Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Shouldn't Mumbai Airport come under RTI Act since it is ``substantially'' funded by the govt?
Airport operators sit on valuable public property, avail of concessions, but will not be accountable
May 18, 2011 02:30 PM Bookmark and Share
Vinita Deshmukh

RTI activist Sanjay Shirodkar has been working to bring Mumbai International Airport Ltd (MIAL) under the RTI Act, since 2007. MIAL has resisted all orders, even going to the High Court on the matter. Shockingly, the public Airports Authority of India (AAI), which has a stake in the company, has defended the private agency. Similar battles are being fought in Bangalore and Delhi

One day, while waiting at the Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport for his cousin to arrive, Sanjay Shirodkar noticed a number of cars belonging to various 'embassies' parked outside. He asked security agency personnel and designated traffic police why the cars were allowed to park there for such a long duration, when other vehicles were not permitted to stop there for more than a few minutes, only allowing travellers to alight. But he got no answer.  Mr Shirodkar was also hassled about the high price charged for mineral water at the airport stalls. That was back in 2007.

Mr Shirodkar proceeded to write a letter to the Mumbai International AirportLtd (MIAL) as well as the Airports Authority of India (AAI) seeking information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, about the mineral water price policy. He received a reply from the deputy general manager ofAAI, quoting an internal note from the legal department, saying that "MIAL will not come under the purview of the public authority and thus the provisions of this (RTI) Act will not be applicable to MIAL.''

Mr Shirodkar says, "I was shocked that the public department, the AAI, which has a 26% stake in the public-private partnership (PPP) and has allowed the use of 2,000 acres of its land-which amounts to at least Rs50,000 crore-was actually protecting the private agency, MIAL, instead of monitoring it and ensuring that it performs its duty transparently, and it was encouraging the agency to keep information away from the public domain.''

Undeterred, Mr Shirodkar invoked a second RTI query on 15 November 2007 with regard to the rules for parking of vehicles. He asked:
> Is parking free for all embassy vehicles at all airports in India? If yes, then please give a copy of the government resolution (GR) or any such notification to show this.
> At which furthest point can embassy vehicles be parked from the terminus?
> Is there any privileged parking facility for embassy vehicles when the ambassador/high commissioner is in the car, or for the staff of the embassy as well?
> Please provide a list of all embassy offices and their respective official number plate details (by which they are recognise for privileged parking, if applicable).

The reply from AAI on 26 December 2007 said that embassy vehicles could go only up to the designated VIP area where they can park free of charges. This implies that they were not permitted to park outside theairport terminal for long durations.

This set Mr Shirodkar thinking about public-private partnerships which have become the backbone of several large-scale (read, large money), development infrastructure projects. More so in the case of airports, which are sensitive areas in the context of the threat of terrorism, how was MIAL flouting the basic rules on parking? He, therefore, decided to find out what concessions MIAL enjoyed from the state and central governments.

In an RTI query, dated 17 November 2007, Mr Shirodkar requested information from a number of related government departments at the Mantralaya state headquarters, including the General Administration Department (GAD), and whether AAI had offered/provided any discounts/concessions/exemptions/waivers to MIAL on interest  free debt, entry taxes, property tax, lease of land, stamp duty and registration charges, change of land use, octroi and road cess, if any.

All departments kept mum for months, till a fortnight back, when the GAD replied stating that "MIAL has been given a stamp duty concession of Rs250 crore and it operates on 2,000 acres of government land.'' Now, is this not sufficient premise for MIAL to come under the RTI Act, with such "substantial funding from the government," Mr Shirodkar asks.

Interestingly, in the case of the Delhi airport, which is also privatised under the banner of Delhi International Airport Pvt Ltd (DIAL), Lt Col Anil Heble (retd), an RTI activist and resident of Delhi, filed two applications on 12th June and 15 June 2006 with the public information officer (PIO) of the Ministry of Civil Aviation for information related to the construction of a newsecurity wall in place of the existing wall in Shahabad Mohamadpur village.

