Huge Bank Loan taken by Achyut Samant by mortgaging Govt. land illegally acquired by him.

Achyut Samant  has  not only  illegally  acquired  land  but also taken huge loan  of crores  of  rupees amount  by mortgaging   the same land.

Dear  friends

RTI Application was submitted  to the PIO  seeking the information  about details of NOC  ( No Objection Certificate ) granted  by IDCO  to KIIT to get loan from Bank  by mortgaging land leased out by IDCO  along with name of Bank , year of  NOC granted  loan amount  and acres of land  against which loan granted. On 7.9.18, the PIO  has  provided  the  following  information.

1.       As per CAG Report, Sri Achyut Samant, founder KIIT  has illegally acquired 82 acres of land. As per RTI Information. Sri Samant  has acquired illegally  Rs. 12 acres of land  of General Administration Dept.

2.       By  acquiring Govt. land through fraudlent means  and  his nexus  with  corrupt bureaucracy, Sri Samant  has taken  hundreds of  crores of loan  for infrastructure development of KIIT.

3.       IDCO  has not only facilitated granting illegal lease of land to KIIT  but also granted  NOC  on illegally acquired  land to get huge amount of loan from bank.

4.       Total 32 acres of  leased out  land  has been mortgaged  by KIIT  to  different Banks to get loan.  

5.       Sri Samant  may have taken around  loan of around  500 crore  by mortgaging leased out  of illegal land given by IDCO.

6.       The  following are name of the  8 banks  which have  granted huge   loan to    Achyut Samant .

Sl.No	Name of Bank	Year of NOC granted	Total  amount	Acres of  land against which NOC granted
1	Punjab National Bank C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar	2012		Ac. 0.851:  IDCO Plot No. 26, 42 and 42/1
2	HDFC Bank Ltd. Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar	2012		Ac. 1.550: IDCO Plot No. 31
3	Oriental Bank of  Commerce, Alok Bharati, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar	2016	T.I. Rs. 45.00 crore  & OD : Rs. 40 .00 crore	Ac. 10.20 : IDCO Plot No. 87 & Ac. 0. 150 . IDCO Plot No. 68
4	Bank of India, Bhubaneswar	2011		Ac. 0.500 IDCO Plot No. 41
5	Punjab National Bank C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar	2007		Ac. 0.507, IDCO Plot.19
6	Allahabad Bank Ltd. KIIT, Bhubaneswar	2003		Ac. 10.130 IDCO Plot No. 15
7	HDFC Bank Ltd. Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar	2011		Ac. 3.504  IDCO Plot No. 51
8	Oriental Bank of Commerce, Alok Bharati Tower, Saheed Nagar	2010		Ac. 3.214, IDCO  Plot No. 44/C, 44/D & 44/E
9	Canara Bank , stock Exchange, Bhubaneswar	2009		Ac.0.501, IDCO Plot No. 22
10	Tata Capital Finance Service Ltd., Park Street , Kolkatta-16	2012		Ac. 0.989, IDCO Plot No. 28
11	Religare Finvest Ltd., Saket, New Delhi	2012		Ac. 4.828, IDCO Plot No. 28
12	Allahabad Bank, KIIT, Bhubaneswar	2008		Ac. 6.00, IDCO plot No. 14/A & 14/B
13	Oriental Bank of Commerce , Alok Bharati  Tower, sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar	2011		Ac. 1.959, IDCO  Plot No. 23/B, 23/D, 41/E, 68/A, 68/B, 91,91/A & 91/B
14	Punjab National Bank, C.S.Pur, Bhubaneswar	2007		Ac. 1.501, IDCO Plot No. 18  & 19/A
15	Oriental Bank of Commerce, Alok Bharati Tower, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar.	2006		Ac.2.00, IDCO Plot No. 20/A

Pradip Pradhan

M-9937843482

Date-19.9.18

Public Hearing on “Corruption and Scams under 18 years of BJD Govt.

Open  Invitation

State-level Public Hearing

on

“Corruption and Scams under 18 years of  BJD Govt. in Odisha

Venue- Institute of Engineers, Bhubaneswar, Date- 20.9.18, Time- 10.30 am

Dear  friends

  since last few years, RTI Activists  have unearthed huge corruption and  irregularities in implementation of Govt. programme, mega scams  and misappropriation  of public fund  by  political leaders of ruling party , bureaucrats , contractors  etc. Though plethora of complaints  have been filed to  different  authorities including state  vigilance and crime branch for investigation and prosecution of the culprits,  it has been suppressed by the Investigative agencies on their own and   at the direction of  Chief Minister’s office.  Few of these Scams are  OSCB Scam, land Scam, Medhabruti Scam, OMFED Scam, Corruption  in allotment of houses  under  IAY, Biju Pucca Yojana, irregularities in disbursement of loan by Cooperative Societies  ICDS programme etc.

