 30 days, so that more time
is available for others to scrutinize the accounts and to take the matter to
the Court in Election Petitions in cases of spending in excess of the ceiling.
Date of proposal-24
t h
April, 2009.
11.Restoring the cycle of biennial retirement in the Rajya Sabha/Legislative
Councils
Under constitutional provtslons.t/s'" of members of Rajya Sabha are to
retire every two years.
In some States the biennial ejection schedule got disturbed as the
Legislative Assembly was not in existence at the relevant time.
9
Section Officer
Prime Offi.
New Delhi
,,\
Consequently, biennial retirement schedule also got disturbed.
Commission's proposal is for amending the law so as to ensure
retirement of 1/3
rd
of the members in the Rajya Sabha and State
legislative councils after every two years.
There was a petition in the Patna High Court last year on this issue. The
High Court, in its order, observed that the Government and the
Commission may sort out the matter for a solution.
Date ofproposal - February 1992
12. Use of common electoral rolls
Local bodies' elections are conducted by the State Election Commissions of
the respective States.
For preparing the electoral rolls for local bodies' elections, there is no uniform
law or procedure.
Some States adopt the rolls prepared by the EC I while a few States prepare
the rolls separately.
Local laws of the States should be amended to provide that electoral rolls
prepared by the Commission will be used for local bodies elections with
necessary modifications/re-arrangement. This will simplify the process of
preparation of rolls and also avoid unnecessary expenditure.
Date of Proposal - zr" November, 1999
Reiterated in July 2004.
13. Expenditure ceiling for election from Graduates' and Teachers' constituencies
The expenditure ceiling for candidates applies only for the Lok Sabha and
Assembly elections.
Expenditure ceiling should also be applicable in the case of legislative
council elections from Graduates' and Teachers' constituencies also (at half
10
the amount of the Assembly constituency ceiling). The candidate should
also be required to submit the account of election expenses.
Date of Proposal - so" May 2007
14. Ban on transfer of election officers on the eve of election
In the case of general election, there should be a ban against transferring
any election related officer without the concurrence of the Commission for
a period of six months prior to the expiry of the term of the House.
Date of proposal- is" July, 1998.
Reiterated in July, 2004.
15. Making of false declaration in connection with elections to be an offence
There should be provision for penal action against those making false
declaration in connection with election.
There is a provision in the ROP Act, 50 (Section-31) providing for punishment
with imprisonment upto one year for making false declaration in connection
with preparation/revision of electoral roll. There is no such provision in ROP
Act, 51, in relation to conduct of elections.
The proposal is to provide for a similar punishment for false declarations in
connection with conduct of elections also.
Date of Proposal July 1998
Reiterated in July 2004.
16. Samenumber of proposers for all candidates
At present, the candidates of recognized parties need only one proposer
while the other candidates require 10 proposers. The Commission suggested
that in order to remove confusion, number of proposers may be made
11
uniform with 10 proposers for a/l candidates. Uniformity with regard to ,\'
number of proposers will help avoid confusion.
22
nd
Date of Proposal - November} 1999
Reiterated in July 2004.
17. Facility of enrolment in electoral roll to husband of a service voter
Under the existing law [Sub-Sections {3} and {4} of Section 20 of
Representation of the People Act. 1950L a person having his service
qualification (member of armed forces} para-military forces, armed police
force of a State who is serving outside that State and a person employed
under the Govt. of India in a post outside India) have been given the facility
of registration in the electoral roll of their native place.
Under Sub-Section (6) of Section 20, wife of a declared office holder or
service voter who is ordinarily residing with such person also has the facility
of enrolment in the native place. However, if the declared office
holder/service voter is a female, the husband of such person does not have
the facility of enrolment in the native place even if he is ordinarily residing
with the office holder/service voter.
The Commission has suggested that husband of a declared office holder and
husband of a service voter should also be extended the facility of enrolment
in the native place if he is ordinarily residing with such office holder/service
voter, by suitably amending Sub-Section (6) of Section 20 of Representation
of the People Act, 1950.
Date of proposal si" May} 2011
18. Power to requisition premises for election purpose
Section 160 of R.P. Act, 51 provides for requisitioning of premises for
setting up polling station or for storage of ballot boxes.
