Hum Janenge: 5/8/11

Saturday, May 14, 2011

RE: [HumJanenge] Need help/suggestions please

Dear sir
As mentioned by you, the letter recd by you from AICTE /cc letter from RTI in Nov 2010 should clarify your position. In case you are not satisfied then, first ppeal will elaborate on it. Please note, according to new regulation, you can ask for only one question at a time in RTI and not 17 questions as requested by you.
DR N C Jain
15-5-11

Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 08:44:56 +0200
Subject: [HumJanenge] Need help/suggestions please
From: kpalanikannan@gmail.com
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com

Hi Everyone,

I am MS(By Research) graduate from anna university after my B.Tech studies. I did MS(By Research) in the faculty of technology. Eventhought my MS(By Research) degree is in the faculty of Technology (Eligible to teach in undergraduate Technology courses Eg. B.Tech) in affiliated engineering colleges in tamilnadu and accrediated by AICTE. Those colleges had rejected my qualification because, "MS(By Research)" as a degree keyword is not included in AICTE eligibility regulations. But, my bachelors and masters degree are in the faculty of technology. Colleges are blindly considering the degree name (MS By Research).

I applied to RTI to get information about eligibility and authorized persons who can authorize the course from AICTE. I asked around 10-14 questions in my request which respects to the authorized person/AICTE responsbility in this issue/University responsbility in this issue etc.

I applied to RTI May 2010. I moved to germany in August 2010 ni the connection to my job. I got two CC letters from RTI in November 2010 about the "requestion letter towards AICTE and Technical education" in my permanent address in tamilnadu. Still date, I didn't get positive response from RTI. As, I am out of country now, I am unable to contact them. Kindly help/tell/suggest me to move this issue in positive direction to get the fruitful information through RTI.

--

With Regards,

Palani Kannan. K,
Doctoral Researcher,
Microbiology Department,
German Collection Center for Microorganisms and Cell Cultures,
Helmholtz-HZI Infectious diseases Research Campus,
38124, Braunschweig,
Germany.

[HumJanenge] protection to corrupt the Register of company acting against RTI act.

it is deliberate wrong orders of CIC to protect corruption.

This type of orders means , other law will override in the request of RTI under RTI Act, 2005. And they provide new type of exemption.

rakesh gupta

From: M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, 14 May, 2011 10:43:45 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

Does it mean that RTI Act is not applicable to RoC though it is not exempt u.s.24 of the Act. Section 22 of the Act says that RTI Act it will have overriding effect. Such decisions should be read carefully and if need be, shld be challenged in the Court of Law.

--- On Sat, 14/5/11, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 14 May, 2011, 10:04 AM

similar is my case where two applications rejected and even the CIC given the decision in same line citing a case.
The order copy of CIC in Appeal No 21/IC(A)/2006 dated 29^th March 2006 in the matter of Arun Verma Vs Department of Company Affairs, Govt. of India that the CPIO has sent reads as follows "There is already provison for seeking information under the companies act. The appellant may accordingly approach the registrar of the companies, as advised by the appellate authority, to obtain the relevant information. There is no question of denial of information to him

regards

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com> wrote:

DEAR ALL,

THIS IS MOST CORRUPTED ORGANIZATION IN INDIA UNDER THE GUISE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS. IF YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THEM NOTHING WILL HAPPEN FOR YEARS ...

THERE IS ONE CASE WHERE ALL OUT RIGHT DISTORTATION OF ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES, AUDITING PRINCIPLES, PROVISIONS OF LAW AND O N THEIR RECORD THIS FACT IS AVAILABLE , NOT DOING ANY THING FOR LAST 17 YEARS! MY RTI APPLICATION IS ALSO REJECTED SEVERAL TIMES APPEAL ALSO???

THEY TAKE SHELTER OF SOME IRRELEVANT CASES ???

C A Shah D J
USA

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2011 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

You may please read CIC decision in "CIC/AT/A/2007/00112" "K.Lall versus RoC/MCA"
Sarbajit

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:33 PM, gopala krishnan <gopalakrishnanvelu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

sir,
i requested copies of balance sheet and IT returns of D3D tech,
chennai to Register of companies, chennai under rti act 2005. Public
information officer not supplied copy and asked me see in his
website (MCA21). i searched in website but asking pay rs.50/- to view
the document. I made appeal to first appellate authority to furnish
the copy in the form i sought and supply the copies free of cost as
per sec 7(6) of the RTI act. The appeallate authority informed me, for
supplying the copies i have to pay Rs.25/- per page. as per RTI act
for supplying the copies A4 rs2 per page. the Register of company
acting against RTI act.