Odisha Soochana Adhikar Abhijan  is going to organize a State –level Public Hearing  at Institute of Engineers, Bhubaneswar, on  20.9.18. for presentation of these scams, corruption and irregularities with all documents, fact  and figures   obtained  under RTI and steps taken  by RTI Activists  to fight out  these  corruptions.  The political leaders of all political parties including Dr. Damodar Rout, Civil Society Groups and Social Activists  have been invited to  share  their  views with the participants.

We invite you all  to participate  in this public hearing.

Pradip Pradhan

State Convener

M-9937843482

Naveen has destroyed all anti-corruption mechanisms in Odisha

Naveen Patnaik, Chief Minister has not only patronized and promoted corruption but groomed, nourished and nurtured corrupt political leaders and bureaucrats in Odisha

He has also destroyed  all anti-corruption mechanisms  in the state.

Propaganda about “ Naveen Patnaik is transparent and intolerant to corruption” is a paid media induced campaign floated  by  corrupt bureaucrats  to keep his image  clean in the public domain. So that they can keep unhesitatingly continue  their loot of   state resources  and State exchequer which is going on , exposed  under RTI and Dr. Damodar Rout. 

Dear friends

Let me cite two examples to justify my above allegations against Chief Minister.

1. Directorate of Vigilance functioning under direct control of Chief Minister is one of the agencies having mandate to investigate into allegation of corruption, irregularities   against Govt. officials.  But investigation into any corruption by the state vigilance requires prior sanction of the Chief Minister.  Within last 10 years, a number of   cases of  corruption and scams has been filed in the State  Vigilance which are pending  for investigation , as  Chief Minister has refused  to give sanction.  For example, Dal Scam which is one of the mega scams involving loot of Rs. 700 crores by top IAS officers including Mr. V. Pandian was suppressed at the direction of Chief Minister. Similarly, complaint cases on OSCB Scam, OMFED Scam has been suppressed by the State Vigilance.

While filling complaints of corruption and irregularities, the complainants were  filling RTI applications to the office of Director, Vigilance  to track  their  complaints  and action taken   by the  State Vigilance. When the inaction and failure of office of Vigilance  to enquire into allegation of corruption  was exposed under RTI,  the  Chief Minister  took  overnight  decision  to keep directorate of Vigilance out of purview of RTI Act in 2015.  Since then, the people who are filling  corruption cases  are in dark  whether any inquiry  is going on or not. This was one of biggest strategies of Naveen Patnaik to suppress  the  corruption.

2.       Institution of Lokpal and lokayukta is farce

 The office of lokpal constituted under the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 1995   is another body empowered to enquire into allegation of corruption and irregularities in State Government. A retired Judge of High Court is appointed as Lokpal of the State.  Though it is a toothless body,  but  the Lokpal acts upon and conducts inquiry  into allegation of  corruption made  by anybody  in the state. The Lokpal  has done outstanding work in terms of submitting fantastic inquiry report on Vedant University  and Sanjeeb Marik case.  In 2013, after   death of the sitting Lokpal,   Chief Minister did not appoint anybody in this post which is still vacant.  The office of Lokpal is defunct  in the state.

Similarly, after enactment of the Lokpal & Lokayukta Act in the centre,  Chief Minister  took much credit  as first state   in the country passing  Odisha Lokayukta Bill  in Feb. 2014  reinforcing his  commitment to fight out corruption  through constitution of the Lokayukta in the state.  Though  the president of India  gave assent  to the Bill  in January , 2015,  Chief Minister  did not take any steps to  notify  the implementation of the Act nor constitute the  Lokayukta. After intervention of the Supreme Court, the State Government  on 7^th July, 2018 has notified the enforcement of the Lokayukta in official gazette, but not yet made any Rules  for  constitution of Search Committee and Selection committee ( information obtained under RTI).

These are the examples how Naveen Patnaik does  not want any inquiry of  corruption. Naveen patnaik  has made all anti-corruption mechanism defunct in our state.

 

Pradip Pradhan

M-9937843482

Date- 14.9.18

False claim of Govt. of Odisha completing 17 lakhs houses under BPGY

False claim of   Govt. of Odisha completing 17 lakhs houses under BPGY within ( 2014-15 to 2017-18), exposed  under RTI

Appeal to the people of Odisha not to be misguided by self-styled false propaganda of Govt. of Odisha. This is very dangerous practice of BJD Govt.

·         Only 1.75 lakhs houses have been constructed under Biju Pucca Ghara Yojana from 2014-15 to 2017-18 by utilizing  Rs. 1747.66 crore ( Appro.  Rs. 1 lakh per house)

·         Around 10 lakh houses has been constructed under IAY/PMAY  by utilizing ( Rs. 10,349.05 crores) within four years.

