Re: [HumJanenge] Fwd: CIC

Sir,

I would request all to resist making harsh comments. RTI is blossoming in India and we need to protect it from ill effects of bureaucracy, therefore any expression about malfunctioning needs to be read and understood, so that right path comes into view. I as an RTI Activist in Daman since 2006 have learnt many a things through such follies. Well the decision to act is subjective, but let the objective be not lost. Thank you.

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 7:39 PM, PMK1504 <humjanenge.owner@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Shri Bimal  Khemani

Please (re)read the following message thread, especially my last post.
http://groups.google.com/group/HumJanenge/browse_thread/thread/ab72a1d13cc07778

In future,

a) Please don't post details of individual cases.
b) "Self publicity or publicity for NGOs (and their programs) is
strictly prohibited."

NB:This group is not the "other" HumJanenge where any rubbish can be dumped.
This is your final warning

PMK

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 7:02 PM, bimal khemani
<bimal.khemani@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>
>

> Friends
> I am attaching here with 6 documenmts
> Smt. Premlata Sharma applied to CPIO, BSNL , Aligarh
> for inspection of a particular file   ( 01.jpg  )
> The CPIO did not responded while after First appeal the FAA
> has sent his reply with a copy of affidavit ( 02.jpg  & 03.jpg )
> Smt. Premalata filed her 2nd appeal before CIC  ( 04.jpg )
> The funny order of CIC ( 05.jpg )
>
> BSNL , Aligarh is headed by a General Manager with various brances like Commercial, Accounts, Engineering etc. The applicant wanted inspection of a file which is available with the commercial section, . The FAA who is DGM in adminstrative department, without going into the details sent an affidavit signed by his Commercial officer  stating that the file is not available in his branch , the FAA in place of searching file in other departments under his control, choose to take this shortest route.
> The matter was referred to CIC with a prayer that the authority be directed to give an affidavit recording the reason for the lost of file.
> The case was fixed for hearing on 12-10-2010, The appealant sent an E.mail as well as FAX to the Asstt. Registrar of CIC on 11-10-2010, which was not put up in the record and in absence of the appellant the appeal was heard.
> The learned CIC in his decision did not considered the prayer of the appellant and given the decision within the framework of RTI gave his verdict like a High Court judge.
> I am failed to understand, under RTI how CIC can ask the appelant to approach the public authority for refund of her  money with interest.
>
>
> BIMAL KUMAR KHEMANI,
> TRAP group of RTI activists
>  ALIGARH (U.P.)
>  Mob:09359724625
> ******************************************
> Officially Certified A Grade by DoPT
> *****************************************

--
Keep emailing me bjkoppar@gmail.com