Saturday, August 11, 2012

Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

1.The main issues are :-
(a) Evident prosperity enhancement of public servants, including elected MPsw and MLAs, from the beging to end of their term. This reflects as disproportionate assets.
(b) Bureaucrat and politician nexus  which has resulted in the following :-
     (i)   For AAM ADMI, Indian Police Service has become an agency for documentation of crime by convenience.
     (ii) There is NOTHING in this country which a tax payer gets but tax evader does NOT.
     (iii) Justice is delayed to deny.
     (iv) Rules are practiced for denial only
     (v) Outlaws cab get away with anything if they have money to bribe.
2. Possible remedy is to open online registration of complaints and their acknowledgement regarding corruption safeguarding identity of complainant and a charter regarding time in which an action taken can be replied.
3. Public servants guilty of corruption, unless DISPROVED, to be retired without pension or such benefits.
Lt Col(Veteran) VC Khare    
On 12-08-2012, Mahesh Khera wrote:


---
Lt Col \28Retd\29 VC Khare B-406 Ram Vihar Sector 30, Noida 201303 \28Uttar Pradesh\29 Mob 9312807120, 9810114095 Phone +91-120-2456116
Dear  Sarbajit, what is this disservice to the nation when well meaning people want to brain storm strategies to combat corruption ? Anna did what he thought was right, it is upon us to make what ever we want to make out of it. The real question is not Anna or his followers but how should the corruption be minimized ? Make this country into e-governance and watch the amazing results of cleaner living.    Warm regards, Mahesh Khera  Sent from my BlackBerry® on Airtel    -----Original Message-----  From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>  Sender: humjanenge@googlegroups.com  Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 00:08:48   To: <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>  Reply-To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com  Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption    Dear Mr Venkatraman    You are doing a great disservice to the nation by propounding that  the anti-corruption movement devolves upon the rising and setting  of Anna Hazare or upon his "team" of corrupt jokers.    Sarbajit    On 8/11/12, Venkatraman NS <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:
*BRAIN STORMING MEETING AT CHENNAI * * ON STRATEGIES ( INCLUDING RTI ) TO COMBAT CORRUPTION* * * *Nandini Voice For The Deprived, a Chennai based NGO will organize brain storming meeting on strategies to combat corruption ( including RTI ) * * * *Objective :* * * *There is, no doubt , great concern amongst the citizens about the widespread corruption in India at all levels, which has resulted in misuse of government funds ,set back to welfare projects and social tension.* *The country men responded to Anna Hazare’s call to fight against corruption spontaneously , since everyone thought that this would be the need of the hour. However, Anna Hazare’s decision to dissolve his team and enter electoral politics has created confusion and uncertainty about the future trend of anti corruption movement in India.* * * *The objective of the meeting is to discuss the possible and appropriate strategies to combat corruption in India and provide a forum for the concerned citizens to discuss the issue thread bare, in the light of Anna Hazare’s decision.* * * * RTI activists and those involved in anti corruption struggle will share their experience. * * * *Venue : Adyar , Chennai* * * *Date :- 26th August,2012 (Sunday)* * * *Time:- 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.* * * *Invitation:* * * *Nandini Voice For the Deprived has pleasure in inviting everyone for the meeting. Those interested in participating in the meeting are requested to register their name in advance by email nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com or Tele No. :- 24916037* * N.S.Venkataraman** Nandini Voice For The Deprived www.nandinivoice.org *

 

[HumJanenge] PUBLIC GRIEVANCE: Discrimnatory E-IPO scheme for NRIs

To:
1) Shri P.K.Misra, Secretary/DoPT,
2) Shri Manoj Joshi, JS(ATA)/DoPT

BY EMAIL

Date: 12-August-2012

Dear Sirs

I refer to DoPT's circular dated 03/May.2012 issued by Ms. Anuradha
Chagti/Director(RTI) concerning e-IPO facility for RTI applications/
further fees for Indians living abroad.

1) I am aggrieved that this facility is not being provided to Indians
who are resident in India.
It is pertinent that on behalf of resident Indians I have been
continually representing to DoPT for many years now. Copies of these
are in my possession.