12
U ;;'1,:0
;,j, y ~ f)'.c::Lj
In the conduct of ejections, services of Central Police Force is used. For
accommodation of such Police Force, premises are required to be
requisitioned, usually for short period.
The Allahabad High Court in an order dated 23-04-2004 in Committee of
Management, Jagat Taran Girls Degree College, Allahabad Vs. State of UP
and Drs. , held that Section 160 does not empower requisitioning of
premises for accommodating Police Force.
The Commission has proposed that Section 160 of RP Act, 51, may be
amended so as to provide for requisitioning premises for any election
related purposes instead of restricting it to only for the purpose of polling
stations and storage of ballot boxes.
Date of proposal 1
st
March, 2012.
C. Proposals for amendment of Rules for which the law Ministry is the
competent authority
1. Totalizer for counting of votes
Elections to Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies are conducted using
the EVMs. Rules regarding counting of votes in EVMs provide for counting
polling station -wise.
The Commission has proposed amendment of the Rules to provide for the
use of totalizer for counting of votes at EVM elections.
Using totalizer I it would be possible to take out the results of votes polled
in a group of 14 EVMs together as against the present practice of counting
votes polling station wise.
In such a system of counting, the trend of voting in individual polling station
areas would not be known. This will prevent intimidation and post election
victimization of electors.
The proposal was referred to a parliamentary committee in 2009.
Date ofproposai-at" November, 2008.
13
Section Officer
Prime "if:; .st.: ~ 's O ~ f i c e
, -. c '';\', Dl: h 1
2. Amendment of Form 26
Candidates are required to file two affidavits alongwith their nomination
papers - one in Form 26 and the other in the format prescribed by the
Commission in pursuance of the Supreme Court's order dated 13-03-2003 in
Writ Petition (civil) No. 490 of 2002 and connected petitions.
Commission has proposed that the two affidavits may be merged into one
by amending Form 26 suitably (incorporating therein the format prescribed
by the Commission.
A single affidavit will be convenient for the candidates as well as for the
electors who want to scrutinize the contents of the affidavit.
Proposal made initially in June 2005, and revised proposal sent on 02-12-11.
3. Amendment of Registration of Electors Rules, 1960 (RE Rules, 60)
The proposal is for amendment of the Rule 32 in the RE Rules, 1960 so as to
enable the Electoral Registration Officers to weed out old rolls after a
period of one year after revision has taken place.
Under the present rule, all papers related to revision of rolls have to be
preserved till one year after the completion of the next intensive revision.
Now, de novo intensive revision of rolls is not undertaken with the result that
the old papers can not be weeded out.
The proposal is to discard the reference to intensive revision for disposal of
the old papers.
Proposal made in April 2009
4. Amendment of Rule-27 of RE Rules, 1960
By the amendment made to Section 24 of RP Act, SO, appeal against the
decision of the Electoral Registration Officer on claims/objections during the
14
, ~
continuous updation period can be made before DM/Collector/equivalent
officer.
However, Rule-27 of the RE Rules mentions only CEO as the appellate
authority. This rule also needs to be amended to include OM, Collector etc.
Proposal made in March 2010
(The Law Ministry had drafted an amendment to the Rules recently. However,
the amendment is yet to be notified).
S. Amendment of Rule to provide for mandatorily mentioning the identification
document produced by the electors
The proposal was that there should be a column in the register of voters
(Form 17A) for mentioning the details of the identification documents
produced by the electors.
Proposal made in March 2007
15
FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT
SF-POD DAREEDA {11e'.6)
Shri Dheeraj Gupta, Director
ED335982497IN
& Appellate Authority Count@r No:l\uP-Codf
I
P
To:DHIRAJ BLOCK
Prime Minister's Office (PMO)
MDELHI, PIN:ll'le1 ,
FrO.IS C A6GRAWAi 1775 DAREEDAK, DAREEDAKAtAH
DE.
