#RighttoInformation

[eyetcsuffolk]

Demolition of Paddock House Work starts on Monday February 20th. Mid Suffolk District Council are responsible for this development and their contractor @gbmdemolition will be carrying out the demolition on site and work will run for 14 consecutive weeks. The attached map showing the route for HGVs Mid Suffolk District Council have now (finally) received the bat licence which enables work to commence with the phase 2 demolition works Work will be carried out under the watching brief of the ecologist Letters have been received by residents in the area to advise and to give the contact details of the site management. Any concerns or questions from the public or businesses should be directed to housingdevelopment@baberghmidsuffolk.gov.uk @greendoordecorative @fleurs_artisan_florist @lifesolesuffolk @englishantiques1 @gbmdemolition @familiestogethersuffolk @cocoamama_chocolate_cafe @eyehairandbeautysalon @eyehandyman @cafeye14 @tudorbakehouse @tuniedb @thehexagonsuffolk @bar.14x @thebankartscentre @clothing_dream_on @bruce.salter @dream_on_woman @dreamonbeauty.suffolk @coopukpress @eoecoop @coopuk @nifti.___ @stevekibris @eyeprimarysuffolk #business #businessowner #local #localbusiness #school #church #resident #righttoinformation #disruptaging #demolition #disability #footpath #noise #road #cycling #building #development #developer #construction #walking #footpath (at Eye Market Town) https://www.instagram.com/p/Cojb0j_IrXF/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[seemabhatnagar]

#ElectoralBond Scheme

Association for Femocratic Reforms and Another v.  Union of India and Others

WP(C) 880/2017

Before Supreme Court of India

Writ Petition was allowed on 15.02.2024

On 2 January 2018, the Ministry of Finance in the Department of Economic Affairs notified the Electoral Bond Scheme 2018 in exercise of the power under Section 31(3) of the RBI Act.

The Electoral Bond is issued in the nature of promissory note which is a bearer banking instrument and does not carry the name of the buyer.

The scheme allowed anonymous donations to political parties through interest-free financial instruments.

The scheme was challenged by several petitioners, including the Association for Democratic Reforms, who argued that it violated the voter’s right to information, the principle of free and fair elections, and the equality clause of the Constitution.

On 15 February 2024, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, led by Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, unanimously struck down the scheme as unconstitutional, holding that it infringed on the fundamental right of the voters to know the source of funding of the political parties

The features of the Scheme are as under:

The Bond may be purchased by a person who is (i) a citizen of India; or (ii) incorporated or established in India. ‘Person’ includes (a) an individual; (b) a Hindu undivided family; (c) a company; (c) a firm; (d) an association of persons or a body of individuals, whether incorporated or not; (e) every artificial juridical person, not falling within any of the above categories; and (f) any agency, office, or branch owned or controlled by such a person. An individual can buy bonds either singly or jointly with other individuals;

An Electoral Bond can only be encashed by an eligible political party. A political party, to be eligible to receive an electoral bond, has to be registered under Section 29A of the RP Act, and ought to have secured not less than one per cent of the votes polled in the last general election to the House of the People or the Legislative Assembly of the State. An eligible political party can encash a bond only through a bank account with an authorised bank. The scheme has notified the State Bank of India as the bank authorised to issue and encash bonds;

The instructions issued by the Reserve Bank of India regarding KYC apply to buyers of the bond. The authorised bank may call for additional KYC documents if necessary;

Payments for the issuance of the bond are accepted in Indian rupees, through demand draft, cheque, Electronic Clearing System or direct debit to the buyer’s account. Where payment is made by cheque or demand draft, it must be drawn in favour of the issuing bank at the place of issue;

The bonds are issued in denominations of Rs 1000, 10,000, 1,00,000, 10,00,000 and 1,00,00,000;

The bond is valid for fifteen days from the date of issue. No payment will be made to a political party if the bond is deposited after the expiry of fifteen days. If the bond is not encashed within fifteen days, it will be deposited by the authorised bank with the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund;

