[HumJanenge] Re: [Humjanenge-YG] Miss India Voting

Dear Col Shivraj

Many thanks for sending this to us.

Just to let you know, the entire Miss India racket is anti-Indian and racist.

Anybody who has at least 20% Indian "ethicity", has been a citizen of
India for 6 months and meets the SECRET height requirement of 5 feet 7
inches is eligible.

This straightaway discriminates against 60% of Indian females in the
age group, and limits it to well nourished and affluent state of
society. Armed Forces "brats"have good chances due to the coordinated
lobbying.

Kindly tell your friends about this. Best wishes for your efforts to
promote your freinds daughter.

Sarbajit Roy

On 3/24/12, Col Shivraj <colshivraj@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> *Nikita Dutta *is our friend's daughter whose father is in Defence.
> *Pl vote for her and spread this message amongst your friends. *
> *The last date is 29 March so please do it ASAP.*
>
> This is the link to Nikita's profile on the Miss India page. The "vote"
> button is on the top right.
> Once you click on that you'll have to vote for 2 more contestants ( 2nd and
> 3rd choice). But make sure that Nikita's in your 1st choice !
> http://feminamissindia.indiatimes.com/photoshow/11777780.cms?curpg=7
>
> You can also vote for her by typing " PFMI (space) nik" and send it to
> 58888 !
>
>
>
> regards -
>
> Col Shivraj
> 210 Munirka Vihar
> New Delhi-110067
> Phone: 26102999
> Mob: 9810433842
> http://www.google.com/profiles/colshivraj.
> <http://www.facebook.com/?tid=5014313388&sk=messages#%21/>
> http://www.facebook.com/poster.hatao
> *MY DELHI , POSTER and NOISE FREE* *DELHI*
> *
> *
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Need Help

Clearly there is a defect with respect to title of half the plot.
How did you get this situation, was the plot partitioned by
"metes and bounds" at any stage and you purchased from
2 persons. Was permission taken from the land owner before
sale/purchase ?

You may see section 54 of TP Act. It seems 50% of the plot
was never properly transferred, maybe you did some GPA/WIll
business. Kindly see the decision of SC dt.11.10.2011 in
"Suraj Lamps & Industries versus Govt of Haryana".

You must get the whole plot converted into freehold immediately by any
means, if the same is permitted and since you can show possession.
Or else you must "somehow" get the sale deed executed in your
favour for the remaining 50%.

Doing all these things will strengthen your case to get the survey done
and the plot properly transferred. Or is it the other way around ?.

On 3/25/12, BALA <balanaidu.akkana@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dears, Can you pls anyone give me the advice for the below issue. We
> have bought the site 6 yrs ago.(we are the 5th person. This site has
> been alloted some one in 1983 by govt). Half of the site got
> registered and half of the site got only sale agreement. Now we are
> built the house in whole site and got approval for half of the
> building which got registered. We have a border issue with adjacent
> site owner. Thats what we have applied for surveying the site to
> revenue dept and got surveyed. Next day opposite owner removed the
> marked stones. And then we had given complaint in police station as
> well as revenue dept. When we asked revenue dept for the action, no
> response and they told need to complaint in police station only. When
> we consult police dept(writer) for filling the case, they told case
> will registered only when getting complaint from revenue dept. Finaly
> we had consult lawyer, they told case can file only we have detail
> survey reports. We dont have survey reports bcoz surver had given only
> notice. For this we have applied through RTI but in vain. After we
> applied for 1st level appel to RDO. Now we have plan to apply to
> SIC.(We have checked in revenue dept unafficially that surveyer didnt
> submit detail report). So how we need to proceed?. Either legally or
> lokayuktha or appel to governor. Pls let me know any problem for my
> construction if we proceed legally?.
>
> --
> *Thanks & Regards
> Bala *
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Need Help

It is the responsibility of surveyor to give report along with survey sketch to revenue authorities.This survey sketch is available to any body against the payment of prescribed fees irrespective of the provisions of RTI act.
What I understand is that the surveyor though issued notice of survey to all concerned might have not reported the survey conducted for the reasons best known to him and naturally the report may not be available with revenue authorities from whom you sought under RTI
You may file another RTI seeking info on the action initiated by the surveyor after the survey notice issued.You may also ask the details of action initiated against surveyor for dereliction of duties of not submitting the report
You may also complain to Lokayukta against surveyor.
I don't see any hurdles for continuing construction provided you have sanctioned plan from the competitive authority
Regards
JSD Pani



Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel

-----Original Message-----
From: BALA <balanaidu.akkana@gmail.com>
Sender: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 01:22:15
To: <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: [HumJanenge] Need Help

Dears, Can you pls anyone give me the advice for the below issue. We
have bought the site 6 yrs ago.(we are the 5th person. This site has
been alloted some one in 1983 by govt). Half of the site got
registered and half of the site got only sale agreement. Now we are
built the house in whole site and got approval for half of the
building which got registered. We have a border issue with adjacent
site owner. Thats what we have applied for surveying the site to
revenue dept and got surveyed. Next day opposite owner removed the
marked stones. And then we had given complaint in police station as
well as revenue dept. When we asked revenue dept for the action, no
response and they told need to complaint in police station only. When
we consult police dept(writer) for filling the case, they told case
will registered only when getting complaint from revenue dept. Finaly
we had consult lawyer, they told case can file only we have detail
survey reports. We dont have survey reports bcoz surver had given only
notice. For this we have applied through RTI but in vain. After we
applied for 1st level appel to RDO. Now we have plan to apply to
SIC.(We have checked in revenue dept unafficially that surveyer didnt
submit detail report). So how we need to proceed?. Either legally or
lokayuktha or appel to governor. Pls let me know any problem for my
construction if we proceed legally?.

--
*Thanks & Regards
Bala *

[HumJanenge] Need Help

Dears, Can you pls anyone give me the advice for the below issue. We
have bought the site 6 yrs ago.(we are the 5th person. This site has
been alloted some one in 1983 by govt). Half of the site got
registered and half of the site got only sale agreement. Now we are
built the house in whole site and got approval for half of the
building which got registered. We have a border issue with adjacent
site owner. Thats what we have applied for surveying the site to
revenue dept and got surveyed. Next day opposite owner removed the
marked stones. And then we had given complaint in police station as
well as revenue dept. When we asked revenue dept for the action, no
response and they told need to complaint in police station only. When
we consult police dept(writer) for filling the case, they told case
will registered only when getting complaint from revenue dept. Finaly
we had consult lawyer, they told case can file only we have detail
survey reports. We dont have survey reports bcoz surver had given only
notice. For this we have applied through RTI but in vain. After we
applied for 1st level appel to RDO. Now we have plan to apply to
SIC.(We have checked in revenue dept unafficially that surveyer didnt
submit detail report). So how we need to proceed?. Either legally or
lokayuktha or appel to governor. Pls let me know any problem for my
construction if we proceed legally?.

--
*Thanks & Regards
Bala *

Re: [HumJanenge] Judgement on assets of public servants under RTI act

Exactly the kind of wishy washy "feel good" (NGO written) judgments
delivered by somebody who knows it usually won't fly in the SC (unless
the fix is in) but will get media publicity at home town. <ha ha>

On 3/23/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
> Though it is little old judgement but I think group members would like
> to go through it.
> regards
> sandeep
> http://judis.nic.in/judis_chennai/qrydisp.aspx?filename=32970
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>

[HumJanenge] Judgement on assets of public servants under RTI act

Though it is little old judgement but I think group members would like
to go through it.
regards
sandeep
http://judis.nic.in/judis_chennai/qrydisp.aspx?filename=32970
--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Are Odisha Information Commissioners really committed to give justice to Citizens

Are Odisha Information Commissioners really committed to give justice to Citizens

Dear friends

Recently, a RTI Applicant has sought information about no. of complaint cases and Second cases received  by the office of Commission  since 2005 and no. of cases disposed by the Information Commissioners since 2005. The response of PIO is as follows.

                                  

a.     On question of No. of cases disposed by the Commission, the PIO has requested to get  it from website of Odisha Information Commission www.orissainformationcommission.nic.in

b.     No. of  Complaints and Second Appeals received by the Commission from 2005 to Dec. 2011 is as follows.

Year	Complaint Case	Second Appeal
2005	123	10
2006	522	202
2007	1973	437
2008	1973	370
2009	2579	375
2010	3364	429
2011	5015	591
Total	15549	2414

c.      On question regarding no. of cases pending in the office of the Commission, the response of PIO is "there are  7429 Complaint cases and 1233 no. of Second Appeal cases pending for decision of the Commission till Dec.2011.