South block, New Delhi-l10101
Wt:2fgraas,
Att:2.... , 12/1612.12 , U:i2
iaH!s:Rs.3.32Track on M indiapost.gov.in
Sir
I vide my RTI petition dated 16.04.2012 sought detailed and complete information
together with related documents/file-notings/corrcspondence etc on under-mentioned
aspects also relating to news-item from Dainik Jagran (14.04.2012):
1. Is it true that Chief Election Commissioner Shri SY Quereshi has sent some letter
to Honourable Prime Minister appealing for urgent poll-reforms, as also referred in
enclosed news-clipping ,
2. Copy ofthe said letter (together with enclosures) from Shri SY Quercshi as referred
in query above
3. Complete and detailed information together with related
documents/correspondence/file-notings etc on action taken on the said letter as
referred in queries above from Chief Election Commissioner Shri SY Quereshi, by
PMO and/or some other public-authority where the said letter of Shri SY Quereshi
might have been forwarded
4. Copy of the reply from Honourable Prime Minister and/or PMO to Shri SY
Quereshi enclosing also file-notings/correspondence/documents etc on drafting the
said reply
5. Copies of letters in last five years from successive Chief Election Commissioners
demanding electoral reforms, together with copies of replies from Honourable
Prime Minister and/or PMO
6. Complete and detailed information together with related
documents!correspondence/file-notings etc on action taken on the said letters of
,
Chief Election Commissioners in last five years by PMO and/or some other public
authority where the said letter of Shri SY Quereshi might have been forwarded
7. Date on which any of the electoral reforms were last implemented
8. Elcctoral reforms presently under consideration of Union government
9. Complete and detailed information on steps taken to implement electoral reforms
t
urgently
10. Any other related or follow-up information
..

11. File-notings on movement of this RTI petition as well
Learned CPIO vide response No. RTI/1613/2012-PMR dated 08.06.2012 in response to
t
query-numbers (2) stated that the documents sought by me attract provisions of section 11
of RTI Act. But section 11 clearly states that this section can be invoked only within five
.

days of receipt of RTI petition, which was evidently not done. Hence I appeal that
~
documents sought under query (2) of my RTI petition may kindly be directed to be
provided but now free-of-cost under section 7(6) ofRTI Act.
t
It is admittedly a serious matter that Union Council of Ministers has been indecisive (if it
is really so) on matters taken up by various Chief Election Commissioners in last five
years, information sought under query (6) therefore is covered by section 8(2) of RTI Act
which stipulates that a public authority may allow access to information if public interest
in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests.
Honourable Mr Justice S Ravindra Bhatt ofDelhi High Court in the matter "Bhagat Singh
Vs. CIC (WP. (C) No.3114/2007) .'.' has held that the Right to Information Act being a right
based enactment is akin to a welfare measure and as such should receive liberal
interpretation. Under the circumstances, I appeal that learned CPIO may kindly be
provided sought information (point-wise) together with sought and related documents but
now to be provided free-of-cost under section 7(6) ofRTI Act. It is prayed accordingly.
Humbly submitted
,
f \ \ ; \ ~ & .
\} V
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL
(Guinness Record Holder & RTf Activist)
1775 Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
DELHI 110006 (India)
Mobile9810033711 Fax 23254036
E-mail subhashmadhu@sify.com
Web www.subhashmadhu.com
,
12.06.2012
Speed Post A.D.
Right to Information
PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
South Block
New Delhi -110011
No. RTI/1613/2012-PMR Dated: June, 2012
1V
C6
To:
Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal
1775, Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
Delhi - 110 006
Subject: Follow-up on appeal decision.
Sir,
Please refer to your letter dated 12.5.2012, received on 14.5.2012, preferring an
appeal under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and decision dated 25.5.2012 of the appellate
authority in this office.
2. In compliance with the appeal decision dated 25.5.2012 the matter was referred to the
office for providing fresh inputs. Inputs provided by the office are enclosed (1 page). Regarding
point no. (2), the office has informed that the documents sought by you attract the provisions of
section 11 of the RTI Act. The response in this regard will be provided to you after due process
as envisaged in section 11 of the Act is completed.
3. For the purpose of section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005, Shri
Dheeraj Gupta, Director, is the appellate authority in respect of this office
Yours faithfully,
Encl: As above (1 page).
~ ~
(K. Salil Kumar)
Under Secretary and
Central Public Information Officer
~ : 23074072
RTIJ1613/2012-PMR
Shri Subhash Chandra Agarwal, rio Chandni Chowk, Delhi vide letter dated 16.4.2012
had sought information from this office, under Right to Information Act, 2005.
