Re: [rti4empowerment] Re: [HumJanenge] Centre must add purpose clause to RTI Act

Dear Friends incl Sunil Ahya and MKG

I never shy away from backing up statements I make.

On the (few) occasions I am wrong, I am the first to apologize.
As other people also are interested, and since I made this
statement on HJ-GG, I shall confine myself to posting there
in the larger public interest.

If Sunil is not a member (HJ-GG rolls are being continuously
vetted for bouncing / spammy email IDs) we can always
reinstate him or make him a member.

I am not a member at rti4emp@YG. Mr Dhirendra Krishna
and I have agreed that we should maintain a proper distance
as befits group moderators. So I cannot reply to Sunil there.

OTH, if Sunil has some objection to posting on HJ-GG, then
I am afraid this discussion cannot go forward.

Sarbajit
.

On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Sunil Ahya <sunilahya@gmail.com> wrote:

 

Dear Guptaji,

The point is ONUS.

I am putting the onus on Sarbajit to elicit the specific provisions of the Constitution of India which contravenes (overrides) the provision of section 6(2) of the RTI Act.

Best Regards,

Sunil.

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 4:50 AM, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

I also request Sarabjit ji to inform about these provision or else stop spreading misinformation on this blog.    On the contrary, According to Constitution as pronounced by the Supreme Court, Right to Information is Fundamental Right.  Tomorrow, some body will advise that there should not be any suo-motu disclosure u.s. 4 of the RTI Act as these are un-constitutional,  Why there should be any need to give reason in an open government?.  Act has enought safe guards under section 8, 9 24 (exempted organisation).    I have read the Constituion fair enough, not only India Constituion but all the leading Constiutution like USA, UK and other as an student of Pol. Sciene. In our Constitution, there is no such thing but on the reverse, many articles in Fundamental Rights supoort providing information and not unnecessary secret/ confidential working . Britisher brought Official Secret Act to deprive us from participating in the governance for their own interest but RTI Act override that Act and all other such Acts etc. too.    --- On Mon, 21/2/11, Sunil Ahya <sunilahya@gmail.com> wrote: From: Sunil Ahya <sunilahya@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Centre must add purpose clause to RTI Act To: Date: Monday, 21 February, 2011, 9:41 PM Dear Sarbajit, As mentioned in your post (quoted below) about there being specific existing provisions in the Constitution which overrides section 6(2) of the RTI Act, can you please specify those relevant provisions (Articles) of the Constitution, to substantiate your claim? Quote from your post: In any case there are specific Constitutional provisions requiring reasons for seeking info to be mandated and which over-ride 6(2) of the RTI Act. FYI,, 6(2) is actually unconstitutional and it is better that the Act be amended otherwise it would be struck down by some court. Unquote Best Regards, Sunil.

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___