2) I have come to know that a former Secretary of DoPT has been
corrupted (as defined in Prevention of Corruption Act) to extend this
facility to NRIs so that foreign intelligence agencies can file RTI
requests from abroad (possibly in fictitious names) and intercept the
same through their postal departments while the said documents are in
transit. Accordingly this lady ensured that approval of intelligence /
security agencies to this hare-brained scheme was never obtained.
Kindly investigate the same otherwise I shall be further aggrieved.

3) Insofar as non resident Indians are concerned, I am aggrieved that
DoPT has ignored the provisions relating to "scope" of RTI Act which
limit its extent / operation to within the territory of India. This is
also a corrupt action instigated by that former Secretary/DoPT. I am
given to understand that one Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd), INS, was
the instigator of this action which deserves vigilance inquiry.

4) I am further aggrieved that to facilitate providing NRIs
information under RTI, the postage fees for residents has been levied
(which was hitherto free) under the recently notified Rules. Once
again Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd) is the instigator of this scheme
and responsible for huge postal fees in addition to further fees.

Kindly acknowledge receipt of this communication within 3 days as
mandated under the Central Govt's PG scheme and resolve all my
aforesaid public grievances suitably..

yours faithfully

Sarbajit Roy

B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024

Tel : 09311448069

Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

dear Mahesh,
 
some people are carried away by themselves and see themselves as the jesus COMING.
 
you see this in all the channels having FIST FIGHTH. none will allow others to speak and in the middle of the other guy talking will interject.
 
compare this with channels like BBC where the speaker will hear out AND THEN talk.
 
we are after all THIRD WORLD
 
except me all are jokers. dont rejoinder, just laugh
 
GANDHIGIRI

--- On Sun, 12/8/12, Mahesh Khera <mkkhera@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Mahesh Khera <mkkhera@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Sunday, 12 August, 2012, 7:19 AM

Dear  Sarbajit, what is this disservice to the nation when well meaning people want to brain storm strategies to combat corruption ? Anna did what he thought was right, it is upon us to make what ever we want to make out of it. The real question is not Anna or his followers but how should the corruption be minimized ? Make this country into e-governance and watch the amazing results of cleaner living. 
Warm regards, Mahesh Khera
Sent from my BlackBerry® on Airtel

-----Original Message-----
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Sender: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 00:08:48
To: <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

Dear Mr Venkatraman

You are doing a great disservice to the nation by propounding that
the anti-corruption movement devolves upon the rising and setting
of Anna Hazare or upon his "team" of corrupt jokers.

Sarbajit

On 8/11/12, Venkatraman NS <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:
>                               *BRAIN STORMING MEETING AT CHENNAI *
>
> *                ON STRATEGIES (  INCLUDING RTI ) TO COMBAT CORRUPTION*
>
> *
> *
>
>
> *Nandini Voice For The Deprived, a Chennai based NGO will organize brain
> storming meeting on strategies to combat corruption ( including RTI )
> *
>
> *
> *
>
> *Objective :*
>
> *
> *
>
> *There is, no doubt , great concern amongst the citizens about the
> widespread corruption in India at all levels, which has resulted in misuse
> of government funds ,set back to welfare projects  and social tension.*
>
> *The country men responded to Anna Hazare's call to fight against
> corruption spontaneously ,  since everyone thought that this would be the
> need of the hour.  However, Anna Hazare's decision to dissolve his team and
> enter electoral politics has created confusion and uncertainty about the
> future trend of anti corruption movement in India.*
>
> *
> *
>
> *The objective of the meeting is to discuss the possible and appropriate
> strategies to combat corruption in India and provide a forum for the
> concerned citizens to discuss the issue thread bare, in the light of Anna
> Hazare's decision.*
>
> *
> *
>
> * RTI activists and those involved in anti corruption struggle will share
> their experience.   *
>
> *
> *
>
> *Venue :  Adyar , Chennai*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Date :-  26th August,2012 (Sunday)*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Time:- 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Invitation:*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Nandini Voice For the Deprived has pleasure in inviting everyone for the
> meeting. Those interested  in participating in the meeting are requested to
> register their name in advance by email  nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com  or Tele
> No. :- 24916037*
> *
> N.S.Venkataraman**
>
> Nandini Voice For The Deprived
> www.nandinivoice.org
> *
>

[HumJanenge] Re: STICKY: RTI Rules 2012

Dear Members

Here is my first analysis of RTI Rules 2012

1) On the suggestion of 275 members of this group,
DoPT has explicitly defined "Commission" to be the
Central; Information Commission constituted under
s/s 12(1) of the Act.