2. The information sought by the applicant is as under:
(1) Is it true thai: Chief Election Commissioner Shri SY.Quereshi has sent some letter to
Honourable Prime Minister appealing for urgent poll-reforms, as also referred in enclosed
new-clipping.
(2) Copy of the said letter (together with enclosures) from Shri S.Y.Qureshi as referred in
query above
(3) Complete and detailed information together with related documents/correspondence/file
notings etc on action taken on the said letter as referred in queries above from Chief
Election Commissioner Shri S. Y. Qureshi, by PMO and lor some other public-authority
where the said letter of Shri S.Y.Quereshi might have been forwarded
(4) Copy of the reply from Honourable Prime Minister and I or PMO to Shri S.Y.Quereshi .
enclosing also file notingslcorrespondencel documents etc on drafting the said reply
(5) Copies of letters in last five years from successive Chief Election Cornmissiosers
demanding electoral reforms, together with copies of replies from Honourable Prime
Minister and I or PMO
(6) Complete and detailed information together with related documents/correspondence/file
notings etc on action taken on the said letters of Chief Election Commissioners in last
five years by PMO and I or some other public-authority where the said letter of Shri
S.Y.Quereshi might have been forwarded
3. Shri Subhash Chandra Agarwal, vide letter dated 12.5.2012, not satisfied with the reply
of the CPIO, has preferred an appeal stating that
"CPIO had not specified how exemption under section 8(i) was applicable that too on all
the queries. CPIO must have specified in clear terms about the subject-matterls of
various queries (point-wise) if there are still not decided by council of ministers for five
long years. Not all the queries can be covered under section 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act.
The First Appellate Authority vide his ordersdated 25.5.2012 directed the CPIO to seek
point-wise inputs afresh from the office on points 2 to 6 of the request and to furnish
suitable response within 3 weeks."
4. The following are the inputs:
Speed Post AD
Ri2ht to Information
PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
New Delhi - 110011
No. RTI/1613/2012-PMR
Dated: 21~ /2lJ u,
To:
Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal
1775, Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
Delhi - 110006
Subject: Decision on appeal under the Right to Information Act, 2005
Sir,
Please refer to your letter dated 12.5.2012, received on 14.5.2012,
preferring an appeal under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
2. It is observed that you made a right to information application dated
16.4.2012, received on 17.4.2012, with reference to a news clipping and
seeking information on "letters sent by the Chief Election Commissioner
Shri S.Y. Qureshi and CECs in the last 5 years on electoral reforms"
3. The CPIO, PMO, vide Office Memorandum dated 18.4.2012, transferred
the application to the Legislative Department under section 6(3) of the Act
in respect of points 7 to 9. Subsequently, based on inputs from the office, the
CPIO, vide letter dated 8.5.2012, furnished response in the affirmative on
point (1) and invoking exemption under section 8(1)(i) of the Act.
4. In the appeal, you have stated as under:
"The learned CPIO had not specified how exemption under section 8(i)
was applicable that too on all the queries. CPIO must have specified in
clear terms about the subject-matterls of various queries (point-wise) if
these are still not decided by council of ministers for five long years. Not
all the queries can be covered under section 8(1)(i) of the RTI Act".
2
No. RTI/1613/2012-PMR
5. In view of submissions made in the appeal, the CPIO is directed,
through endorsed copy of this letter, to seek point-wise inputs afresh from
the office on points 2 to 6 of the request and to furnish suitable response to
you within 3 weeks of issue of this letter.