--
Sankar Prasad Pani
A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
India
PIN-751007
Cell- 9437279278
http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

Only that information should be demanded which is not available online.

On 5/14/11, Trivendra <trivendra54@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Sir,
>
> The MCA has got most simplified process for disclosure of information. For
> which one never need to use RTI. In most cases the dissemination of info on
> companies is much more economical than RTI rout after being 100% paperless
> filing, apart from compromising on your comfort.
>
> It is always advisable to use the ministry's own online system for seeking
> information belonging to a year after 2007. In case you need any information
> which is not available online, RTI should be used in that case only.
>
> I fail to understand why people become ready to pay Rs 2 or 25 for a single
> page information through RTI rout whereas entire bundle of information is
> otherwise available for Rs 50/- only.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Trivendra
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com>
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, 14 May 2011 10:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.
>
>
> similar is my case where two applications rejected and even the CIC given
> the decision in same line citing a case.
> The order copy of CIC in Appeal No 21/IC(A)/2006 dated
> 29th March 2006 in the matter of Arun Verma Vs Department of Company
> Affairs, Govt. of India that the CPIO
> has sent reads as follows "There is already provison for seeking information
> under the companies act. The appellant may accordingly approach the
> registrar
> of the companies, as advised by the appellate authority, to obtain the
> relevant
> information. There is no question of denial of information to him
>
> regards
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> DEAR ALL,
>> THIS IS MOST CORRUPTED ORGANIZATION IN INDIA UNDER THE
>> GUISE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS. IF YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THEM
>> NOTHING WILL HAPPEN FOR YEARS ...
>>THERE IS ONE CASE WHERE ALL OUT RIGHT DISTORTATION OF ACCOUNTING
>> PRINCIPLES, AUDITING PRINCIPLES, PROVISIONS OF LAW AND O N THEIR RECORD
>> THIS FACT IS AVAILABLE , NOT DOING ANY THING FOR LAST 17 YEARS! MY RTI
>> APPLICATION IS ALSO REJECTED SEVERAL TIMES APPEAL ALSO???
>>THEY TAKE SHELTER OF SOME IRRELEVANT CASES ???
>>
>>C A Shah D J
>>USA
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>>From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
>>To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>>Sent: Friday, 13 May 2011 2:19 AM
>>Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.
>>
>>
>>
>>You may please read CIC decision in "CIC/AT/A/2007/00112" "K.Lall versus
>> RoC/MCA"
>>Sarbajit
>>
>>
>>On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:33 PM, gopala krishnan
>> <gopalakrishnanvelu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>sir,
>>>>i requested copies of balance sheet and IT returns of D3D tech,
>>>>chennai to Register of companies, chennai under rti act 2005. Public
>>>>information officer not supplied copy and asked me see in his
>>>>website (MCA21). i searched in website but asking pay rs.50/- to view
>>>>the document. I made appeal to first appellate authority to furnish
>>>>the copy in the form i sought and supply the copies free of cost as
>>>>per sec 7(6) of the RTI act. The appeallate authority informed me, for
>>>>supplying the copies i have to pay Rs.25/- per page. as per RTI act
>>>>for supplying the copies A4 rs2 per page. the Register of company
>>>>acting against RTI act.
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Sankar Prasad Pani
> A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> India
> PIN-751007
> Cell- 9437279278
> http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

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

Mr Vikram Simha,

The full judgment of the Allahabad HC, referred to in the trailing posts is attached to this post.

(NOTE to Moderator: In case attachments are not allowed, please upload in files segment of the group)

RTIwanted

From: C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com>
To: "humjanenge@googlegroups.com" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Cabinet note not secret: Info panel

A summary is given here: http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/7344-allahabad-high-court-order-clarifying-sec-18-a.html

RTIwanted

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"

Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

Sir,

The MCA has got most simplified process for disclosure of information. For which one never need to use RTI. In most cases the dissemination of info on companies is much more economical than RTI rout after being 100% paperless filing, apart from compromising on your comfort.

It is always advisable to use the ministry's own online system for seeking information belonging to a year after 2007. In case you need any information which is not available online, RTI should be used in that case only.