This means that CIC is a "body" and benches are
ILLEGAL. There is a parallel ongoing proceeding in SC.

2) From now on members of this group are advised to
file "EXTRA-ORDINARY" RTI requests under section
6(1) only. As we are all EXTRA-ORDINARY responsible
RTI'ers / citizens only interested in getting section 4
disclosure <wink>, we are compelled to file EXTRAORDINARY
RTI requests running into 1,000s of words due to the default
of PA in complying with section 4 disclosure.

3) The CIC has been comprehensively MASSACRED by
the RTI rules. Almost each and every suggestion we (HJ-GG
through me) made has been incorporated.

a) From now on Appeals and Complaints to CIC can be filed in
any Indian language.

b) The CIC Registry is an unempowered joke.

4) The biggest plus point of these Rules is that inspection of
section 4 disclosure is free for first hour. Perfect for us.

and so on..

Sarbajit

On 8/12/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Members
>
> The complete RTI Rules 2012 are attached as a PDF file.
> I have gone through them rapidly.
> It seems OK except for Rule 13.
>
> Discussion / Debate is open on them.
> Please do not change the subject line. Use the "Reply To" button.
>
> Sarbajit
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

Dear Sh Venkatraman,
Thanks.I would loved to attend,but regret.
Is it possible to send me the minutes of the meeting?
Col Dharma

--- On Sat, 11/8/12, Venkatraman NS <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Venkatraman NS <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com>
Subject: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 11 August, 2012, 8:04 PM

                              BRAIN STORMING MEETING AT CHENNAI

                ON STRATEGIES (  INCLUDING RTI ) TO COMBAT CORRUPTION



Nandini Voice For The Deprived, a Chennai based NGO will organize brain storming meeting on strategies to combat corruption ( including RTI )


Objective :


There is, no doubt , great concern amongst the citizens about the widespread corruption in India at all levels, which has resulted in misuse of government funds ,set back to welfare projects  and social tension.

The country men responded to Anna Hazare's call to fight against corruption spontaneously ,  since everyone thought that this would be the need of the hour.  However, Anna Hazare's decision to dissolve his team and  enter electoral politics has created confusion and uncertainty about the future trend of anti corruption movement in India.


The objective of the meeting is to discuss the possible and appropriate strategies to combat corruption in India and provide a forum for the concerned citizens to discuss the issue thread bare, in the light of Anna Hazare's decision.


 RTI activists and those involved in anti corruption struggle will share their experience.  


Venue :  Adyar , Chennai


Date :-  26th August,2012 (Sunday)


Time:- 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.


Invitation:


Nandini Voice For the Deprived has pleasure in inviting everyone for the meeting. Those interested  in participating in the meeting are requested to register their name in advance by email  nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com  or Tele  No. :- 24916037


N.S.Venkataraman


Nandini Voice For The Deprived
www.nandinivoice.org

[HumJanenge] STICKY: RTI Rules 2012

Dear Members

The complete RTI Rules 2012 are attached as a PDF file.
I have gone through them rapidly.
It seems OK except for Rule 13.

Discussion / Debate is open on them.
Please do not change the subject line. Use the "Reply To" button.

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

Dear Sarbajit, what is this disservice to the nation when well meaning people want to brain storm strategies to combat corruption ? Anna did what he thought was right, it is upon us to make what ever we want to make out of it. The real question is not Anna or his followers but how should the corruption be minimized ? Make this country into e-governance and watch the amazing results of cleaner living.
Warm regards, Mahesh Khera
Sent from my BlackBerry® on Airtel

-----Original Message-----
From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Sender: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 00:08:48
To: <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

Dear Mr Venkatraman

You are doing a great disservice to the nation by propounding that
the anti-corruption movement devolves upon the rising and setting
of Anna Hazare or upon his "team" of corrupt jokers.