A buyer who wishes to purchase electoral bond(s) can apply in the format specified in Annexure II of the Scheme. issue the bond if all the requirements are fulfilled. The application shall be rejected if the application is not KYC compliant or if the application does not meet the requirements of the scheme;

The bond issued is non-refundable;

The information furnished by the buyer is to be treated as confidential by the authorized bank. It shall be disclosed only when demanded by a competent court or upon the registration of criminal case by any law enforcement agency;

The bond shall be available for purchase for a period of ten days on a quarterly basis, in the months of January, April, July, and October as specified by the Central Government. Bonds will be available for an additional period of thirty days as specified by the Central Government in a year when General Elections to the House of People are to be held;

No interest is payable on the bond. No commission, brokerage, or any other charges for issue of a bond shall be payable by the buyer against purchase of the bond;

The value of the bonds shall be considered as income by way of voluntary contributions received by an eligible political party for the purpose of exemption from Income Tax under Section 13A of the IT Act; and

The bonds are not eligible for trading.

[newz-archive]

Supreme Court Invalidates Electoral Bonds: Countering Arun Jaitley’s Arguments

In a landmark decision, a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court has declared the electoral bonds scheme unconstitutional, citing its violation of the Right to Information Act and thereby impinging on the Fundamental Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

Former Finance Minister Arun Jaitley had introduced the Electoral Bonds Scheme on January 2, 2018, in the Lok Sabha, emphasizing its potential to mitigate the influx of black money into political party funding. However, the scheme faced judicial scrutiny, culminating in its recent nullification by the apex court.

Key Points from the Supreme Court Verdict:

The court asserted that transparency regarding political party funding is indispensable, highlighting that the electoral bonds scheme undermines the right to information.

Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud elaborated on the inherent quid pro quo between political funding and policy-making, deeming the lack of disclosure regarding corporate funding as unconstitutional.

Contrary to the government’s argument of curbing black money, the court held that the objective doesn’t justify compromising fundamental rights. It applied a three-pronged test, as outlined in the 2017 Justice K S Puttaswamy (retd) v Union of India ruling, emphasizing that the electoral bond scheme wasn’t the least restrictive method available.

The court invalidated amendments to the Income Tax Act and Section 29C of the Representation of the People Act.

Arguments Presented by Arun Jaitley:

In defense of the electoral bonds scheme, Jaitley contended that disclosing individual donor contributions would discourage donations, potentially reverting to less desirable cash-based donations. He argued that the scheme represented a significant improvement in transparency compared to the existing opaque funding system. Jaitley highlighted the prevailing non-transparent political funding ecosystem and emphasized the need for reform. He outlined the features of the electoral bonds scheme, emphasizing its transparency through banking instruments and mandatory disclosure requirements for both donors and political parties.

A recent Supreme Court ruling has invalidated the electoral bonds scheme, a brainchild of former Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, citing its infringement upon the Right to Information Act and fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. Introduced in 2018 as a measure to tackle black money in political funding, the scheme faced constitutional scrutiny, culminating in its annulment by the apex court.

The court’s decision underscored the imperative of transparency in political funding, rebuffing the government’s argument of curbing black money through the electoral bonds scheme. Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud elucidated the symbiotic relationship between political funding and policymaking, deeming the lack of disclosure regarding corporate funding unconstitutional. Additionally, the court applied a rigorous test, concluding that the scheme failed to meet the standards of least restriction on fundamental rights.

Jaitley, in defense of the electoral bonds scheme, argued that mandatory disclosure of donor contributions could dissuade donations, potentially reverting to less desirable cash-based transactions. He emphasized the scheme’s role in enhancing transparency compared to the existing opaque funding practices.

In essence, the Supreme Court’s verdict not only nullifies the electoral bonds scheme but also underscores the significance of transparency and accountability in political funding, setting a significant precedent for future electoral reforms.

