The government owes over Rs 110 crore to cash-strapped Air India for its special flights which ferry VVIPs including the President and the Prime Minister on their visits abroad which it is trying hard to realize.

The national carrier, which is facing a financial crunch, has pending bills of 12 special flights for the President, the vice-president and the Prime Minister which amount to over Rs 110 crore, an RTI reply from the carrier said. It said during July last year, the total outstanding bills were Rs 291 crore.

"Out of the above amount, recently the government has paid Rs 181.30 crore leaving a balance outstanding amount of Rs 110.60 crore," the reply said. The records show that two bills of are pending with the defence ministry for the abroad travel of the President to Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Damascus and Aleppo during November 20-30, 2010, which is Rs 14.5 crore and another to Paro via Bagdogra which is Rs 4.45 crore. The bill to Paro, Bhutan is nearly three years old, the reply dated December 28, 2011 said.

Five bills worth Rs 55.81 crore are pending with the Cabinet Secretariat for the travel of the PM to Huahin, Thailand during October 23-25, 2009, to Paro, Bhutan during April 27-30, to Tokyo, Kuala Lumpur, Hanoi during October 23-30, 2010, to Seoul during November 9-12, 2010 and to Brussels and Berlin during December 8-12, 2010.

One outstanding bill for the travel of the vice-president to Male, Maldives is pending since November, 2008. The total bill for this trip was Rs 2.77 crore of which part payment was done leaving an outstanding of Rs 39 lakh.

With complaints of arbitrariness in hearing of cases piling up, the Central Information Commission last week began listing out pending cases before each commissioner on its website. Cases pending before chief information commissioner Satyananda Mishra and information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi have already been uploaded while the other commissioners are likely to follow soon. This is the first time that an information commission has displayed at least a partial list of cases pending before it.

Speaking about the move, Mishra said, "This is an added advantage to the public. Other commissioners will also put up their list of pending cases but we have not set a time frame." CIC has a pendency of 22,000 cases with about 2,500 cases added every month. The decision was prompted by an RTI application that sought information on the status of a case filed a year ago. Information commissioner Shailesh Gandhi said that in replying to the decision, the commission realized that the case was over a year old and was inadvertently left out of the cause list.

"I realized that if a mistake had been made in one case, it could have been made in some others as well. A careful search of 2010 cases revealed another 110 cases which had been forgotten and missed completely," Gandhi said. In fact, one of the cases related to the widow of a government employee and her struggle to get pension that only ended 17 years later.

The 'List of pending cases' has been displayed on the CIC website and will be updated every month. Gandhi said, "CIC is only six years old and this will be an opportunity for us to correct mistakes and also reassure citizens that there is fairness in taking up their cases. In most commissions and judicial bodies, citizens suspect arbitrariness and corruption in the listing of cases. The simple act of listing all pending cases publicly will go a long way in restoring citizens' confidence in these institutions, and also act as self- regulating check."

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a plea under the transparency law for disclosure of selection norms and appointment process in the country's internal intelligence agency, Intelligence Bureau (IB). A bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi rejected the plea by an unsuccessful IB job aspirant, dismissing his accusation that IB selection process was plagued by corruption.

"It appears that the selection process has been conducted in a transparent manner, and there is nothing to indicate any corruption in the said process," Justice Sanghi said. The high court's order came on an appeal by IB job aspirant Ravinder Kumar Kataria, challenging the Central Information Commission's June 2011 order, dismissing his plea earlier for disclosure of selection process and norms in IB. Kataria had alleged he could not be selected for the post of Junior Intelligence Officer (JIO) in IB in 2009 due to corruption.

The court accepted the Union Home Ministry's argument that Kataria is a Scheduled Caste (SC) candidate and there were 17 posts reserved for SC category. All posts have been filled and the petitioner had scored lesser marks than the candidate last recruited in SC category, while the cut-off marks for the general category were substantially higher, the ministry told the court, seeking dismissal of Kataria's plea.

Kataria had approached the CIC after the Public Information Officer (PIO) had rejected his query saying Section 24 of the RTI Act exempts the intelligence and security agencies from the Right to Information Act's purview. The CIC had rejected Kataria argument that the information sought by him did not pertain to IB's functioning and merely pertained to the recruitment process for public employment by the agency and so the said information should be given to him.