Sarbajit

On 8/11/12, Venkatraman NS <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:
> *BRAIN STORMING MEETING AT CHENNAI *
>
> * ON STRATEGIES ( INCLUDING RTI ) TO COMBAT CORRUPTION*
>
> *
> *
>
>
> *Nandini Voice For The Deprived, a Chennai based NGO will organize brain
> storming meeting on strategies to combat corruption ( including RTI )
> *
>
> *
> *
>
> *Objective :*
>
> *
> *
>
> *There is, no doubt , great concern amongst the citizens about the
> widespread corruption in India at all levels, which has resulted in misuse
> of government funds ,set back to welfare projects and social tension.*
>
> *The country men responded to Anna Hazare's call to fight against
> corruption spontaneously , since everyone thought that this would be the
> need of the hour. However, Anna Hazare's decision to dissolve his team and
> enter electoral politics has created confusion and uncertainty about the
> future trend of anti corruption movement in India.*
>
> *
> *
>
> *The objective of the meeting is to discuss the possible and appropriate
> strategies to combat corruption in India and provide a forum for the
> concerned citizens to discuss the issue thread bare, in the light of Anna
> Hazare's decision.*
>
> *
> *
>
> * RTI activists and those involved in anti corruption struggle will share
> their experience. *
>
> *
> *
>
> *Venue : Adyar , Chennai*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Date :- 26th August,2012 (Sunday)*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Time:- 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Invitation:*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Nandini Voice For the Deprived has pleasure in inviting everyone for the
> meeting. Those interested in participating in the meeting are requested to
> register their name in advance by email nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com or Tele
> No. :- 24916037*
> *
> N.S.Venkataraman**
>
> Nandini Voice For The Deprived
> www.nandinivoice.org
> *
>

Re: [HumJanenge] CIC warns SSC chairman for 'utter disregard' of panel

The New ammended rule Permits any Authorised officer ... No mention of supwerannuated /Voluntarily Retired

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

--- On Sat, 11/8/12, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

From: M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CIC warns SSC chairman for 'utter disregard' of panel
To: "humjanenge@googlegroups.com" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Date: Saturday, 11 August, 2012, 7:42 PM

Very good, a bold step.


From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 11 August 2012 7:07 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] CIC warns SSC chairman for 'utter disregard' of panel

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-08-08/india/33099943_1_central-public-information-officer-cic-information-commissioner-satyananda-mishra

NEW DELHI: Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra has issued
a stern warning to the chairman of the Staff Selection Commission
asking him to send a "right and relevant" officer during hearing in a
case pending since 2009 failing which he may be personally summoned.

Mishra was hearing the plea of Gwalior-based Amit Kumar Jain who
sought some information in October 2009 and did not get it within the
mandatory one month period following which he filed a complaint before
the CIC in December 2009.

After delay of nearly three years, when the case came for hearing
before Mishra in January, a retired employee appeared on the behalf of
SSC who claimed he was superannuated in July 2009 and had no knowledge
about the RTI application.

Mishra issued notices to the present official, dealing with RTI
applications at SSC, Central Public Information Officer, to appear
before the Commission and explain the delay in furnishing the
information.

In the next hearing on February 13, another officer appeared who did
not have any knowledge about the case.

Irked at the behaviour, CIC issued notice to Chairman SSC to depute
the officer concerned having knowledge about the case to appear for
hearing. But in the hearing once again same retired officer appeared.

"It is both sad and surprising that, once again, the same officer who
has retired in 2009 was directed to appear. This shows complete lack
of application of mind and utter disregard of the CIC. We cannot go on
hearing this case indefinitely to identify the officer who is guilty
of not providing the information in time," Mishra pointed out.


Re: [HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

Dear Mr Venkatraman

You are doing a great disservice to the nation by propounding that
the anti-corruption movement devolves upon the rising and setting
of Anna Hazare or upon his "team" of corrupt jokers.