[sassinake]

As a Canadian adult w/o a drivers' licence, where does that leave me?

[sail-steel]

SAIL organized an RTI Awareness Programme today at its Corporate Office at New Delhi through hybrid mode. Ms. Vanaja N Sarna, Information Commissioner enlightened employees of @steelauthority about the practical aspects of RTI Act, 2005. #RightToInformation #RTI #RTIact #Information https://www.instagram.com/p/CmODKLQJIl4/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[livesanskrit]

Send from Sansgreet Android App. Sanskrit greetings app from team @livesanskrit .

It's the first Android app for sending @sanskrit greetings. Download app from https://livesanskrit.com/sansgreet

Anna Hazare.

Kisan Baburao Hazare (born 15 June 1937), popularly known as Anna Hazare (About this soundpronunciation (help·info)), is an Indian social activist who led movements to promote rural development, increase government transparency, and investigate and punish corruption in public life. In addition to organising and encouraging grassroots movements, Hazare frequently conducted hunger strikes to further his causes—a tactic reminiscent, to many, of the work of Mohandas K. Gandhi. Hazare also contributed to the development and structuring of Ralegan Siddhi, a village in Parner taluka of Ahmednagar district, Maharashtra, India. He was awarded the Padma Bhushan—the third-highest civilian award—by the Government of India in 1992 for his efforts in establishing this village as a model for others.

#sansgreet #sanskritgreetings #greetingsinsanskrit #sanskritquotes #sanskritthoughts #emergingsanskrit #sanskrittrends #trendsinsanskrit #livesanskrit #sanskritlanguage #sanskritlove #sanskritdailyquotes #sanskritdailythoughts #sanskrit #resanskrit #annahazare #socialactivist #stopcorruption #ralegansiddhi #ahmednagar #maharashtra #padmabhushan #bhingar #anticorruptionactivist #anticorruption #anticorruptionmovement #righttoinformation #celebratingsanskrit #corruptionfreeindia #incredibleindia

[paranjothipandian]

ஏற்காடு தாலுகா வில் RTI 2J யின் கீழ் ஆவண ஆய்வு

ஏற்காடு தாலுகா வில் RTI 2J யின் கீழ் ஆவண ஆய்வு. இப்படிக்கு சா.மு.பரஞ்சோதி பாண்டியன் எழுத்தாளர், தொழில்முனைவர் 9841665836 http://www.paranjothipandian.com #yercaud #2J #Right_to_Information_Act #problem #lawyer #great_tool #righttoinformation #rti #law #humanrights #legalnews #lawyer #rights #justice #court #india #fundamentalrights #indianlaw #legaladvice #rtiact #legal #attorney…

[kikxnow]

Sports Department Goes Silent on Information Requests

Peshawar, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa - A journalist in Peshawar is locked in a battle for transparency with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Sports Department. Musarrat Ullah Jan, a citizen with a keen eye for accountability, has accused the department of failing to respond to multiple RTI requests submitted since 2022.

Jan, exercising his right under the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Act, has filed numerous online applications seeking information from the Sports Department. Disappointingly, all requests have been met with silence. This lack of response not only hinders Jan's journalistic endeavors but also raises concerns about the department's commitment to openness and public scrutiny.

The RTI applications pertain to various aspects of the Sports Department's operations. Specific details remain undisclosed due to the pending nature of the requests. However, Jan's pursuit of information highlights the potential for a larger issue of secrecy within the department.

Jan has taken his fight for transparency to the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Right to Information Commission. He has filed a formal complaint urging the commission to:

Direct the Sports Department to respond promptly and completely to all pending RTI applications.

Impose a fine on the department's PIO (Public Information Officer) for non-compliance with the RTI Act.

Instruct the Sports Department to implement measures guaranteeing timely responses to future RTI requests.