The PIO, Ministry of Civil Aviation, forwarded the applications to various PIOs of the Airports Authority of India, New Delhi. When Lt Col Heble did not receive any reply, he filed a complaint with the Central Information Commission on 19 July 2006.

The bench of the then central information commissioner (CIC), Dr OP Kejriwal, ordered that DIAL abide by the provisions of the RTI Act. The decision read: "The Commission heard both sides. DIAL responded saying that they were not a public authority as they held a 74% stake in the joint venture company set up by GMR. On making further inquiries, the Commission was told that the government had a 26% stake in DIAL.

"The Commission is of the opinion that a holding of 26% is quite substantial for any company and therefore, Section 2(1) which states that any body owned, controlled or substantially financed is a public authority, is applicable to DIAL and hence it is bound by the directions of RTI. The Commission therefore directs DIAL to provide for the directions of the RTI. This must be done within 15 days of the issue of the order.''

Mr Shirodkar had made a similar appeal to the CIC. The order of 11 June 2008 was predictably, ditto as in the case of Mr Heble. "In an identical case, in respect of Delhi International Airport Pvt Ltd (DIAL) the Commission vide its decision dated 17 January 2007 has observed that a shareholding of 26% is quite substantial for any company and therefore Section 2(1) is applicable to DIAL…'' Accordingly, MIAL "is covered under the definition of public authority and is therefore directed to furnish the information asked for within 15 days from the date of issue of the decision.''

In yet another case, Bangalore resident Benson Isaac also appealed to the CIC regarding the Bangalore International Airport Pvt Ltd and on 14 May 2008, KK Mishra, state information commissioner, Karnataka, gave a ditto verdict.

But, MIAL did not take the CIC's order lying down. Advocates Duttmenon Dunmorrset filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court in 2008, challenging the decision of the CIC, and pleading that it be exempted from the provisions of the RTI Act since it has 74% stake in the PPP. The High Court recently directed the matter back to the CIC, Sushma Singh.

As of 16th May, Sushma Singh has sent the copy of the GAD's official reply to Mr Shirodkar; and has asked MIAL to reply on the 26% "substantial'' stake by the AAI in MIAL and that MIAL is using 2,000 acres of land belonging to the government.

This is just the tip of the iceberg in PPPs that have become an integral part of India's progress. Check out for an idea of the magnitude of such projects.  Surely, we need transparency, and not official secrecy, as has been the case since the days of the British Raj.

(Vinita Deshmukh is a senior editor, author and convener of Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She can be reached at

Submit your comments
Name * :
Email Id * :
Author Url:
alert me when new comment is posted on this article
Security Code: 
Not readable? Change text.


nagesh kini 1 hour ago
The issues raised by Vinita are very apt
1. The vehicles flauting yellow CD in Delhi and CC elsewhere, red topi safed sarkari gaddis, vehicles hired by PSUs - "GOI undertakings", "On BMC duty" break traffic laws with impunity. this ought to be curbed.
2. It is convenient for any authority to fob any RTI query by stating that are not covered. At the Anniversary of the RTI Bombay High Court Justice Dr. Dhananjay Chandrachud validly suggested that even the private sector should be answerable under the RTI.
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
Malq 7 hours ago
Thank you for this detailed report. It seems that a few more flanking rti applications will have to be filed by other people.

# an rti application to pmo asking them for information on free facilities if any asked for from bial / mial / dial by the pmo.

# an rti application to moca asking them for information on free facilities if any provided to pro from all airports in India.

# an rti application to mea asking them for information on free facilities if any asked for from all airports in India on behalf of diplomats in India, and information under which rules or laws.

# an rti application to bcas asking them for information on relaxations in security of diplomats and diplomatic vehicles if any at all airports in India.

I request people reading in to do these and simply follow up on responses so that these responses, whatever they are, come into the public domain. This will , in turn, impact the position that moca takes in the high courts.
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
Nitin Kirtane 9 hours ago
This is a important issue and some higher up people like our dear ministers seem to have some inside deal on selling our airports for peanuts , good luck to Mr shirodkar with this issue and thks to Mrs Deshmukh who continues her fight against corruption , good luck
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
Mayur 10 hours ago
Commendable Efforts !!
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
Sarabjit S Kahlon 13 hours ago
I appreciate hard work put in, this will definitely pave the way to opening flood gates of many such entities impeding RTI act, and fighting tooth nail to remain unaccountable and non-transparent.