Sarbajit

On 8/11/12, Venkatraman NS <nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com> wrote:
> *BRAIN STORMING MEETING AT CHENNAI *
>
> * ON STRATEGIES ( INCLUDING RTI ) TO COMBAT CORRUPTION*
>
> *
> *
>
>
> *Nandini Voice For The Deprived, a Chennai based NGO will organize brain
> storming meeting on strategies to combat corruption ( including RTI )
> *
>
> *
> *
>
> *Objective :*
>
> *
> *
>
> *There is, no doubt , great concern amongst the citizens about the
> widespread corruption in India at all levels, which has resulted in misuse
> of government funds ,set back to welfare projects and social tension.*
>
> *The country men responded to Anna Hazare's call to fight against
> corruption spontaneously , since everyone thought that this would be the
> need of the hour. However, Anna Hazare's decision to dissolve his team and
> enter electoral politics has created confusion and uncertainty about the
> future trend of anti corruption movement in India.*
>
> *
> *
>
> *The objective of the meeting is to discuss the possible and appropriate
> strategies to combat corruption in India and provide a forum for the
> concerned citizens to discuss the issue thread bare, in the light of Anna
> Hazare's decision.*
>
> *
> *
>
> * RTI activists and those involved in anti corruption struggle will share
> their experience. *
>
> *
> *
>
> *Venue : Adyar , Chennai*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Date :- 26th August,2012 (Sunday)*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Time:- 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Invitation:*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Nandini Voice For the Deprived has pleasure in inviting everyone for the
> meeting. Those interested in participating in the meeting are requested to
> register their name in advance by email nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com or Tele
> No. :- 24916037*
> *
> N.S.Venkataraman**
>
> Nandini Voice For The Deprived
> www.nandinivoice.org
> *
>

[HumJanenge] PUBLIC GRIEVANCE: Incomplete publication of RTI Rules

To:
1) Shri P.K.Misra, Secretary/DoPT,
2) Shri Manoj Joshi, JS(ATA)/DoPT

BY EMAIL

Date: 11-August-2012

Dear Sirs

I refer to the PDF file containing the amended RTI Rules 2012
downloaded from the DoPT website by RTI activists. I am attaching a
copy for your ready reference.

I am aggrieved that the English version of this document is badly
mutilated and many sections of law are missing. The English version is
replete with spelling and other typographical mistakes and does not
correspond to the Hindi version at many places.

Kindly identify the officers responsible for this SHODDY PUBLICATION
and take disciplinary action against them immediately (under advice to
me). I am given to understand that publishing incorrect versions of
Laws of India is a penalisable offense. Accordingly, I have asked my
regular counsel(s) to locate the said offences so that I can proceed
against your officers once they are identified to my satisfaction.

In the meantime, kindly immediately disseminate a correct version of
this document on your website so that the public at large is not
inconvenienced. It is pertinent that these Rules have come into force
from 31.July.2012 and native English speakers like me should not be
discriminated vis-a-vis the common rabble.

yours faithfully

Sarbajit Roy

B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024

Tel : 09311448069

[HumJanenge] Meeting on strategies (including RTI) to combat corruption

                              BRAIN STORMING MEETING AT CHENNAI

                ON STRATEGIES (  INCLUDING RTI ) TO COMBAT CORRUPTION



Nandini Voice For The Deprived, a Chennai based NGO will organize brain storming meeting on strategies to combat corruption ( including RTI )


Objective :


There is, no doubt , great concern amongst the citizens about the widespread corruption in India at all levels, which has resulted in misuse of government funds ,set back to welfare projects  and social tension.

The country men responded to Anna Hazare's call to fight against corruption spontaneously ,  since everyone thought that this would be the need of the hour.  However, Anna Hazare's decision to dissolve his team and  enter electoral politics has created confusion and uncertainty about the future trend of anti corruption movement in India.


The objective of the meeting is to discuss the possible and appropriate strategies to combat corruption in India and provide a forum for the concerned citizens to discuss the issue thread bare, in the light of Anna Hazare's decision.


 RTI activists and those involved in anti corruption struggle will share their experience.  


Venue :  Adyar , Chennai


Date :-  26th August,2012 (Sunday)


Time:- 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m.


Invitation:


Nandini Voice For the Deprived has pleasure in inviting everyone for the meeting. Those interested  in participating in the meeting are requested to register their name in advance by email  nsvenkatchennai@gmail.com  or Tele  No. :- 24916037


N.S.Venkataraman


Nandini Voice For The Deprived
www.nandinivoice.org

Re: [HumJanenge] CIC warns SSC chairman for 'utter disregard' of panel

Very good, a bold step.