Analysis

a.     As per the above data, total number of Cases received by office of Odisha Information Commission within the period of 2005 to 2011 is 17,963 cases and number of cases pending is 8662. Then, total number of cases disposed by Odisha Commission is 9,301(say 9300 cases).

b.     Though Odisha Information Commission  assumed office on 20^th Nov.2005 with appointment of  Mr. D. N. Padhi as State Chief Information Commissioner and Prof. Radhamohan as State Information Commissioner, the hearing of cases  by Information Commissioner started from  April, 2006.

c.      Out of 9300 cases disposed, around  more than 4000 cases has been disposed and closed by Information Commissioners  without hearing and simply remanding to First Appellate Authority at a stroke of pen. So, practically, the Commissioners have disposed only 5300 cases within said period.

d.     Within the period of 69 months ( April, 2006 to Dec.2011), Five Information Commissioners ( Mr. Tarun Kanti Mishra, SCIC, Mr. Jagadanand, SICand Mr. Pramod Mohanty, SIC and other two abovementioned retired Commissioner) have disposed  only 5300 cases.

e.     If  we deduct 15 months within the said period as leave, Sunday, holidays, then 54 months has been devoted  for hearing  and disposing 5300 cases. It means 98 cases has been disposed in a months.

f.       If we take  disposal of 98 cases by three Commissioners in a month, then, each Commissioner disposes only 32 cases per month which is too less in comparison with Information Commissioners  of other states and Central Information Commissioners who dispose 250 to 350 cases per month.

g.     Long delay and low disposal of cases  due to inefficiency of Information Commissioners  has made the complainant and Appellant-citizens frustrated  and hopeless in Odisha.

Any comments and feed back is welcome.

Regards

Pradip Pradhan

RTI Activist, Odisha

M-99378-43482

Date- 20.3.2012

Re: [HumJanenge] URGENT NOTICE: Controversy "Chief Information Commissioner of India"

Dear Shri Sarbajit Roy ji:

Thank you for sharing your email on the above subject. I write to
record my appreciation of your very well worded communication and the
rather unworthy affairs of the system that continues to revel in
causing confusion, for no rhyme or reason.
Let us hope you will hear from them in the next 24 hours. That is the
least that any honourable worthy would do, normally speaking.

With kind regards.
Sincerely,
dev chopra in gurgaon
UN Retiree
9810338049
***

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> To:
>
> 1) Shri Shailesh Gandhi
> Chief Information Commissioner of India
> Central Information Commission
> at New Delhi
>
> 2) Shri Satyananda Mishra
> Chief Information Commissioner of India
> Central Information Commission
> at New Delhi
>
> DATE: 19-March-2012
>
> Sirs
>
> LEGAL NOTICE
>
> I refer to my email dated 15/03/2012 sent  to Noticee No.2 Shri
> Satyananda Mishra, Chief Information Commissioner of India.. I have
> not received any reply to the same.
>
> I give you notice that there is considerable confusion in the media
> about who the "Chief Information Commissioner of India" is, and that
> Noticee No.2 Shri Satyananda Mishraji is not prepared to rebut /
> contradict the numerous media reports describing Noticee No.1 Shri
> Shailesh Gandhi as Chief Information Commissioner which I brought to
> his notice.
>
> As a result of such long running confusion, which I have repeatedly
> brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Commission to no avail, I have
> been unable to exercise my Fundamental Right to Information due to
> non-functioning of the Commission in the manner specified in the Right
> to Information Act, ie. as a body comprising of 1 Chief Information
> Commissioner and up to 10 Information Commissioners. It is pertinent
> that a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court had upheld the said
> manner of functioning of the Commission as a body.
>
>  I am therefore constrained to call upon both of you noticees to
> either rebut / contradict the false and mischievous media reports
> immediately, or confirm to me which of you, is the Chief Information
> Commissioner of India along with your authority.
>
> In the alternative I shall be constrained to explore my legal
> remedies, including petitioning for a Writ of "quo warranto" or a
> direction of like nature.
>
> In passing I may mention that I am only pursuing this matter since I
> am unable to locate any media reports which describe the other
> Information Commissioners like say Ms. Deepak Sandhu, or Ms.. Sushma
> Singh etc. as "Chief Information Commissioner"
>
> Yours faithfully
>
> Sarbajit Roy
>
> B-59 Defence Colony
> New Delhi 110024
>
> Tel : 011-24334262

[HumJanenge] URGENT NOTICE: Controversy "Chief Information Commissioner of India"

To:

1) Shri Shailesh Gandhi
Chief Information Commissioner of India
Central Information Commission
at New Delhi

2) Shri Satyananda Mishra
Chief Information Commissioner of India
Central Information Commission
at New Delhi

DATE: 19-March-2012

Sirs

LEGAL NOTICE

I refer to my email dated 15/03/2012 sent to Noticee No.2 Shri
Satyananda Mishra, Chief Information Commissioner of India.. I have
not received any reply to the same.