Thursday, May 12, 2011

How unsafe and unhygienic are your restaurants? Use RTI to find out

 This appeared in MoneyLife digital May 11.

How unsafe and unhygienic are your restaurants? Use RTI to find out
May 11, 2011 11:16 AM | Bookmark and Share
Vinita Deshmukh

If you can’t resist indulging at wayside eateries, or may be even swanky restaurants, you might not know it, but you could be paying for a bout of indigestion or something more serious like hepatitis-B. It’s because we don’t take food safety and hygiene seriously. Section 4 of the RTI Act can help you find out critical details about your favourite food places, so you can be more careful

Last weekend, I was invited to a birthday lunch at a Gujarati thali restaurant where 'aamras' was being served unlimited! While the guests savoured the delicious feast, I was wondering about the hands that must have squeezed out the pulp!

Ever since an inspection of files at the health department of the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) revealed that even posh restaurants, some of them in five-star hotels, did not adhere to necessary food safety and kitchen and staff hygiene norms, I am cautious when eating out, and I try to spread the word about why one should avoid throwing so much money for poor service that could likely affect one's health, and probably threaten one's life also.

It all began last year, when we published a report on the increasing cases of gastroenteritis and stomach-related cases in Pune, and a couple of prominent doctors pointed to unhygienic eateries as the culprit. I asked Partha Sarathi Biswas, a young journalist and the bureau chief of Intelligent Pune, the news weekly that I was managing then, to inspect documents pertaining to food inspection reports by food inspectors of the health department who monitor food quality and staff hygiene at restaurants, twice a year.

Partha invoked Section 4 of the Right to Information (RTI) Act five times, and collected inspection reports of nearly 300 restaurants located in different localities of Pune. Food inspectors of the health department, whose sole purpose is to check whether restaurants adhere to food safety and health standards, carry with them a form that is filled during an inspection. It contains a list of 29 items that the restaurant is expected to adhere to strictly under the BPMC (Bombay Provisional Municipal Corporation) Act.

To our surprise, such big names like Hotel Blue Diamond, Mainland China, Madhouse Grill, Green Plaza (in upper crust Koregaon Park) and Wadeshwar (an extremely popular udipi place on Fergusson College Road that is patronised by youngsters), were among the restaurants which were sent notices for the "area of the kitchen where food was prepared/cooked or sold and the area where utensils were washed-(found to be) not clean.'' (Note: These are inspection reports for various months in 2010. If any of these restaurants have improved their cleanliness, after receiving notices from the PMC, we welcome it.)

Most shockingly, none of the restaurants (which were inspected) had conducted medical examination of their staff even once, let alone on a regular basis. When asked, most of the restaurant managers had the audacity to say that they could not afford to do it. This means that we could be eating food served by, or even prepared by someone who is suffering from skin disease-let your imagination run if you care to understand the vulnerability of a customer paying good money for probable illnesses.

Parameters used for inspection

When the food inspector goes on inspection, he checks on all the 29 parameters. After the inspection, the food inspector also jots down his own observations on the form. Then the establishment is sent a notice, to rectify the shortcomings that could be hazardous for customers who consume the food.

If it is found on a second inspection that the eatery is continuing to defy norms, the municipal commissioner can suspend the licence for a specific period, or even order the closure of the restaurant in serious cases of food safety violations.