I fail to understand why people become ready to pay Rs 2 or 25 for a single page information through RTI rout whereas entire bundle of information is otherwise available for Rs 50/- only.

Regards

Trivendra

From: Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 14 May 2011 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

similar is my case where two applications rejected and even the CIC given the decision in same line citing a case.
The order copy of CIC in Appeal No 21/IC(A)/2006 dated 29^th March 2006 in the matter of Arun Verma Vs Department of Company Affairs, Govt. of India that the CPIO has sent reads as follows "There is already provison for seeking information under the companies act. The appellant may accordingly approach the registrar of the companies, as advised by the appellate authority, to obtain the relevant information. There is no question of denial of information to him

regards

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com> wrote:

DEAR ALL,
THIS IS MOST CORRUPTED ORGANIZATION IN INDIA UNDER THE GUISE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS. IF YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THEM NOTHING WILL HAPPEN FOR YEARS ...

THERE IS ONE CASE WHERE ALL OUT RIGHT DISTORTATION OF ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES, AUDITING PRINCIPLES, PROVISIONS OF LAW AND O N THEIR RECORD THIS FACT IS AVAILABLE , NOT DOING ANY THING FOR LAST 17 YEARS! MY RTI APPLICATION IS ALSO REJECTED SEVERAL TIMES APPEAL ALSO???

THEY TAKE SHELTER OF SOME IRRELEVANT CASES ???
C A Shah D J
USA

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2011 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

You may please read CIC decision in "CIC/AT/A/2007/00112" "K.Lall versus RoC/MCA"
Sarbajit

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:33 PM, gopala krishnan <gopalakrishnanvelu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

sir,
i requested copies of balance sheet and IT returns of D3D tech,
chennai to Register of companies, chennai under rti act 2005. Public
information officer not supplied copy and asked me see in his
website (MCA21). i searched in website but asking pay rs.50/- to view
the document. I made appeal to first appellate authority to furnish
the copy in the form i sought and supply the copies free of cost as
per sec 7(6) of the RTI act. The appeallate authority informed me, for
supplying the copies i have to pay Rs.25/- per page. as per RTI act
for supplying the copies A4 rs2 per page. the Register of company
acting against RTI act.

--
Sankar Prasad Pani
A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
India
PIN-751007
Cell- 9437279278
http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

Friday, May 13, 2011

[HumJanenge] Need help/suggestions please

Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

From: Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 14 May, 2011, 10:04 AM

similar is my case where two applications rejected and even the CIC given the decision in same line citing a case.
The order copy of CIC in Appeal No 21/IC(A)/2006 dated 29^th March 2006 in the matter of Arun Verma Vs Department of Company Affairs, Govt. of India that the CPIO has sent reads as follows "There is already provison for seeking information under the companies act. The appellant may accordingly approach the registrar of the companies, as advised by the appellate authority, to obtain the relevant information. There is no question of denial of information to him

regards

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com> wrote:

DEAR ALL,

THIS IS MOST CORRUPTED ORGANIZATION IN INDIA UNDER THE GUISE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS. IF YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THEM NOTHING WILL HAPPEN FOR YEARS ...

THERE IS ONE CASE WHERE ALL OUT RIGHT DISTORTATION OF ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES, AUDITING PRINCIPLES, PROVISIONS OF LAW AND O N THEIR RECORD THIS FACT IS AVAILABLE , NOT DOING ANY THING FOR LAST 17 YEARS! MY RTI APPLICATION IS ALSO REJECTED SEVERAL TIMES APPEAL ALSO???

THEY TAKE SHELTER OF SOME IRRELEVANT CASES ???

C A Shah D J
USA

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2011 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

You may please read CIC decision in "CIC/AT/A/2007/00112" "K.Lall versus RoC/MCA"
Sarbajit

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:33 PM, gopala krishnan <gopalakrishnanvelu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

sir,
i requested copies of balance sheet and IT returns of D3D tech,
chennai to Register of companies, chennai under rti act 2005. Public
information officer not supplied copy and asked me see in his
website (MCA21). i searched in website but asking pay rs.50/- to view
the document. I made appeal to first appellate authority to furnish
the copy in the form i sought and supply the copies free of cost as
per sec 7(6) of the RTI act. The appeallate authority informed me, for
supplying the copies i have to pay Rs.25/- per page. as per RTI act
for supplying the copies A4 rs2 per page. the Register of company
acting against RTI act.