Dear friends

In July 2018, Govt. of Odisha  has released a   lengthy advertisement containing information along with smiling Photo of Nabin Patnaik, chief Minister of Odisha  about  completion of 17 lakh houses  under Biju Pucca Ghara Yojana within last four years. Having been astonished  by this startling revelation and high-profile propaganda  about mega achievement  of the State Govt., I had  field RTI Application  to the PIO, Department of  Panchayat Raj  and Drinking water  seeking  information about  details of fund  allocated  and utilized   under various  Rural Housing Schemes  by the State  Government from 2014-15 to 2017-18.

On 9.8.18, the PIO  has provided the following information.  

Fund allocation and  Utilisation under Biju Pucca Ghara Yojana and IAY/Pradhanmantri Awas Yojana

                                                                                                                                                                                ( In lakhs)

Year	Fund allocation under BPGY	Fund utilization under BPGY	Fund allocation under IAY/PMAY (G)			Fund utilization
2014-15	33010.52	26596.4303	128403.756	85944.347	214348.103	107500.00
2015-16	70000.00	47611.65	70154.488	46769.66	116924.148	198165.00
2016-17	70000.00	40291.00	311871.52	207914.34	519785.86	131558.00
2017-18	97323.74	60267.00	263987.79	175992.47	439980.26	597682.00

1.      Within four years, the State Govt. has made budgetary provision of Rs. 270334.26 lakhs  ( 2703.34 crores )  for  Biju Pucca Ghara Yojana. But out of it, total amount of Rs. 174766.0803 lakhs  ( Rs. 1747.66 crore) has been utilized  from 2014-15 to 2018-19 till July , 2018.  The State  Govt. could not spend  around Rs. 1000 crore  allotted  under BPGY.

2.   But  under  Central Govt.  scheme i.e., IAY/ Pradhanmantri Awas Yojana ( PMAY),  total amount of Rs. 1291038.371 lakhs ( Rs. 12,910.38 crores ) ( both Central and State Share)  has been allotted within four years  in order to provide houses  to the poor, needy and vulnerable people. Out of it, the Central Share  and State Share is  Rs. 774417.554 lakhs ( Rs. 7744.17 crores) and Rs. 516620.817 lakhs ( Rs. 5166.20 crores).

3.   The total fund  utilized  under IAY/PMAY within four years is Rs. 1034905.00 lakhs ( Rs. 10,349.05 crores).

 Pradip Pradhan

M-9937843482

Date-10.9.18

History of Development of RTI movement in India

History of Development of RTI movement in India

1975	Supreme Court ruling in the case of State of UP vs Raj Narain talks about people’s right to know.
1982	Supreme Court ruling in the case S.P. Gupta & others vs The President of India & others talks about openness in government
1985	Affidavit filed by NGO Kalpavriksh in Supreme Court regarding the public’s right to know.
1986	Supreme Court in the case of Bombay Environmental Action Group v. Pune Cantonment Board gives right to inspect local authority documents to concerned citizens and groups.
1990	V.P.Singh government proposes to amend the Official Secrets Act and increase access to information.
1993	Draft RTI law proposed by the Consumer Education and Research Council, Ahmedabad.
1994	First MKSS led jan sunwai held in Rajasthan.
1995	First mass meeting organised in Beawar, Rajasthan by MKSS activists; Demand for a Right to Information articulated.
1996	Second mass dharna organised by MKSS at Beawar, Rajasthan, demanding a Right to Information; Formation of NCPRI; Conference of Chief Secretaries talks about a Right to Information Act.
1996	Workshop on Right to Information held at Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA), Mussoorie.
1996	Press Council drafts  RTI National Bill with NCPRI and circulated it to PM, all parliament members, CMs and legislators.
1996	Tamil Nadu passes its legislation (April, 1996)
1997	“Working Group on Right to Information and Promotion of Open and Transparent Government” formed under H.D. Shourie
1997	Goa (29th October, 1997) enacts RTI legislations
1998	Ram Jethmalani, then Minister for Urban Affairs and Employment, passes executive orders providing access to government documents in his Ministry to the general public, which is shot down by the PM.
1998	Madhya Pradesh passes its legislation (30th April, 1998).
2000	Karnataka (10th December 2000), Maharashtra (18th July, 2000) and Rajasthan (11th May, 2000) enact RTI legislations
2001	Delhi enacts RTI legislation (16th May, 2001)
2002	Freedom of Information bill passed by Parliament which was never notified.
2002	Assam enacts RTI legislation (7th May, 2002)
2003	Jammu and Kashmir  enacts RTI legislations (18th December, 2003)
2004	UPA government sworn in; National Advisory Council formed; Right to Information Bill introduced in Parliament , fulfilling a promise made under the National Common Minimum Programme. FOI Act repealed.
2005	Right to Information Act 2005 is passed by Parliament in May 2005 and notified , comes into force on 12 October 2005

The time line has been prepared by Prashant Sharma, as part of his PhD research on the Right to Information, at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Useless and Third-grade order of Odisha Information Commission

Useless and Third-grade order of Odisha Information Commission

Most inefficient, lazy and lethargic people have been appointed in the post of Odisha Information Commission by State Government to destroy RTI Act – How

·The Information   Commission has not mentioned subject matter of information in its decision.

