Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Only 3 complaints lost in CIC since 2005" records IC(SG)

These are very serious charges and prima facie evidence about these should be provided.  

---

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 21 July 2012 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Only 3 complaints lost in CIC since 2005" records IC(SG)

Dear Mr Mittal

If you go through the CIC's old minutes of meetings, you would find
somewhere that Shailesh Gandhi assumed the responsibility of
digitising the entire CIC. I'm sure that you would recall that prior
to his becoming IC, Mr SG had been constantly promoting digitisation
as the universal panacea to solve all the CIC's ills. The reason why
digitisation has slowed down is precisely because of the poor example
SG's own digitisation had set. Let me recount a few of these.

1) Private interns paid for from SG's own funds taking home scanned files.

2) Private RTI consultants being provided scanned copies of plaints
pending before SG, draft orders being prepared in consultation with
P/As prior to hearings so that SG would only have to "fill in the
blanks" by looking at his computer screen during hearings etc.

3) Pen drives / CDs full of information obtained by Mr SG being given
free of cost to Mr SG's NCPRI pals.

and so on

Sarbajit

On 7/21/12, Girish Mittal <rtng.mittal@gmail.com> wrote:
>    Mr. Roy,
>
>          It is wrong to say that Ex IC SG was responsible for digitising
> the CIC. He can be responsible for his own registry, which he has converted
> into paperless office.
>
>          In fact, he has been pushing the digitising the entire
> commission, which has now been stopped in most registries.
>
>          I know you love to blame SG for everything wrong happening with
> RTI in India, but please make your arguments laced with little bit of
> facts...
>
>          Regards.
>
>          Girish Mittal
>
>
>
>
>    Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar,
>    CPIO & Director
>    Central Information Commission
>
>    "The Appellant states that he is extremely disappointed with the way
>    the Commission is working. He states that he has sent these complaints
>    number of times and any of his communication are being reported to be
>    lost. He expresses is anguish that if CIC cannot keep its records
>    properly how can, it set example for Public Authorities. The PIO
>    states that this is the only instance which is being reported and
>    there are no other instances which have been reported to the
>    Commission. The Commission recommends to the Secretary of the
>    commission to ensure that communication received from Appellant are
>    not lost and recorded properly."
>
>    Only 1 instance of CIC records not being maintained properly. <rol>
>    Q: Why didn't SG inquire into Pankaj Shreyaskar's bizarre statement.
>    Ans: Because for many years IC(SG) was responsible for digitisation of
>    the CIC's records.
>