The RTI Commission is yet to respond to the complaint. This case underscores the challenges citizens face in obtaining information from government departments. It is yet to be seen if the Commission will intervene and ensure transparency prevails at the Sports Department.

#RTIRight #Pakistan #KPK #Transparency #RightToInformation #OpenGovernment #FOIA #Journalism #Accountability #MusarratUllahJan #SportsDepartment

[browsership]

Shadow banning (also called stealth banning, ghost banning or comment ghosting) is the act of blocking or partially blocking a user or their content from an online community such that it will not be readily apparent to the user that they have been banned. =================================== 🔈🔉🔊📢📣📞📟📠📲💻📡💡🔦📺🎥🎬 =================================== #hacktivism #hacker #ban #private #freedomofspeech #righttoinformation #revolution #admin #illuminati #cybersecurity #anonymous #threats #vulnerability #stalker #creep #troll #spam #offensive #terrorism #fear #uncertainity #doubt #privacy #violation #wild #freedom #identity #laws #rights #silence =================================== 🔈🔉🔊📢📣📞📟📠📲💻📡💡🔦📺🎥🎬 =================================== https://www.instagram.com/p/B1laoUZhE2U/?igshid=j2zxb0csuysm

[newz-archive]

Supreme Court Strikes Down Electoral Bonds Scheme as Unconstitutional: A Blow to Anonymous Political Funding

In a significant verdict delivered recently, the Supreme Court of India declared the electoral bonds scheme as “unconstitutional.” This ruling marks a watershed moment in the country’s electoral landscape, with far-reaching implications for political funding and transparency.

A unanimous decision by a five-judge Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, held that the anonymous nature of the electoral bonds scheme violates the fundamental right to information enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. The verdict comes after a series of legal challenges to the central government’s scheme, which allowed for undisclosed funding to political parties.

The court emphasized the critical role of political parties in the electoral process and underscored the importance of transparency in funding for making informed electoral choices. Consequently, the Supreme Court directed the State Bank of India (SBI) to cease issuing any further electoral bonds, signaling an end to the controversial system.

The ruling is a setback for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which has been the primary beneficiary of the electoral bond scheme since its introduction in 2017. Additionally, the court mandated the SBI to furnish details of electoral bonds purchased from April 12, 2019, onwards to the Election Commission, further enhancing transparency in political funding.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan hailed the verdict as a significant step towards safeguarding electoral democracy, emphasizing that it upholds citizens’ right to information regarding political contributions. The court’s decision nullifies the provisions introduced in various laws, including the Income Tax Act and the Companies Act, pertaining to the implementation of the electoral bonds scheme.

Initially pitched as an alternative to cash donations, the electoral bonds scheme allowed individuals and entities incorporated in India to purchase bonds, which could then be donated to eligible political parties. However, only parties meeting specific criteria, such as securing at least 1% of votes in previous elections, were eligible to receive these bonds.

Despite initial legal challenges, the apex court had declined to stay the scheme in April 2019, opting instead to delve deeper into the issues raised by the Centre and the Election Commission. The Constitution bench, during hearings, stressed the need to reduce the reliance on cash in the electoral process, highlighting the broader implications for the sanctity of elections in the country.

The verdict represents a significant victory for transparency and accountability in political funding. It underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding democratic principles and ensuring that electoral processes remain fair and equitable. With the electoral bonds scheme now deemed unconstitutional, the focus shifts towards exploring alternative mechanisms that promote transparency and public trust in India’s democratic institutions.