·Without ensuring information, Sri L.N.Patnaik, Information Commissioner on 4.8.17.  again sent back  first appeal to First Appellate Authority  to hear  the  appeal petition and dispose  it on merit . It is already 3 years over since filling of RTI Application by applicant on 12.11.14.

·The Information Commissioner disposed the case on 4.8.17 but sent the copy of decision on 24.8.18 after one year of his decision. As the Commission made unprecedented delay in sending the copy of order, the First Appellate Authority, BDO, Bonth block did not hear the case nor ensured the information.

·Despite approaching the Commission to get justice, the applicant could not get information within four years.

Do  you love or hate   this L.N.Patnaik, Information Commissioner, a  Yes man of Third Floor of  Odisha   Secretariat.

Below is the detailed presentation of the case

Dear friends

As per  section 18, 19 and 20  of the RTI Act,  the Information Commission of the State  and Centre  is  empowered  to hear  and dispose  appeals  and  complaints,  ensure information to the appellant  and complainant  and impose penalty  on erring  PIO for non-supply of information.  The decision of the Commission is final and binding.  The efficiency, expertise, understanding about land and legal acumen   of the Information Commissioners is highly essential to deliver justice to the aggrieved citizens. But here in Odisha,  the   State  Government  have appointed  such a people  in the post of  Information  Commission  who are  not only inefficient, useless  but lack expertise  to hear the  case.

I cite herewith a case( Second Appeal Case No. 1494/2015)  of  L.N.Patnaik , State  Information Commissioner , a known lethargic  Commissioner in history of India . When , I read  the  content of the  decision,  I felt very ashamed  how the State  Govt. appointed  such a fantastic  useless  people  as Information Commissioner.

1.       On 12.11.2014., Sri Ramesh Kumar Mallik, an Information seeker  of Bhadrak  district  had filed RTI Application  to the PIO,  Bonth Block office, Bhadrak  seeking some  information (  though it  is mandatory, but the  Commission  in its  decision has not written  the  subject matter of information). So the readers could not know type of information sought by   RTI Applicant from the decision of the Commission.

2.       When the PIO did not respond the RTI Application, Sri Ramesh, the applicant sent a reminder to the PIO to supply  the information.

3.       Finding  no response  from the PIO, Ramesh  filed  First Appeal  by post  dated 7.1.2015  to the First Appellate  Authority-cum-BDO, Bonth Block  under section 19 (1)  of the RTI Act. But  astonishingly, the letter  returned back from the  block office with remarks  as the addressee is  not seen in the office.

4.       When the First appeal letter returned back, Ramesh filed second appeal   in the office of Odisha Information Commission under section 19(3) of the RTI Act. ( It is interesting  that  the Commission  has not mentioned  in his decision  the date of submission of Second appeal  by appellant )

5.       The case was registered as second Appeal No. 1494/2015. On 4^th August 2017 , after two years of filling the case, Sri L.N.Patnaik, State Information Commissioner  heard the case  and disposed with  direction to redirect  the first  appeal  to the First Appellate  Authority  to hear and dispose  the case  within 45  days after receipt of the order.  In case of non-disposal of the appeal petition by the FAA,  the appellant has the liberty to approach the Commission again by filling  complaint or Second appeal.

6.       Though the Commissioner disposed the appeal on 4.8.17, but he took one year to send copy of the order to appellant and First Appellate authority on 24.8.18.  As the First Appellate authority has not yet disposed the case, as he received the decision of the Commission recently.  Had the Commission sent the decision quickly just after disposal, the FAA would have heard and ensured the information to appellant.  But due to inefficiency and callousness and lack of ability to write order, the Commission took one year to  send the copy of decision.

7.       The Commission could have disposed  the case  by directing the PIO and First Appellate authority to provide the information.

8.       The Commission should have imposed penalty on PIO for denying information.

9.       Four years passed, the applicant Ramesh  has not yet  got  the information despite  filling appeals  to  the Information Commission.

This is the sorry state of affairs of Odisha Information Commission.

Pradip Pradhan

M-9937843482

Date- 3.9.18