- Gr B Promotions List dtd 17/11/2011
- IPS movements
- Beware of Section 43 of The Information Technology Act - 2000
- CENTRAL GOVT APPROVED CHANGES IN PFRDA BILL
|
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 04:41 AM PST
Dte issued the following Gr B Promotional orders today.
Dte Memo No : 9-1 / 2011-SPG Dt. 17.11.11.
Congrats to all the Officers.
Courtesy : http://tnipasp.blogspot.com
For Latest Updates Always Visit http://sapost.blogspot.com/
  | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 04:43 AM PST
Shri.Santosh Gauriar, 1978, Member (O), Postal Dte will look after the Additional charge of Member (Tech) with immediate effect & until further orders in addition to his own duties without any extra remuneration.
Dte Memo No : 1-10 / 2009-SPG Dt. 17.11.11. Source : Sahuliyat
For Latest Updates Always Visit http://sapost.blogspot.com/
  | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted: 17 Nov 2011 04:43 AM PST
What’s section 43 of The Information Technology Act,2000?
If any person without permission of the owner or any other person who is in charge of a computer, computer system or computer network,- accesses or secures access to such computer, computer system or computer networkdownloads, copies or extracts any data, computer data base information from such computer, computer system or computer network including information or data held or stored in any removable storage medium.
Introduces or causes to be introduced any computer contaminant or computer virus into any computer, computer system or computer network;
damages or causes to be damaged and computer, computer system or computer network, data, computer database or any other programmes residing in such computer, computer system or computer network;
disrupts or causes disruption of any computer, computer system or computer network;
denies or causes the denial of access to any person authorised to access any computer, computer system or computer network by any means;
provides any assistance to any person to facilitate access to a computer, computer system or computer network in contravention of the provisions of this Act, rules or regulations made thereunder;
charges the services availed of by a person to the account of another person by tampering with or manipulating any computer, computer system or compute network he shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation not exceeding one crore rupees to the person so affected.
Explanation.-For the purposes of this section.- (i) “computer contaminant” means any set of computer instructions that are designed –
(a) to modify, destroy, record, transmit date or programme residing within a computer, computer system or computer network; or
(b) by any means to usurp the normal operation of the computer, compute system, or computer network;
(ii) “computer database” means a representation of information,
knowledge, facts, concepts or instructions in text, image, audio, video that are being prepared or have been prepare in a formalised manner or have been produced by a computer, computer system or computer network and are intended for use in a computer, computer system or computer network;
(iii) “computer virus” means any computer instruction, information, data or programme that destroys, damages, degrades adversely affects the performance of a computer resources or attaches itself to another itself to another computer resources and operates when a programme, date or instruction is executed or some other even takes place in that computer resource;
(iv) “damage” means to destroy, alter, delete, add, modify or re-arrange any computer resource by any means.
A perfect example is cited below to support my words-
A lady has violated Section 43 of The Information Technology Act,2000 and made unauthorized access to Gmail accounts of her husband and her father-in law, and unauthorisedly downloaded/forwarded/printed their emails and chat sessions with others, thus committing Identity. Theft by using the password belonging to others dishonestly, and violating the privacy of not only the Complainants, but also of others with whom these chat sessions were conducted. Given the fact that she gave the evidence only to Police and the Court, in the Dowry case lodged by her against her husband and in-laws, and did not make It widely public. Hence the Court ordered that she pay a token fine of Rupees One Hundred to the State Treasury.
Source : http://tkbsen.com
For Latest Updates Always Visit http://sapost.blogspot.com/
  | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted: 16 Nov 2011 10:26 PM PST
Cabinet nod for 26% FDI in pension sector
The Cabinet on Wednesday approved changes in the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) Bill, which will also pave the way for 26% foreign investment in pension fund management companies, officials said. The PFRDA bill, which has been pending for long, is now expected to be taken up for approval in the Winter Session of Parliament starting on November 22. Officials said the Cabinet decided there would be no guarantee of assured returns on pension fund schemes. Earlier, the government had released contours of the bill but had side-stepped the issue of foreign investment limit in the sector to avoid any controversy. Even now, the FDI limit will not form part of the bill but will be included in the revised regulations. Several policymakers and experts had backed the idea of allowing 26% FDI in pension fund management companies, similar to the foreign investment norms in the insurance sector. "The government is of the view that FDI cap in the pension (sector) should be at 26%, at par with the insurance sector. However, it would like to retain the flexibility of changing the cap of FDI as and when required and that is why it has not been kept as part of the bill," an official said. The legislation, which was introduced in the Lok Sabha on March 24, was sent to the Standing Committee. It was examined by a panel headed by former finance minister Yashwant Sinha. The panel had asked the government to set the FDI cap in the legislation and had suggested providing minimum returns to pension fund subscribers. Officials said the government has also rejected the suggestion for providing greater flexibility to subscribers to withdraw funds from their accounts. "The flexibility of withdrawals from funds under the pension scheme, however, would be tightened. It would be allowed only in case of genuine needs... It would be considered when the need is critical. It will not be allowed for frivolous reasons," the official said. The government upheld the panel's suggestion for greater participation of employees and stakeholders in the Pension Advisory Committee. The PFRDA Bill, if approved, will also pave the way for conferring statutory backing to the authority for promotional, developmental and regulatory functions in the pension fund sector. The UPA government has lined up several key legislations for the Winter Session and has reached out to the Opposition parties for their support in getting them approved. The Manmohan Singh-led government has been on the back foot after a string of scandals emerged since last year. The government expects to get the key bills approved, which would help dispel doubts about its ability to move ahead with reforms. The UPA government has also been trying to raise FDI limit in the insurance sector to 49% from the existing 26% but has met with resistance from Opposition parties. The move has been pending in Parliament for several years now. The National Pension Scheme, launched in January 2004, has nearly 24 lakh subscribers, mostly those employed by the federal government. Employees Provident Fund Organisation subscribers get 9.5% return on their savings.  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from SA POST To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment