Re: [HumJanenge] Open Letter to Mr Venkatesh Nayak/ Co-Convenor NCPRI

Dear Shashi Kumar

The reasons DoPT has invited NGOs are:-

a) RTI is not a priority for the DoPT. In fact it is a great nuisance
for them, which is why they have put their most useless and
incompetent officers (except the PIO/RTI) in the RTI section.

b) Due to constant interference of completely corrupt foreign financed
lobbyists in NAC, the RTI Act has to be blurred to ensure that NAC's
"power without accountability" survives and is placed out of bounds
for troublesome citizens like me who ask awkward section 4 queries
about NAC. Therefore Ms Aruna Roy has ensured that the Task Force is
packed with her pliable stooges/proxies like Mr Nikhil Dey and Mr
Venkatesh Nayak. In the process if RTI Act gets diluted for citizens
none of them care a F***

c) Since the NAC/NCPRI gang are completely mercenary (and otherwise
useless people who can only "sing for their supper") they have ensured
that the Government will handsomely pay these 5 NGO stooges (who all
give heavy kickbacks at DoPT to get their payments released).

d) The good news is that the moment NCPRI / CHRI / JOSH / SNS etc take
govt funding, we can demand that they must be deemed to be public
authorities in so far as these funds is concerned.

Sarbajit

On 6/9/11, SHASHI KUMAR.A.R. <rudreshtechnology@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mr. Sarbajit roy , The DOPT is not called voulnteer services from rti
> activists , social activists , The NGO''s are trying to make money , What is
> the practical experience of the NGO'S , How many RTI Applicaitons filed by
> them , whether they know the practical dificulties of information seekers ,
> Most of the NGOS included in the list they are having theortical knowledge
> only , How they can assist
> the implementation of section 4 in the central departments
>
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:20 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Venkatesh
>>
>> (The subject line is to get your attention).
>>
>> I disagree with you that Art 350 empowers citizens to submit grievance
>> representations to the government.
>>
>> As per me, Art 350 only enables citizens to use any language of the
>> Union / State to submit his grievance representation.
>>
>> NB: (for group members) The context was my grievance that the DoPT
>> intends to handsomely pay (without inviting tenders) dubious NGOs like
>> NCPRI / CHRI for assisting in the formulation of a Central section 4
>> RTI implementation policy when so many expert citizens will volunteer
>> to do the same work for free.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>