6. Appeal is disposed of with direction as above. (J
~ ~ \ o /
(Sanjay Lohiya)
Director & Appellate Authority
Copy to:
CPIO, PMO
FIRST APPEAL UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT
Shri Dheeraj Gupta, Director
& Appellate Authority
Prime Minister's Office (PMO)
South block, New Delhi-ll0l0l
Sir
I vide my RTI petition dated 16.04.2012 sought detailed and complete information
together with related documents/file-notings/correspondence etc on under-mentioned
aspects also relating to news-item from Dainik Jagran (14.04.2012):
1. Is it true that Chief Election Commissioner Shri SY Quereshi has sent some letter to
Honourable Prime Minister appealing for urgent poll-reforms, as also referred in enclosed
news-clipping
2. Copy of the said letter (together with enclosures) from Shri SY Quereshi as referred in
query above
3. Complete and detailed information together with related documents/correspondence/fiIe
notings etc on action taken on the said letter as referred in queries above from Chief
Election Commissioner Shri SY Quereshi, by PMO and/or some other public-authority
where the said letter of Shri SY Quereshi might have been forwarded
4. Copy of the reply from Honourable Prime Minister and/or PMO to Shri SY Quereshi
enclosing also file-notings/correspondence/documents etc on drafting the said reply
5. Copies of letters in last five years from successive Chief Election Commissioners
demanding electoral reforms, together with copies of replies from Honourable Prime
Minister and/or PMO
6. Complete and detailed information together with related documents/correspondence/fiIe
notings etc on action taken on the said letters of Chief Election Commissioners in last
five years by PMO and/or some other public-authority where the said letter of Shri SY
Quereshi might have been forwarded
7. Date on which any of the electoral reforms were last implemented
8. Electoral reforms presently under consideration of Union government
9. Complete and detailed information on steps taken to implement electoral reforms
urgently
10. Any other related or follow-up information
11. File-notings on movement of this RTI petition as well
Learned CPIO vide response No. RTI/1613/20l2-PMR dated 08.05.2012 in response to
query-numbers (2) and (6) of RTI petition invoked section 8(l)(i) of RTI Act. But the
learned CPIO had not specified how exemption under section 8(i) was applicable that too
on all the queries! CPIO must have specified in clear terms about the subject-matter/s of
various queries (point-wise) if these are still not decided by council of ministers for five
long years. Not all the queries can be covered under section 8(1)(i) of RTI Act.
Otherwise also since it is admittedly a serious matter that Union Council of Ministers has
been indecisive (if it is really so) on matters taken up by various Chief Election
Commissioners in last five years, information sought is covered by section 8(2) of RTI
Act which stipulates that a public authority may allow access to information if public
interest in disclosure outweighs the harm to the protected interests.
Honourable Mr Justice S Ravindra Bhatt of Delhi High Court in the matter "Bhagat
Singh Vs. CIC (W.P. (C) No.3114/2007)" has held that the Right to Information Act being
a right based enactment is akin to a welfare measure and as such should receive liberal
interpretation. Under the circumstances, I appeal that learned CPIO may kindly be
provided sought information (point-wise) together with sought and related documents but
now to be provided free-of-cost under section 7(6) ofRTI Act. It is prayed accordingly.
Humbly submitted
~ ~ ~
\.
SUBHASH CHANDRA AGRAWAL
(Guinness Record Holder & RTf Activist)
1775 Kucha Lattushah
Dad ba, Chandni Chowk
DELHI 110006 (India)
Mobile9810033711 Fax 23254036
E-mail subhashmadhu@sify.com
Web www.subhashrnadhu.corn
12.05.2012
,
~ \
,
Speed Post A.D.
Right to Information
PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
South Block
New Delhi -110 011
No. RT1/1613/2012-PMR
Dated: May, 2012
( ) ~
To:
Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal
1775, Kucha Lattushah
Dariba, Chandni Chowk
Delhi - 110006
Subject: Application under Right to Information Act, 2005.
Sir,
Reference is invited to this office's memorandum of even no. dated 18.4.2012
transferring application-dated 16.4.2012. received on 17.4.2012 regarding point no. 7 to 9,
to the Legislative Department, under section 6(3) of the Act, on the above noted subject.
The matter was also referred to the office for providing inputs on point no. 1 to 6. Input
provided by the office in respect of your request for information, is enclosed (1 page). The
office has invoked exemption under section 8(1)(i) of the Act.
2. As regards point 11 of your application whereby you are requested for copy of
note sheet, it is informed that under RTI Act, 2005 information to be provided relates to
information "held" by a public authority. Your demand for note sheet of file where your RTI
application is dealt is for future action as no note sheet was "held" at the time your
application was received. Point no. 10 of your application is not specific.
3. For the purpose of section 19 of the Right to Information Act, 2005,
Shri Dheeraj Gupta, Director, is the appellate authority in respect of this office.