[chaitanyabharatnews]

बैंकों का महाविलय: भारत में अब सिर्फ 12 सरकारी बैंक, 2118 शाखाओं का खत्म हुआ वजूद

चैतन्य भारत न्यूज भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक (Reserve Bank of India) ने सूचना के अधिकार के तहत बताया है कि, वित्तीय वर्ष 2020-21 में 10 सरकारी बैंकों की कुल 2,118 बैंकिंग शाखाएं या तो हमेशा के लिए बंद कर दी गयीं या इन्हें दूसरी बैंक शाखाओं में मिला दिया गया है। किस बैंक की कितनी शाखाएं हुईं बंद! आरटीआई कार्यकर्ता चंद्रशेखर गौड़ ने रविवार को बताया कि, रिजर्व बैंक ने उन्हें सूचना के अधिकार के तहत यह जानकारी दी है। जानकारी के मुताबिक, वित्त वर्ष 2020-21 में शाखा बंदी या विलय की प्रक्रिया से बैंक ऑफ बड़ौदा की सर्वाधिक 1,283 शाखाओं का वजूद खत्म हो गया। इस प्रक्रिया से स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया की 332, पंजाब नेशनल बैंक की 169, यूनियन बैंक ऑफ इंडिया की 124, केनरा बैंक की 107, इंडियन ओवरसीज बैंक की 53, सेंट्रल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया की 43, इंडियन बैंक की पांच औ�� बैंक ऑफ महाराष्ट्र एवं पंजाब एंड सिंध बैंक की एक-एक शाखा बंद हुई। इन बैंकों की बंद नहीं हुई कोई भी शाखा हालांकि, अभी यह स्पष्ट नहीं किया गया है कि इन बैंकों की कितनी शाखाएं हमेशा के लिए बंद कर दी गईं और कितनी शाखाओं को दूसरी शाखाओं में मिला दिया गया। रिजर्व बैंक ने आरटीआई के तहत बताया कि 31 मार्च को समाप्त वित्त वर्ष 2020-21 में बैंक ऑफ इंडिया और यूको बैंक की कोई भी शाखा बंद नहीं हुई। Read the full article

[legalupanishad]

Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005: A Critical Analysis

This article on 'Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005: A Critical Analysis' was written by an intern at Legal Upanishad.

Introduction

The Right to Information Act, of 2005 in India specifically grants citizens the right to request information from public authorities and obligates them to provide the information within a specified timeframe. The right to information helps citizens make informed decisions and hold public officials accountable for their actions. In this article, we will analyze the Right to Information (RTI) Act, of 2005, which is an important legislation in India. We will examine the aims of the act, including promoting transparency and accountability in the government and public institutions, and discuss the potential benefits and criticisms of the act. We will also look at some of the challenges faced in implementing the act, including concerns about misuse and reluctance to provide information and discuss the need for greater transparency in private institutions.

Historical Perspective of the Right to Information

The concept of the right to information can be traced back to the Swedish Parliament, which passed the Freedom of the Press Act in 1766, giving citizens the right to access public documents. In the 20th century, the right to information became an important issue for the democratic movement, particularly in developing countries. The right to information was seen as a tool to combat corruption, promote transparency, and increase citizen participation in governance. In India, the demand for the right to information began in the 1970s and 1980s, when activists and civil society organizations campaigned for greater transparency in government decision-making. The demand for the right to information gained momentum in the 1990s, with the establishment of the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), a grassroots organization that campaigned for the right to information in Rajasthan. The MKSS’s campaign led to the enactment of the Rajasthan Right to Information Act in 2000, which was the first law in India to grant citizens the right to access information held by public authorities. This inspired other states to enact similar laws, leading to the enactment of the national Right to Information Act, of 2005.

Critical Analysis of the RTI Act, 2005

The Right to Information Act, of 2005 was passed by the Indian Parliament on 15 June 2005 and came into force on 12 October 2005. The act under section 3, provides citizens with the right to access information held by public authorities. Section 4 of the Act obligates them to provide the information proactively on websites about their role, powers, duties, etc. within a specified timeframe of 30 days as provisioned under section 7 of the Act. The act has been widely lauded for its potential to increase transparency and accountability in the government and public institutions in India. The Right to Information Act, 2005, provides the citizens with the right to request information which includes policies, decisions, and activities of public authorities subject to certain exemptions to protect the sovereignty, integrity, strategic interests of the State, etc. under section 8 of the Act. The act also aims to promote a culture of openness and transparency in the government and public institutions. Section 9 provides certain grounds for rejection of a request, if it is vague, frivolous, or if it seeks information that is exempt under the Act such as a violation of copyright. The Act also allows a person to appeal to a higher authority if their request for information has been rejected or if they are not satisfied with the information as a ground for appeal under section 19 of the Act. These are some of the important sections of the RTI Act, which empower citizens to access information held by public authorities and promote transparency and accountability in governance.

Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005

Criticisms of the RTI Act

Despite its many benefits, the RTI Act has faced some criticism since its enactment in 2005. Some of the criticisms are: - Limited access to information: Although the RTI Act allows citizens to access information held by public authorities, it does not extend to private bodies. Additionally, certain types of sensitive information, such as national security-related information or information that could impede an ongoing investigation, are exempted from disclosure. In the case of Saurav Yadav v. Union of India (2021): The Delhi High Court held that even when an investigation is ongoing, the information sought under the RTI Act cannot be denied on the ground of investigation or pendency of a case. The public authority has to provide reasons for denying the information under the RTI Act. - Misuse of the Act: Some critics argue that the RTI Act is being misused by individuals or organizations for purposes other than the promotion of transparency and accountability, such as for blackmail, harassment, or settling personal scores. The misuse of the Act can lead to excessive burden on public authorities, delay in providing information, and can adversely impact the effectiveness of the Act. As in the case of Venkatesh Nayak v. Central Information Commission (2020): The Bombay High Court held that under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, if a public authority fails to provide information within the prescribed time, the applicant has the right to approach the first appellate authority, and such an appeal cannot be dismissed on the ground of delay in filing. - Inadequate implementation: Despite the enactment of the RTI Act, there are still many public authorities that are not fully compliant with its provisions. There have been instances where public authorities have refused to provide information or have provided incomplete information. Moreover, there have been reports of harassment and even violence against activists who have sought information under the RTI Act. - Lack of awareness: Despite the RTI Act being in force for over a decade, there is still a lack of awareness among the general public about their right to access information under the Act. Many citizens are not aware of the procedure for filing an RTI application, the fees charged for obtaining information, and the exemptions that apply. In the case of Central Information Commission v. High Court of Delhi (2021): The Supreme Court held that the RTI Act does not give citizens the right to seek information regarding judicial proceedings, which includes information related to judicial orders, judicial records, and court proceedings. However, citizens can still seek information related to administrative matters of the courts, such as recruitment and transfers of employees. - Lack of clarity in exemptions: The exemptions under the RTI Act are broad and open to interpretation. As a result, there have been instances where public authorities have denied access to information that should have been made available to citizens. The lack of clarity in exemptions can also lead to inconsistent application of the Act. This can be illustrated by the recent judgment in the case of Param Bir Singh v. State of Maharashtra (2021): The Bombay High Court held that even if the information sought under the RTI Act is related to the personal affairs of a public servant, it may still be disclosed if it serves a larger public interest and does not fall under the exemptions provided under the RTI Act.

Suggestions

- Increase awareness: There is a need to increase awareness among the general public about their right to access information under the RTI Act. This can be done through campaigns, workshops, and training programs. - Simplify the process: The process for filing an RTI application can be simplified by making it more user-friendly. This can include making the forms available in multiple languages and online submission of applications. - Strengthen whistle-blower protection: There is a need to strengthen the protection of whistle-blowers who provide information under the RTI Act. This can be done by providing them with legal and institutional support to prevent victimization. - Increase capacity: Public authorities should be provided with the necessary resources and capacity building to effectively implement the RTI Act. This can include training programs for officials and making available adequate infrastructure for processing and disseminating information.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Right to Information (RTI) Act, of 2005 has been an important step toward promoting transparency and accountability in governance in India. The Act has empowered citizens to access information held by public authorities and has led to greater public participation in governance. However, the RTI Act has also faced some criticism, including limited access to information, misuse of the Act, inadequate implementation, lack of awareness, and lack of clarity in exemptions. Overall, the RTI Act has been a positive development in promoting transparency and accountability in governance. However, there is still room for improvement to ensure that the Act is implemented effectively and to its fullest potential. The government and civil society must continue to work together to strengthen the Act and ensure that it is used to promote the greater public good.