I give you notice that there is considerable confusion in the media
about who the "Chief Information Commissioner of India" is, and that
Noticee No.2 Shri Satyananda Mishraji is not prepared to rebut /
contradict the numerous media reports describing Noticee No.1 Shri
Shailesh Gandhi as Chief Information Commissioner which I brought to
his notice.

As a result of such long running confusion, which I have repeatedly
brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Commission to no avail, I have
been unable to exercise my Fundamental Right to Information due to
non-functioning of the Commission in the manner specified in the Right
to Information Act, ie. as a body comprising of 1 Chief Information
Commissioner and up to 10 Information Commissioners. It is pertinent
that a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court had upheld the said
manner of functioning of the Commission as a body.

I am therefore constrained to call upon both of you noticees to
either rebut / contradict the false and mischievous media reports
immediately, or confirm to me which of you, is the Chief Information
Commissioner of India along with your authority.

In the alternative I shall be constrained to explore my legal
remedies, including petitioning for a Writ of "quo warranto" or a
direction of like nature.

In passing I may mention that I am only pursuing this matter since I
am unable to locate any media reports which describe the other
Information Commissioners like say Ms. Deepak Sandhu, or Ms.. Sushma
Singh etc. as "Chief Information Commissioner"

Yours faithfully

Sarbajit Roy

B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024

Tel : 011-24334262

[rti4empowerment] Reply: Ban Bailouts - Thank You!

Dear Survey Organisation,

 

It is not the only one that you should be concerned about. There are scores of Government decisions which are criminal breach of trust of the people of India.

 

Let me quote a few:

 

All ammendments to the Constitution of India by late prime minister of India, Indira Gandhi are void ab initio as she had no empowerment to do so.

 

All privatisation of Public sector undertakings are also void.

 

None of the Constitutional functionaries who awarded Indian cricket team members Rs. 1 crore each also had any mandate or authority to do so.

 

Going to past, at Padubidri in Karnataka 500 acres of land was  stated to have been acquired at paltry compensation of Rs 450 per acre for construction of international airport during the time when Late T.A.Pai. was minister for civil aviation.  Afew years back it was denotified & sold to private parties such as Nagarjuna thermal project & Suzlon India destroying marine life, environment & afflicting persons with diseases unheared of. Government has acted as land mafia.

 

For National Highway Nd. 66(formerly west coast road or N.H.17) 150 ft wide strip of land was acquired in 1964 but uptil 2009 only 28 ft wide road was built. rest was occupied by unauthorised encroachments with the implicit consent of N.H>Divisions or Subdivisions, the local governing bodies such as Panchayats, city/town/municipal corporations wtc who continued to receive  periodical payments. Slums were promoted on this land & later revenue authorities granted them land elsewhere under gant land for have nots policy. Persons  from Tamilnadu, Kerala, Andhra etc planted huts acquired those lands , sold them & resettled at the same acquired land to claim another allocation!

 

Those who objected received threats to life!

 

Although your survey intention is laudable, I cannot but express myself sarcastically, YOU ARE BEING PENNY WISE BUT, POUND FOOLISH.

WEDS

 

From: The 5 Minute WrapUp <5MinWrapup@equitymaster.com>To: wilevades@yahoo.co.uk Sent: Friday, 16 March 2012, 17:28Subject: Ban Bailouts - Thank You!

Thank You So Much! Your vote is important to us and we thank you for the same. We also appreciate your attention and care towards the betterment of your country.Together we can make the Government sit up and take notice!Rest assured we'll keep you updated on this crusade through your Free Subscription to The 5 Minute WrapUp - A daily newsletter that will give you unbiased news and views on government policies, stock market happenings... amongst other national and global happenings.We will also publish the final number of people who have joined us in this cause, and the vote count, along with some of the comments we receive in here.So fill in the Comments box below and make your voice be heard!This is your chance to stand up against the misuse of OUR money. Remember, if Gandhi alone could make the British shudder with the Quit India Movement, all of us together can certainly make a difference. United we stand, divided we fall!Spread the Word Around!Please forward this to everyone who you think is concerned. We will share the final poll results (but not your name or email address) with the immediate representatives of the Indian government or through the media outlets. The more votes we have, the more pressure we can put on the Indian government to make the changes we want. Thank you Warm regardsEquitymaster Research

This mail is sent by: Equitymaster Agora Research Private Limited. 103, Regent Chambers,Above Status Restaurant, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 21. Tel : 022-6631-4055. Email: subscribe@equitymaster.com