Yours faithfully,
Ene!: As above(1 pages)
~
(Sanjukta Ray)
Deputy Secretary and
Central Public Information Officer
'f!5 : 2307 4072
RTII1613/2012-PMR
Shri Subhash Chandra Agarwal, rio Chandni Chowk, Delhi vide letter dated
16.4.2012 has sought information from this office, under Right to Information Act,
2005.
2. The information sought by the applicant is as under:
(1) Is it true that Chief Election Commissioner Shri S.Y.Quereshi has sent
some letter to Honourable Prime Minister appealing for urgent poll
reforms, as also referred in enclosed new-clipping.
(2) Copy of the said letter (together with enclosures) from Shri S.Y.Qureshi as
referred in query above
(3) Complete and detailed information together with related
documents/correspondence/file-notings etc on action taken on the said letter
as referred in queries above from Chief Election Commissioner Shri S. Y.
Qureshi, by PMO and I or some other public-authority where the said letter
of Shri S.Y.Quereshi might have been forwarded
(4) Copy of the reply from Honourable Prime Minister and I or PMO to Shri
S.Y.Quereshi enclosing also file notings/correspondencel documents etc on
drafting the said reply
(5) , Copies of letters in last five years from successive Chief Election
Commissioners demanding electoral reforms, together with copies of
replies from Honourable Prime Minister and lor PMO
(6) Complete and detailed information together with related
'documents/correspondence/file-notings etc' on action taken on the said
letters of Chief Election Commissioners in last five years by'PMO and I or
some other public-authority where the said letter of Shri S.Y.Quereshi
might have been forwarded
3. The following inputs are provided:
Point no. (1): Yes
Point no. (2) to (6): Exemption may be sought under section 8(1)(i) of the
Right to Information Act, 2005.
By Speed Post
F.No.4(45)/2012-RTI
Government ofIndia
Ministry of Law & Justice
Legislative Department
***
.:
New Delhi, the 4
th
May, 2012.
To
Shri Subhash Chandra Agarawal,
1775, Kucha Lattushah,
Dariba, Chandni Chock,
Delhi-110006.
Subject: Information under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Sir,
I am directed to refer to your RTI application dated 16-4-2012 received in this Department
on 25-4-2012 through Prime Minister's Office regarding information sought for at point No.7 to 9
of the application under RTI, 2005 on the above mentioned subject and to state that the concerned
Administrative Unit of this Department has furnished the following information in response to your
RTI application:
"As regards point No.7, it is stated that the Central Government, after consulting the Election
Commission, has amended the Conduct of Elections Rules, 1961 vide notification No.S.0.425(E)
dated 23.2.2011. The said notification is available on the website of this Ministry i.e. www.law.min
in.
"As regards point Nos. 8 & 9 regarding Electoral Reforms, it is stated that the electoral
scenario of the country has been continuously changing, has necessitated reforms of electoral law
on several occasions. The electoral reforms is a continuous and on-going process and can be carried
out through consensus amongst the political parties. Further, in the light of the experience gained
during elections, recommendations of the Election Commission of India, the proposals from
different sources including political parties, eminent men in the public life and the deliberations in
the Legislatures and various public bodies, the successive Governments have taken a number of
measures, from time to time, to bring about electoral reforms; though need to effect a
comprehensive package of electoral reforms cannot be gainsaid. It is further stated that with a view
to carrying out comprehensive electoral reforms, a Core-Committee has been constituted on the 1sl
October, 2010 under the Chairmanship of an Additional Solicitor General. Seven Regional
consultations have been held and an all party Consultation is also under consideration On the basis
of the inputs received or as may be received in all these consultations, legislative process as may be
considered necessary will be initiated by the Government in due course'
(Jose Thomas)
Deputy Secretary & CPIO
Copy to:-
Ms. Sanjukta Ray, Deputy secretary and CPIO, Prime Minister's Office, South Block New Delhi
110001, w.r.t. their RTI/1613/2012-PMR dated 18.4 2012 for information.
Note:- Dr. Sanjay Singh, Joint Secretary, Legislative Department, Ministry of Law &
Justice, Room No.423'A' Wing, 4
th
Floor, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi-110001
is the 1st Appellate Authority for filing the first appeal, if any.