Here are some jottings that Partha found on the inspector's forms:
> "Cobwebs noticed on the walls of the kitchen." - This observation was made by the food inspectors who checked the Green Plaza hotel on Baner Road.
> "Prepared food not covered properly before serving." - Taj Blue Diamond, Mainland China on DP Road and Shingri at Koregaon Park were ticked off for this by food inspectors.
> "Proper care is not taken to prevent the contamination of food by dust, insects, etc, where food is prepared." - Taj Blue Diamond, Shingri on Boat Club Road, Green Plaza in Koregaon Park and Mainland China on DP Road.
> "The kitchen and storeroom used for storing raw materials is not located at a safe distance from bathrooms, gutter or urinals, to avoid contamination of food." - Not through inspector's documents, but through word of mouth, Partha stumbled upon two big restaurants, Khyber and Mayur Thali on Jangli Maharaj Road, where the exhaust fans of the toilets opened out into the kitchen. Notices were served to these establishments and they promised to rectify this. (Note that this observation was made in the last quarter of 2010. If they have amended the placement of the exhaust fans, we welcome it.)

What did we do?

While surfing the Internet, I stumbled upon an online form (image of the page is reproduced below) called the 'Food Illness Report Page' of the Los Angeles Public Health Department which citizens can fill online, if they believe that they have become sick from eating or drinking something, somewhere, and the department will inquire into the matter.

We approached the Municipal Commissioner of Pune, Mahesh Zhagde, and requested him to adopt a similar online process on the PMC's website. Mr Zhagde told us that "this is the best form of social audit" and he included it in the PMC's budget for 2010-2011. The online facility has not yet seen the light of day. Mr Zhagde was unceremoniously transferred, recently, for his stern action against illegal encroachments. We must pursue this matter with the new municipal commissioner, Mahesh Pathak.

You too can replicate this in your city, so that the local government is pressurised to check such practices and take corrective action.

(Vinita Deshmukh is a senior editor, author and convener of Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She can be reached at

Submit your comments
Name * :
Email Id * :
Author Url:

alert me when new comment is posted on this article
Security Code:
Not readable? Change text.

malq 3 hours ago
article, thanks, and as a thumb rule, we try to eat at restaurants
where we can see the kitchen or the cooking is done in front of you.
There is a very simple and solid reason why truckers, who live on dhaba
food, would rather eat at dhabas where the cooking is done in front of
them and served straight from the tandoor as well as kadhais. Good luck
to all of us . . .
» Reply » Link » Report abuse

Prakash 3 hours ago
and bold article. Eye opener for most of the mumbaikars, majority of
whom have an unwritten rule of eating out (mandatory) on weekends,
paying heavyily for first waiting endlessly for the turn and then eat
junk, unhygienic food. We as a family are completely against this type
of norm and eat out only on rare occassions such as birthdays,
anniversaries, thus limiting exposure to such unhygienic food. Once at
Taj Hotel, Nasik, I had a wooden piece, cut off from wooden spatula, in
my omelette. I photographed it and even taped the conversation with F
& B Manager when he accepted the mistake. I have several such
instances while eating out (even though so rare) and hence hate when it
comes to eating out. Unfortunately in such incidences the maximum
compensation is just the waiver or reimbursement of the charges.

Keep it up - Moneylife
» Reply » Link » Report abuse

Meenal Mamdani 16 hours ago
Restaurants must be inspected and the reports should be available to the interested public.

All violations are not of the same magnitude therefore some countries
have a system where a restaurant is rated A to F depending on the
number and severity of violations. The restaurants are compelled to
display this rating prominently on their premises. If this is adopted
in India, then consumers can make an informed decision to patronize the
eatery or not.

Yes, it is true that food inspectors can be bribed and also that food
inspectors can extort, but that is no reason to avoid implementing a
regulation that affects public hygiene.
» Reply » Link » Report abuse

Stephen Wong 19 hours ago
B is a blood-borne disease and can only be transmitted through blood to
blood contact. Next time before I buy your magazine, I will insisted
that it is certified clean to be free of germ and I will not shake your
hands until you can show me proof that you are free of any skin
» Reply » Link » Report abuse