--
Sankar Prasad Pani
A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
India
PIN-751007
Cell- 9437279278
http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com> wrote:

DEAR ALL,
THIS IS MOST CORRUPTED ORGANIZATION IN INDIA UNDER THE GUISE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS. IF YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THEM NOTHING WILL HAPPEN FOR YEARS ...

THERE IS ONE CASE WHERE ALL OUT RIGHT DISTORTATION OF ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES, AUDITING PRINCIPLES, PROVISIONS OF LAW AND O N THEIR RECORD THIS FACT IS AVAILABLE , NOT DOING ANY THING FOR LAST 17 YEARS! MY RTI APPLICATION IS ALSO REJECTED SEVERAL TIMES APPEAL ALSO???

THEY TAKE SHELTER OF SOME IRRELEVANT CASES ???
C A Shah D J
USA

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2011 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

You may please read CIC decision in "CIC/AT/A/2007/00112" "K.Lall versus RoC/MCA"
Sarbajit

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:33 PM, gopala krishnan <gopalakrishnanvelu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

sir,
i requested copies of balance sheet and IT returns of D3D tech,
chennai to Register of companies, chennai under rti act 2005. Public
information officer not supplied copy and asked me see in his
website (MCA21). i searched in website but asking pay rs.50/- to view
the document. I made appeal to first appellate authority to furnish
the copy in the form i sought and supply the copies free of cost as
per sec 7(6) of the RTI act. The appeallate authority informed me, for
supplying the copies i have to pay Rs.25/- per page. as per RTI act
for supplying the copies A4 rs2 per page. the Register of company
acting against RTI act.

--
Sankar Prasad Pani
A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
India
PIN-751007
Cell- 9437279278
http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

[HumJanenge] HumJanenge Group's Regulations

GROUP REGULATIONS
Please read the following group regulations carefully, these regulations are enforced strictly and without discrimination

1) MESSAGE POSTS

a) Message posts to be directly relevant to RTI / Right to Information. The focus is on RTI in general and not on specific instances affecting an individual member. The prime focus is on discussion of gray areas of the RTI Act 2005.
b) No abusive language to be used in message posts
c) No "Cross-Posting" (multiple copies of the same message from / to other egroups)
d) All posts in English language only (or with accurate translation)
e) No communal, sexist, racial, casteist etc message posts
f) Fostering brotherly feeling among RTI activists all over India and organizing concerted action through message posts.
g) Posting of "news" reports on RTI by simply copy-pasting is banned. This is also a copyright violation issue which we (and googlegroups) take seriously. If a news report is important, post your views / concerns with the LINK to the article.
h) Posts to be kept short and focussed. Long scholarly arguments are strongly discouraged.
i) Posts in reply to be trimmed (by deleting the previous post so that only relevant portions which are at issue to be retained).
j) Self publicity or publicity for NGOs (and their programs) is strictly prohibited.
k) Address message posts to the group (and not to individual members)
l) SPAM (spammers, and spam harvesters) is not tolerated.

2) FREQUENCY OF POSTING

a) This group shall strive to limit itself to 300 messages per month. The list owner is empowered to take all steps necessary to achieve this.
b) Of these 150 message are reserved to the list owner and about 10 "guru" members who shall be invited to assist the list owner. The list of "guru" members shall be widely publicised and updated from time to time
c) Other members are allowed to post upto 3 messages per day (24 hours approx) and 10 messages per month.
d) Members are requested to limit / control the frequency of their posts to this list and avoid personality based squabbles on this group.
e) Please try to combine reply posts, and avoid the temptation of replying to posts immediately.

PMK
List Owner

[HumJanenge] Ringa Ringa Roses

The Indi Patriot:

Ringa Ringa Roses

The Economic Times today had an article a couple of days ago about how to legitimately bring your black money back to India legally by paying only 15% tax.

In light of my recent articles with regard to Hassan Ali and Tax havens , one of my readers sent it to me and I thought it is worth reproducing.

How do you bring money back legally that too with only 15% tax whereas we Indians pay 33%+ ? Well first of all you cant bring it back straight, if you did questions may be asked as to how and why it was lying in a Swiss or a Grand Cayman Bank in the first place. So a bit of lateral thinking is required.