Right to Information
PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
South Block
New Delhi-IlO OIl
No. RTI/1613/2012-PMR
Dated: \ C6 10412012
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Application under Right to Information Act, 2005.
An application dated 16/04/2012 received on 17/04/2012 from Shri Subhash
Chandra Agrawal on the above noted subject is transferred under section 6(3) (ii) of the
Right to Information Act, 2005, for action as appropriate.
An amount of ~ 1 0 / - in the form of a Postal Order has been received from the
applicant as application fee.
~ y )
Deputy Secretary and
Central Public Information Officer
Phone: 2307 4072
Secretary Points 7 To 9
Legislative Department
Shashtri Bhavan
New Delhi - 110001
Copy by Registered AD to:
Shri Subhash Chandra Agrawal You are advised to approach the above public
) 775, Kucha Lattushah authority for further information regarding the
J Dariba, Chandni Chowk matter. Response in respect of this office will be
Delhi - 110 006 provided in due course.
UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMAnON ACT
Central Public Information Officer
Prime Minister's Office (PMO)
South block, New Delhi-I 10101
Sir
I will be obliged if your honour kindly provides me detailed and complete information
together with related documents/file-notings/correspondence etc on under-mentioned
aspects also relating to news-item from Dainik Jagran (14.04.2012):
1. Is it true that Chief Election Commissioner Shri SY Quereshi has sent some letter
to Honourable Prime Minister appealing for urgent poll-reforms, as also referred
in enclosed news-clipping
2. Copy of the said lett ir 'ogether with enclosures) from Shri SY Quereshi as
referred in query above
3. Complete and detailed information together with related
documents/correspond;?nce/file-notings etc on action taken on the said letter as
referred in queries above from Chief Election Commissioner Shri SY Quereshi,
by PMO and/or some other public-authority where the said letter of Shri SY
Quereshi might have been forwarded
4. Copy of the reply from Honourable Prime Minister and/or PMO to Shri SY
Quereshi enclosing also file-notings!correspondence/documents etc on drafting
the said reply
5. Copies ofletters in last fi-e years from successive Chief Election Commissioners
demanding electoral r efc.rns, together with copies of replies from Honourable
Prime Minister and/or PMO
6. Complete and derailed information together with related
documents/correspondencdfile-noting:3 etc on action taken on the said letters of
Chief Election Commissioners in last five years by PMO and/or some other
public-authority where the said letter of Shri SY Quereshi might have been
forwarded
7. Date on which any of tilt' electoral reforms were last implemented
8. Electoral reforms presently under consideration of Union government
9. Complete and detailed information on steps taken to implement electoral reforms
urgently
\ O. An'] other related or fo\\o'tli-u"Qlnformat\m\
\ \ . Ek-notlugs on movemem ofthis RTI ti
pe inon as well
In case queries relate to some other public-auth()t\\\l T"\\e"s t f'. . .
oJ,}' <1 e ransrer this RT1 petition to
CPlO there under secti 6(3) , R .
. ron . 01 II Act. Postal-order number 92 446107 for rupees
ten IS enclosed towards RTI fees in name of 'Accounts Officer' as per DoPT circular No.
F.10/9/2008-IR dated 05/12/21'08 , "
; ,
:7
- '"
Regards
..
,.
t
\r
SUBBASH CHANDRA AGRAv, AL
!Gmnness Record Holder & RTf Activist)
,....
1775 Kucha Lattushah
\
Sf DAREEBA KALAN {11fjfb>

Dariba, Chandni Chowk
Counter
To:CPIO.fRlH KINlSTER efFIC
DELHI 110006 (india)
NEW BELHI. PIN:11...1
Mobile9810033711 Fax 23:::540: frol:SUBHASH CHANDRA A6kAilAl DElHI 6

E-mail subhashmadhui:q]sify.c\)n,
A.tI12." , 16/14/2.12 11:49
Taxts:Rs.l.15Trlck on
Web www.subhashmadhuoCJm
ifIRJ d JjmI eMil
1ft1!Jr ill ....
16.04.20\2
:! ,A (: f!-AJJ I l( 0 <...t - '2--0 t L
r