  Hemant Bhatia 17 hours ago  in reply to Stephen Wong
Thats why its our tradition to say NAMASTE ,insted of shaking hands (:
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
  Stephen Wong 17 hours ago  in reply to Hemant Bhatia
What a good idea. Namaste. May be we should all wear a mask before talking to each other and have our medical clearance certificate clearly displayed - "I am certified to be GERM free"
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
  Vinita 4 hours ago  in reply to Stephen Wong
My apologies to Stephen and everyone - Please read as Hepatitis A.
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
p k 23 hours ago
am not surprised.. in mumbai also once, after eating in five star hotel
in nariman point area, one of my swiss guest was sick!! loose motion

all these things can be purchased in india for a price.

best is mouthshut .com kind of network to warn public about quality of food .

in uae , in spite of hot and humid weather , i have not come accross
food poisoning in last 2 years..rule are followed and are same for all
» Reply » Link » Report abuse

pravin 1 day ago
further nonsense from regulator loving moneylife staffers.

restaurants are in business because people enjoy eating there and not
because assorted babus vouch for their babus inspect your
grandma's home to certify it is clean? i am willing to bet,restaurants
take a far more care of hygiene-as accepted in by indian society's
norms.they risk losing business if even one incident of food poisoning
blows out of doesnt mean that accidents wont happen or
someone will not be sloppy.but we dont need bureaucrats to tell us if
the food is good.we can find it for ourselves.

people like you imagine that everyone is out to loot strangers and only
because some big babu is looking over their shoulders,things move
smoothly 99% of the time.wake up you remnants of license permit
raj.wake up and smell the signs of freedom and responsibility for your
» Reply » Link » Report abuse

  P K 23 hours ago  in reply to Pravin
hi there..
in pune on j m road i had cocroach in my idli shivsagar...there was no apology from the was taken casually. i have stopped going to shivsagar after this incidence.

it is one of the most crowded place!!

» Reply » Link » Report abuse
  pravin 23 hours ago  in reply to P K
good choice.i too like to avoid shops that sell me bad goods.
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
  Foodie 1 day ago  in reply to Pravin
What your problem, buddy? Agreed, nobody inspected the food prepared by your grandma because there was a trust element. But see how your grandfather has behaved in public places while delivering your food and you will come to know the need have checks on food vendors, including hotels, restaurants etc.
» Reply » Link » Report abuse
  pravin 1 day ago  in reply to Foodie
my problem is that the author wants babus to determine what is safe for you and me to eat.i say BS.i determine what is safe by a)reading restaurant reviews b)checking out the crowd c)visual inspection of surroundings .the trust factor comes from voluntary private observations and not some taxpayer funded babu inclined to take bribes.
what amazes me is people like you think that a babu is equipped with knowledge thousands of independent customers like you and me are not. that is naivete beyond belief.
the "trust" factor is indeed what restaurants thrive on.didnt you get that from my post?
the trust doesnt come because some MPSC babu told us it is came from people's observations.and that costs nothing but an ordinarily alert mind.
you want to know who lobbied for this food health inspection babu? . entrenched restaurants themselves.they wanted to limit and thwart competition and therefore set up an impediment for new start up restaurants/food is always like this.the entrenched players like to get someone in power to serve their interests.and you think the babu is working for the paying customer.what a ludicrous idea

» Reply » Link » Report abuse
  Vinita 4 hours ago  in reply to Pravin
Pravin does not seem to have comprehended the gravity of the situation in India regarding food safety norms that are thrown to the winds by restaurants. Well, if an authority like a municipal corporation enforces strict and regular inspection of restaurants, then surely they would all ensure stringent standards of food safety, clean kitchen and medical examination of the kitchen and serving staff. Please don't under rate babus - you cannot generalise that all babus are corrupt or inefficient. Once, during a prestigious anniversary function of a leading newspapers which was held at Hotel Blue Diamond in Pune, 125 of us were down with food poisoning. Neither did the management apologise - instead it was trying to find excuses. So many lodged police complaints. Recently there have been cases of mass food poisoning in hostels of prestigious educational institutes. These should also come under the scanner of the department. I guess this article is ahead of its time in the sense that majority of us are `conditioned' into having full faith in the restaurant managements. How lucky they are as we easily let off our purse strings and fatten theirs. No questions asked! Don't we need to grow?