References

- https://progressive.international/members/cc70b9ce-cbd6-4c3e-a80d-657c37c8525b-mazdoor-kisan-shakti-sangathan/en - https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1053993/ Read the full article

[venusrays-tza]

သနပ်ခါးလည်းလူးပါ။ mask လည်းတပ်ပါ။ လက်ကိုလည်း ဆေးပါ။ ရေရှည်တိုက်ပွဲမို့ တစ်ယောက်မှ အားလျော့လို့ မဖြစ်ပါဘူး။ လူကအရမ်း glow နေတော့ သနပ်ခါးမပေါ်ဘူး ဖြစ်သွားတာတော့ သည်းခံ 😂 please be safe always everyone ❤ #WhatsHappeningInMyanmar #thanaka #thanakacampaign #SaveMyanmarDemocracy #RejectMilitaryCoupMyanmar #HumanRightViolationInMyanmar #CrimeAgainstHumanity #Myanmar #FreeAungSanSuuKyi #JusticeForMyanmar #SpringRevolution #CivilDisobedienceMovement #burma #RightToInformation #FreedomFromFear #GeneralStrike #SaveMyanmar #RejectMilitaryCoup #RejectMilitaryDictatorship #MyanmarMilitaryTerrorist #RespectOurVotes #feb25coup #Instagram #facebook #twitter #instadaily #iphone12pro #lgbtmyanmar #milkteaalliance #fightfordemocracy https://www.instagram.com/p/CLtwKAIhxnc/?igshid=1pcfe4wfloy8b

[forestsindia]

1.89 lakh trees chopped for UP's Bundelkhand expressway: RTI https://www.forests.in/latest/1-89-lakh-trees-chopped-for-ups-bundelkhand-expressway-rti/

[livesanskrit]

Send from Sansgreet Android App. Sanskrit greetings app from team @livesanskrit .

It's the first Android app for sending @sanskrit greetings. Download app from https://livesanskrit.com/sansgreet

Anna Hazare.

Kisan Baburao Hazare (born 15 June 1937), popularly known as Anna Hazare (About this soundpronunciation (help·info)), is an Indian social activist who led movements to promote rural development, increase government transparency, and investigate and punish corruption in public life. In addition to organising and encouraging grassroots movements, Hazare frequently conducted hunger strikes to further his causes—a tactic reminiscent, to many, of the work of Mohandas K. Gandhi. Hazare also contributed to the development and structuring of Ralegan Siddhi, a village in Parner taluka of Ahmednagar district, Maharashtra, India. He was awarded the Padma Bhushan—the third-highest civilian award—by the Government of India in 1992 for his efforts in establishing this village as a model for others.

#sansgreet #sanskritgreetings #greetingsinsanskrit #sanskritquotes #sanskritthoughts #emergingsanskrit #sanskrittrends #trendsinsanskrit #livesanskrit #sanskritlanguage #sanskritlove #sanskritdailyquotes #sanskritdailythoughts #sanskrit #resanskrit #annahazare #socialactivist #stopcorruption #ralegansiddhi #ahmednagar #maharashtra #padmabhushan #bhingar #anticorruptionactivist #anticorruption #anticorruptionmovement #righttoinformation #celebratingsanskrit #corruptionfreeindia #incredibleindia

[mishrasatty7]

#RTI #righttoinformation completes 15 year #law #knowyourrights #legal #onlinelegalservices #legalseva (at Zirakpur) https://www.instagram.com/p/CGRHsdCp6LW/?igshid=3c1g3datycdl