The first step is to setup a company in a Tax haven like lets say Dubai or Hong Kong where tax is zero OFFICALLY as a subsidiary of the Indian company owned by you. Naturally this company will have an operational bank account in that country.

Now a wire transfer is done from the Swiss or the Grand Cayman Account to the bank account in Dubai / HK. This is then shown as consultancy fees for services to European or Eastern Bloc clients. Being Zero Tax regimes, no strict audits etc are done of any funds flowing in and out.

The Dubai / HK company then sends a part of the money to India as a dividend to its head office. This dividend is taxed at only 15%. The rest is useable OFFICAL white money.

The cherry on the cake, if you want to keep money abroad "for emergencies" all you need to do is send only a part of the money back to India and open a FRESH account in Switzerland / Grand Caymans for the Dubai / HK Company OFFICALLY, since they are allowed to.

Then the money left over after transfer to India can be transferred from Dubai / HK to the new account and the old account closed.

Once closed the Swiss rider comes into play where no information can be accessed for old closed accounts.

Voila the money is clean useable and all old tracks are wiped clean.

=======================================================

Yesterday from the Times of India I came to know that there are no poor people in Mumbai.

This summary fact is based upon an NREGA ( A Ministry of Rural development Initiative)study and was conveyed by the Planning Commission. What the commission recommends is that anyone who spends above Rs. 20/- a day or Rs. 528/- per month should be considered as above Poverty line and ergo receive no social or economic benefits.

This ridiculous figure has been arrived using a national index. Some people may remember my article(beggars can be choosers) where I had spoken about beggars in Mumbai and their shenanigans and how they perhaps made more money than us with no PAN number, no paperwork and all cash.

One thing though,now that they are declared rich, can the politicians stop protecting the slums which are grabbed claiming that the residents were too poor ?

I'm confused. How can you be rich and poor at the same time ? Obviously in India you can.

For more articles like this one , please visit http://theindipatriot.blogspot.com

let me introduce myself:

I am an person of Indian origin residing in Mumbai who feels that the time has come to speak up or be silent forever. We all see movies like Rang De Basanti or Lage Raho Munnabhai and after walking out of theatre for the next couple of days the effect hangs like a halo around us. A few days later we go back to our old ways. This is my way of keeping the spirit of India alive.
: As they say" 100 mein se 99% beimaan phir be India hai Mahaan"; I am sending you this mail since you have at some time or the other sent me a joke, an interesting article or some other little snippet or or some friend who has liked my articles has reffered you to me or at the very least you have been a CC on such an article forwarded to me so I feel this may be of interest to you.; I have started a blog under the name indipatriot and am sending you this article and the link to the blog http://theindipatriot.blogspot.com where you can read this and other articles. I would also request you to send me articles and other things you would like me to publish on this blog from jokes to spiritual articles all comments are welcome. The email address for sending articles to is theindipatriot@yahoo.co.in If you feel that this blog is not to your taste and do not wish to receive updates about the same, please send an email to the same address and we shall remove you from the mailing list.

Disclaimer This article is my personal opinion and is not meant to offend or hurt any person or any body of people. The matter is drawn from public domain and no copyright is knowingly transgressed. If any topic is found to be objectionable by you for any reason whatsoever, please do leave a comment and I will be glad to include a clarification in my followups.

Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

DEAR ALL,

THIS IS MOST CORRUPTED ORGANIZATION IN INDIA UNDER THE GUISE OF MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS. IF YOU MAKE A COMPLAINT TO THEM NOTHING WILL HAPPEN FOR YEARS ...

THERE IS ONE CASE WHERE ALL OUT RIGHT DISTORTATION OF ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES, AUDITING PRINCIPLES, PROVISIONS OF LAW AND O N THEIR RECORD THIS FACT IS AVAILABLE , NOT DOING ANY THING FOR LAST 17 YEARS! MY RTI APPLICATION IS ALSO REJECTED SEVERAL TIMES APPEAL ALSO???

THEY TAKE SHELTER OF SOME IRRELEVANT CASES ???