From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, 11 August 2012 7:07 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] CIC warns SSC chairman for 'utter disregard' of panel

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-08-08/india/33099943_1_central-public-information-officer-cic-information-commissioner-satyananda-mishra

NEW DELHI: Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra has issued
a stern warning to the chairman of the Staff Selection Commission
asking him to send a "right and relevant" officer during hearing in a
case pending since 2009 failing which he may be personally summoned.

Mishra was hearing the plea of Gwalior-based Amit Kumar Jain who
sought some information in October 2009 and did not get it within the
mandatory one month period following which he filed a complaint before
the CIC in December 2009.

After delay of nearly three years, when the case came for hearing
before Mishra in January, a retired employee appeared on the behalf of
SSC who claimed he was superannuated in July 2009 and had no knowledge
about the RTI application.

Mishra issued notices to the present official, dealing with RTI
applications at SSC, Central Public Information Officer, to appear
before the Commission and explain the delay in furnishing the
information.

In the next hearing on February 13, another officer appeared who did
not have any knowledge about the case.

Irked at the behaviour, CIC issued notice to Chairman SSC to depute
the officer concerned having knowledge about the case to appear for
hearing. But in the hearing once again same retired officer appeared.

"It is both sad and surprising that, once again, the same officer who
has retired in 2009 was directed to appear. This shows complete lack
of application of mind and utter disregard of the CIC. We cannot go on
hearing this case indefinitely to identify the officer who is guilty
of not providing the information in time," Mishra pointed out.


Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Help Required

Pl visit

 


-J. P. SHAH 9924106490  
http://www.jps50.blogspot.com/





  

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, 11 August 2012 12:33 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: Help Required

Goto
http://rtiindia.org
They are more suited for this sort of thing.


Mr. Hemant Kshirsagar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> One of my application have not received answers in the accordance with the
> queries raised, also on communication with the concerned CPIO, he has
> refused to the provide any documents as requested in the application.
>
> Now I have to apply to appellate. Please can any one guide me how to file a
> complaint or appeal with the appellate with any format, (this is my first
> time to appeal to an appellate).
>
> Regards,
> Hemant


[HumJanenge] CIC warns SSC chairman for 'utter disregard' of panel

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-08-08/india/33099943_1_central-public-information-officer-cic-information-commissioner-satyananda-mishra

NEW DELHI: Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra has issued
a stern warning to the chairman of the Staff Selection Commission
asking him to send a "right and relevant" officer during hearing in a
case pending since 2009 failing which he may be personally summoned.

Mishra was hearing the plea of Gwalior-based Amit Kumar Jain who
sought some information in October 2009 and did not get it within the
mandatory one month period following which he filed a complaint before
the CIC in December 2009.

After delay of nearly three years, when the case came for hearing
before Mishra in January, a retired employee appeared on the behalf of
SSC who claimed he was superannuated in July 2009 and had no knowledge
about the RTI application.

Mishra issued notices to the present official, dealing with RTI
applications at SSC, Central Public Information Officer, to appear
before the Commission and explain the delay in furnishing the
information.

In the next hearing on February 13, another officer appeared who did
not have any knowledge about the case.

Irked at the behaviour, CIC issued notice to Chairman SSC to depute
the officer concerned having knowledge about the case to appear for
hearing. But in the hearing once again same retired officer appeared.

"It is both sad and surprising that, once again, the same officer who
has retired in 2009 was directed to appear. This shows complete lack
of application of mind and utter disregard of the CIC. We cannot go on
hearing this case indefinitely to identify the officer who is guilty
of not providing the information in time," Mishra pointed out.

Re:: [HumJanenge] Help Required

Jis department ma aap na rti file ki ha
Ushi department ka first appellant ko hi appil karna ha sath ma rti va fee ki photocopy lagani ha.


------------------------------
On Sat 11 Aug, 2012 11:37 AM IST Mr. Hemant Kshirsagar wrote:

>Hi,
>
>One of my application have not received answers in the accordance with the
>queries raised, also on communication with the concerned CPIO, he has
>refused to the provide any documents as requested in the application.
>
>Now I have to apply to appellate. Please can any one guide me how to file a
>complaint or appeal with the appellate with any format, (this is my first
>time to appeal to an appellate).
>
>Regards,
>Hemant

[HumJanenge] Re: Help Required

Goto
http://rtiindia.org
They are more suited for this sort of thing.


