The modern thinking Indian

We are typically more sympathetic to the concerns and feelings of differently abled people (or who used to be called as handicapped people), and one expects that Government departments, who act as enablers for providing support and services to the citizenry of this country, would also act the same way for differently abled citizens. However, it is no surprise that Government departments are as unconcerned to these special citizens as they are towards normal citizens. But now, citizens have a weapon to get what they want, and that is using the power of RTI. The RTI Act enables citizens to get information on many aspects of the workings of the Government, and this includes the status of any item pending with the Government, and so it was in this particular case when the citizen used RTI to get the required action (link to article):

For almost a year, Rudrakshi Pandya, a differently-abled was pushed around when she demanded her right to a family pension after her father, a retired headmaster of a city-based school, died few years ago. Rudrakshi, was entitled by the government for a pension, under Gujarat civil services (pension) rules as she was unable to fend for herself. Interestingly, pension department had all the requisite documents, including Rudrakshi's medical certificate and even the clearance from the district education office.
It was here that Rudrakshi's mentor, Falguni Mehta, filed an RTI application under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, which pertains to information being provided within 48 hours of the application with the pensions department. Mehta wanted to know reasons why Rudrakshi's pension was delayed, officers responsible for the delay, the grounds on which pensions for the differently-abled were rejected since 1980 and what punitive actions would be taken if the officers were found guilty. The case finally came up for hearing before state information commission. State chief information commissioner RN Das ruled in Rudrakshi's favour and directed pensions department to provide information within 48 hours.

One wishes that cases like not come up, since they show the bureaucracy in pretty bad light; however, this is also another depiction of the power of the RTI Act in getting the concerned Government departments to act. Also, recent punishments against officials for denying or delaying information should also act as a warning to Government officials in this regard.

Labels: Benefits, Governance, India, Information, Law, Policy, RTI

You must have seen this all the time. You go to a fuel pump, and they ask you whether you want the premium fuel (whether it is petrol or diesel); in some cases, they will tell you that the premium fuel is better for your engine, as well as for the mileage of your vehicle. The fuel will have the name of 'Premium', 'Turbo', or 'Speed', all designed to make sure that you feel that you are taking a fuel much better than the traditional fuel. The television advertisements are all designed to project the same thing, with the fuel supposed to have additives that smoothen the engine, and deliver many other benefits.
Months back, when fuel prices were very high, the oil companies were actually forcing higher consumption of these branded fuel through greater marketing campaigns, as well as through actual constriction of supply of the non-branded fuel at the fuel pumps. So, what is the reality of these branded fuels ? Do their consistent campaigns have any real substance to them ? Does your vehicle benefit if you use such fuels ? Well, the MRTPC did a study, and found that there was no evidence to backup these claims (link to article):

Next time you pay Rs 2 extra per litre to tank up on branded petrol, you are probably being taken for a ride. For, the state-run oil marketing companies have failed to back up their claim of this fuel giving higher mileage and better engine performance before the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC). MRTPC had asked the companies to "clarify the quantitive difference between normal fuel and branded fuel alongwith supportive documents.''
The query, however, failed to get the companies to furnish anything more than letters from additive suppliers in support their claim. While the additive suppliers, the Singapore branch of Chevron and Oronite, have spoken about the benefits of branded fuel, it has failed to impress the Commission as it doesn't regard the suppliers as non-partial authority; on the contrary they are viewed as vested interests. The suppliers' certificates do not talk about any test having been carried out on branded petrol
.

So, the net result is that oil companies claim that these additives are being used the world over, and are from companies that provide these to fuels all over the world. However, in the absence of any proof, paying extra for these fuels is a risk that a person is taking; there is a good chance that you do not any benefit commensurate with the additional price.

Labels: Benefits, Consumer, False, Fraud, India, MRTPC, Oil Companies