Re: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel

Dear Dr Niraj Kumar,
After the High Court Judgment, what steps we need to take,
please advise.
Regards
Dr JN Sharma

On 5/13/11, Dr. Jagnarain Sharma <dr.jagnarainsharma@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Dr Niraj Kumar
> Dr JN Sharma
>
> On 5/11/11, NIRAJ <nirajklko@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> You can find the whole text of the refered judgement in the Journal
>> "INFORMATION DECISIONS" Pulished by Shreeram Law House, Chandigarh or in
>> the
>> book "TREATISE ON RTI ACT, 2005" Published by Bharat Law House, New
>> Delhi,
>> THIRD Edition, written by me. Not only this Judgement but many other
>> Judgements, Whole Text with Citation you will find in this book on a C.D.
>>
>>
>> Dr. NIRAJ KUMAR
>> C-4/8, RIVER BANK COLONY
>> LUCKNOW - 226018
>> INDIA
>> Mob.: +91+9415787095
>> Dopt Certified "A" Grade
>>
>> From: SHASHI KUMAR.A.R. <rudreshtechnology@gmail.com>
>> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>> Sent: Tuesday, 10 May 2011 7:47 PM
>> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel
>>
>> In karnataka it is the general practice that if a Public information
>> officer
>> produces a copy of postal acknowledgment before the information
>> commission
>> saying that information sought by the rti applicant is provided then the
>> commission is not verifying whether the information sought by the rti
>> applicants is correctly and complete information is provided , in most of
>> the cases the commission is not alliowing to submit before the commission
>> regarding incomplete and irrelevant information , false information
>> provided
>> ARS KUMAR , Swamy Vivekananda RTI Jana Jagruthi Mission , Karntaka
>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:20 PM, R. Dua <r.dua1234@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is to appreciate the above discussion and details given by the
>> members.
>> These interactions make us aware of laws.
>>>On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Vikram Simha
>>> <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in>
>>> wrote:
>>>Sir ,
>>>>Can ihave the Citation So that i can read the AHC Order
>>>>N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road ,
>>>> Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.--- On Mon, 9/5/11, C K Jam
>>>> <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>From: C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com>
>>>>>Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel
>>>>>To: "humjanenge@googlegroups.com" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
>>>>>Date: Monday, 9 May, 2011, 7:35 AM
>>>>>Vikram,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>There is another judgment of the Allahabad High Court (related to
>>>>> beneficiaries of CMs discretionary fund) in which it "respectfully"
>>>>> disagreed with this part of the judgment of the Gujarat High Court
>>>>> which
>>>>> you referred to.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>In common language, the Allahabad HC ripped apart this part of the
>>>>> Gujarat HC order.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The whole purpose of the RTI Act will be lost if a Commission does not
>>>>> decide (and direct) on whether information has to be disclosed or not
>>>>> disclosed, while dealing with Complaints under Sec 18.
>>>>>RTIwanted
>>>>>From: Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in>
>>>>>To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>>>>>Sent: Saturday, May 7, 2011 11:56 PM
>>>>>Subject: RE: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel
>>>>>With All dissussions From All eminent and learned freinds , I Have Read
>>>>> And with Me an Gujarath High Court order which Reads As " Power under
>>>>> Sec 18 is Limited to Hold enquiry into Complaint and If Necessary to
>>>>> Impose Penalty -- Information Commission has no Jursidiction to Pass
>>>>> order directing authority to part with information"
>