The SIC cannot order the SPIO to "create" information. He can only direct the SPIO to provide the information as it exists. So, sorry, the SPIO is denied the blessing of Lord Hanuman (you Ketan Modi), as he does not have to write "Jai Ram Shri Ram Jai Jai Ram a hundred times on a blank piece of paper,". and give it you.
However, noting can stop you from stretching your long long long tail and set it afire by approaching the High Court. But then that would cost you some money.
Anyway, not that SIC Vilas Patil has retired, maybe you could go for a review decision or perhaps, file a fresh RTI Application, seeking the very information you had asked earlier.
Manoj
From: Ketan Modi <modiketan@rediffmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2011 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: Re: [HumJanenge] START OF MANDATORY PERIOD FOR RTI APPLN OR FIRST APPEAL
Friends,
I want to share my experience with the Maharashtra IC Vilas Patil who
had passed a verbal order directing PIO and ACP, South Region Police,
Mumbai to furnish me the information query wise but in the written
order the application was out rightly rejected. The PIO's contention
was that information was furnished as available on record. My
contention was that if the PIO has created false record whose
responsibility it is to oversee and rectify? Patil did not respond to
my question and maintained that the information was furnished whether
true or false is immaterial. This was in gross violation of the
stipulation of the RTI Act itself. ICs are expected to dispense justice
as provided for under RTI. When I told Patil that if this was his stand
why doesn't he ask the PIOs to write Jai Ram Shri Ram Jai Jai Ram a
hundred times on a blank piece of paper, insert the same in the file
and furnish it to the applicant claiming that information had been
furnished. To which Patil was looking for way out but failed miserably
in dispensing justice. He also did not direct the PIO to furnish his
reason.Happy information seeking
Regards
Ketan Modi
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 09:48:47 +0530 wrote
>You will need to re-read the RTI Act Mr Gupta. The CPIO has to provide
the information within 30 days. A reply cannot constitue as
information. The FAA has to dispose off the appeal within 30 days with
a speaking order. The 30 days in each starts from the date of the
receipt at either office.
As for the movement of application or appeal with the office of the
public authority,Section 5(4) will apply. There is no provision for any
addition of number of days for each movement of the application /
appeal here. The 30 days from the date of the receipt stands good.
Manoj
I want to share my experience with the Maharashtra IC Vilas Patil who
had passed a verbal order directing PIO and ACP, South Region Police,
Mumbai to furnish me the information query wise but in the written
order the application was out rightly rejected. The PIO's contention
was that information was furnished as available on record. My
contention was that if the PIO has created false record whose
responsibility it is to oversee and rectify? Patil did not respond to
my question and maintained that the information was furnished whether
true or false is immaterial. This was in gross violation of the
stipulation of the RTI Act itself. ICs are expected to dispense justice
as provided for under RTI. When I told Patil that if this was his stand
why doesn't he ask the PIOs to write Jai Ram Shri Ram Jai Jai Ram a
hundred times on a blank piece of paper, insert the same in the file
and furnish it to the applicant claiming that information had been
furnished. To which Patil was looking for way out but failed miserably
in dispensing justice. He also did not direct the PIO to furnish his
reason.Happy information seeking
Regards
Ketan Modi
On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 09:48:47 +0530 wrote
>You will need to re-read the RTI Act Mr Gupta. The CPIO has to provide
the information within 30 days. A reply cannot constitue as
information. The FAA has to dispose off the appeal within 30 days with
a speaking order. The 30 days in each starts from the date of the
receipt at either office.
As for the movement of application or appeal with the office of the
public authority,Section 5(4) will apply. There is no provision for any
addition of number of days for each movement of the application /
appeal here. The 30 days from the date of the receipt stands good.
Manoj
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.