C A Shah D J
USA

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, 13 May 2011 2:19 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

You may please read CIC decision in "CIC/AT/A/2007/00112" "K.Lall versus RoC/MCA"
Sarbajit

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:33 PM, gopala krishnan <gopalakrishnanvelu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

sir,
i requested copies of balance sheet and IT returns of D3D tech,
chennai to Register of companies, chennai under rti act 2005. Public
information officer not supplied copy and asked me see in his
website (MCA21). i searched in website but asking pay rs.50/- to view
the document. I made appeal to first appellate authority to furnish
the copy in the form i sought and supply the copies free of cost as
per sec 7(6) of the RTI act. The appeallate authority informed me, for
supplying the copies i have to pay Rs.25/- per page. as per RTI act
for supplying the copies A4 rs2 per page. the Register of company
acting against RTI act.

Re: [HumJanenge] Fwd: Talk on RTI - Coimbatore

Dear Freinds ,

This is what is Happening in Media Often Because These people Have they themselves know of the RTI leave alone a seep understanding . as activists i request where ever possible please have a close knit "INTERFACE" with Media freinds . insist that they have an RTI Beat .

N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Fri, 13/5/11, Narayan Varma <narayanvarma2011@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Narayan Varma <narayanvarma2011@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Fwd: Talk on RTI - Coimbatore
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Friday, 13 May, 2011, 1:01 PM

I have not made the statement attributed to me i.e. that K. Government intends to amend the Act, Reference was to Central Government and it was in context of the query raised by the individual in the house.
Narayan Varma

On 12 May 2011 07:01, SHASHI KUMAR.A.R. <rudreshtechnology@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Vikram Sihma Sir ,
Thanks for your valuable coments made on vermajis presentation , Thanks for your support to protect the act , on what basis the above presentation is made with reference to Karnataka , Mr. Verma has to clarify

ARS KUMAR. BE. LLB , MA Journalism

SOCIAL ACTIVIST , SWAMY VIVEKANANDA RTI JANAJAGRUTHI MISSION

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Abhijit Mehta <abhijit@abhijitmehta.com> wrote:

It's a central law how can the state government amend a central law.

Legal experts please advise.

Regards

Abhijit Mehta

The Best Is Yet To Come

God Bless

On 11-May-2011, at 10:07 PM, SHASHI KUMAR.A.R. wrote:

I gone through your presentation , How Karnataka Government can change or amend the act saying the penalty will be leavyied on rti applicants , For every application the Public information officer or State information can use these ground and reject the application and he can leavy penalty on the applicants , It is a very bad move , it will detiriorate the spirit of the RTI ACT and entire RTI Act will be diluted and main purpose will be not served , How the governor or government can amend without taking public opinion , the act can be amended , All ready several times the rules have been made regarding number of words to be used in rti application pertatining to a single subject , Every user of RTI Act should condemn these type of attitude of the goverment or state information commission

ARS KUMAR. BE. LLB , MA JOURNALISM

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Narayan Varma <narayanvarma2011@gmail.com> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: PUBLIC CONCERN FOR GOVERNANCE TRUST <publicconcern@gmail.com>
Date: 11 May 2011 14:53
Subject: Talk on RTI - Coimbatore
To: "Mr. Narayan Varma" <narayanvarma2011@gmail.com>

Dear Sir,

Attached herewith please find article covered in The Hindu newspaper.

Best Wishes

Ankita Pandya

--
PUBLIC CONCERN FOR GOVERNANCE TRUST
B/2 - Mahalaxmi Chambers,
22, Bhulabhai Desai Road,
Mumbai - 400026
Tel No - 2352 64 26
Fax No - 2352 64 52
RTI HELPLINE NUMBER - 93 2288 2288

Website - www.pcgt.org

--
Narayan Varma
56B Mittal Tower,
210 Nariman Point
Mumbai 400 021
RTI PCGT helpline 09322882288
my cell 09821096052

--
Narayan Varma
56B Mittal Tower,
210 Nariman Point
Mumbai 400 021
RTI PCGT helpline 09322882288
my cell 09821096052

Re: [HumJanenge] the Register of company acting against RTI act.

you may see the CIC decision

CIC/SM/A/2011/000237/SG/12351
11-05-2011

General
CIC/SM/A/2011/000237

Mr.R S MISRA

Supreme Court of India

This kind of decision will help you.

Basic flaw in the decision cited by the LD CPIO.

Kindly read Company Act/ MCA official instead of Supreme Court Rules etc.

I. CIC Decisions by implication , accepted that SCI Rule 1966 can override the RTI, Act , 2005.By accepting SCI Rule 1966 as an exemption clause. This is explained above in detail impact and implication of above acceptance.

II. If there is two systems of getting same thing, it is the choice of taker/ requestor to decide which option suits its requirement. By this CIC decision cited , it is rich which is effected less and live of poor is destroyed completely.

III. CIC has taken , a wrong stand that, SCI Rules, 1966 is special Act for dissemination of information and The RTI Act is general act for dissemination of information .

IV. Kindly note, there is only two page for dissemination of information in SCI Rules (there are 164 pages in rules dealing with other matter) because mainly it deals other matter more like Court procedure. Whereas RTI Act is completed devoted to dissemination of information and had certain special sections related to Supreme Court of India also. Chief Justice of India by 'not notifying' the relevant SCI rules as rules under the RTI Act made a decision that RTI act and its rule will prevail over SCI rule..

V. Secondly it ignore the second condition also of two condition that is RTI Act, 2005 is latter law than the SCI Rules, 1966.Even one condition is fulfilled , even then RTI act, 2005 prevail. It is admitted by the CPIO the SCI rules are of 1966 origin.

VI. Most of the Public Authority has their respective Rules for dissemination of information, much before the RTI act. By this logic / CIC orders cited RTI act is not applicable to all those Public Authority.

VII. There contrary decisions of CIC cited by me in the Appeal.

Advantage to Supreme Court of India./ Implication of denial of information under the RTI Act.

1. Thousands of pages which are already scan / Soft copy can easily give in soft form which cost Rs 10/= . Kindly note, Supreme Court had already allowed E filing and scanning the old records. But Citizen is force to take copies in hard certified paper form(which cost Thousands of Rupees).

a. Rich can afford any amount (including fair as well unfair means obtained by money power by hiring Top Advocate ) , but for poor it is denial of justice /fundamental right completely. Create two kind of Citizen, Rich , who have fundamental right of information and poor , who has to beg –information.

b. It is anti environment act.-killing of tree, when it can be avoided easily by giving soft copy.

c. It is anti national. Any deliberate act, which increase cost of service / production makes country anti competitive is anti national. An action which can be done in Rs 10/= is forced by this type of action in Rs 10000/=. That is there is clear wastage of Rs 9,990/= without any benefits, therefore it is anti national..

d. It reduces check and balances in the system to fight corruption.

e. Removal of all the three penal provision(like compensation, penalty on the officer for delay and information is provided free ) increase corruption and inefficiencies.

f. Citizen is forced to collect information separately (and individually) again and again. (Proactive information disclosure).

g. Kindly see the status of pending case in the Supreme Court of India. This table shows, disposal of the cases is less than the half of the cases registered.

THE MONTHLY STATEMENT OF PENDING CASES FOR THE MONTH OF JUNE, 2010
	Pending from the Previous Month	Registered during the month	Disposed of during the month	Pending at the end of the month
Admission Matters	33725	2208	995	34867
Regular Hearing Matters	22072	171	37	22198
Total	55797	2379	1032	57065

Therefore, each denial of information means an appeal to Supreme Court of India , which easily take more than 20 month as per above disposal. Whereas first appeal under RTI act, should be decided in one month.

h. In short practical regime provided (for getting fundamental right of information) by the RTI act is destroyed by this interpretation.

B. The argument by the CPIO that Public can obtain the information free of cost through another Public Authority Legal Aid is absurd and similar to , there is law that basic education is provided free, when Public Authority charges fee claiming that Citizen can obtain Scholarship from another Public authority. Each new additional action by Citizen add to his cost and delay in delivery of service / ( getting information in Supreme Court case, lost of education for years in another case)

Ø Looking forward to your response.

Kindly do the needful at the earliest.

Thanking you

Yours Truly

(RAKESH K. GUPTA)

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 6:33 PM, gopala krishnan <gopalakrishnanvelu@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

sir,
i requested copies of balance sheet and IT returns of D3D tech,
chennai to Register of companies, chennai under rti act 2005. Public
information officer not supplied copy and asked me see in his
website (MCA21). i searched in website but asking pay rs.50/- to view
the document. I made appeal to first appellate authority to furnish
the copy in the form i sought and supply the copies free of cost as
per sec 7(6) of the RTI act. The appeallate authority informed me, for
supplying the copies i have to pay Rs.25/- per page. as per RTI act
for supplying the copies A4 rs2 per page. the Register of company
acting against RTI act.