Mr. Hemant Kshirsagar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> One of my application have not received answers in the accordance with the
> queries raised, also on communication with the concerned CPIO, he has
> refused to the provide any documents as requested in the application.
>
> Now I have to apply to appellate. Please can any one guide me how to file a
> complaint or appeal with the appellate with any format, (this is my first
> time to appeal to an appellate).
>
> Regards,
> Hemant

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed

Dear Karira

The RTI Act does not provide for citizens being provided
translations of documents as matter of right.

Official Languages Act may provide for these things.

C K Jam wrote:
> Dear Sarbajit,
>
> I was responding to your comment:
>
> > Unfortunately RTI Act does not allow for TRANSLATED copies
> > of records to be given as of right.
>
> and not about translating from language A to language B - where A or B are state languages.
>
> RTIwanted
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 8:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed
>
> Dear Karira
>
> Your citation actually ABSOLUTELY proves that the Punjab Police
> must maintain its original records in Punjabi and that applicants
> in that State are NOT entitled to demand translated copies to
> English under RTI.
>
> Here the applicant wants a translation from the Official Language of
> the State into English. In your citation the applicant wanted a translation
> from English into the Official language of the State.
>
> Quite different
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On 8/11/12, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Mr Sarbajit,
> >
> > Not absolutely correct.........depends on the circumstances of the case.
> >
> >
> > Please read:
> > http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/downloads/court-judgements-rti-issues-1/uttarakhand-hc-orders-scf-provide-translated-74/
> >
> > RTIwanted
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >  From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> > To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005"
> > <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> > Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:48 PM
> > Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed
> >
> > Sir
> > .
> >
> > Unfortunately RTI Act does not allow for TRANSLATED copies
> > of records to be given as of right.
> >
> > OTH if you are e RESPONDENT then the Petitioner must
> > serve you with OTs.
> >
> > Sarbajit
> >
> > On Aug 10, 10:42 am, brig sateesh kuthiala <kuthial...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> friends. i need some information from a punjab govt deptt. the documents
> >> are all in punjabi. can i ask for translated copies in hindi, which will
> >> then become officially and legally acceptable in courts in other states.
> >> thanx
> >>
> >> Sateesh Kuthiala

Friday, August 10, 2012

[HumJanenge] PUBLIC GRIEVANCE: Central Right to Information Rules. File No. 1/35/2008-IR

To:
1) Shri P.K.Misra, Secretary/DoPT,
2) Shri Manoj Joshi, JS(ATA)/DoPT

BY EMAIL

Date: 11-August-2012

Dear Sirs

I am given to understand from news reports in the Hindustan Times New
Delhi that new RTI Rules have been notified which restrict the RTI
requests to 500 words based on NAC's recommendations. As the same are
not yet published on the DoPT's website I am unable to get to the
bottom of this matter.

Kindly refer to my previous email of 24.07.2012 annexed below
concerning the corrupt actions of your respective predecessors Ms.
Alka Sirohi and Mr. Rajeev Kapoor in ensuring that the file/folder
containing the comments/objections of myself and about 274 other
persons from HumJanenge RTI group suggesting that the limit be 150
words was made to disappear thereby ensuring that our comments could
not be duly considered so that NAC's view would prevail.

Kindly therefore personally inquire and ensure that all documents
pertaining to our comments / objections have been recovered and are
available on file evidencing due consideration of each and every
objection / suggestion we have made PRIOR to notifying the same.If
not, kindly allow us to resubmit and be heard in person as the NAC was
afforded multiple opportunity for.

Kindly lodge this as a PUBLIC GRIEVANCE and acknowledge the same
within 3 days as mandated. I would also appreciate a Vigilance enquiry
being constituted into the circumstances of our comments having been
"lost". I name Ms. Alka Sirohi and Mr. Rajeev Kapoor as the prime
suspects in the disappearance.

yours faithfully


Sarbajit Roy
B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024

Tel : 09311448069

ANNEXURE:

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 11:54:24 +0530
Subject: Amendments to Central Right to Information Rules. File No. 1/35/2008-IR
To: secy_mop <secy_mop@nic.in>, jsata <jsata@nic.in>

To:
1) Shri P.K.Misra, Secretary/DoPT,
2) Shri Manoj Joshi, JS(ATA)/DoPT

BY EMAIL

In File No. 1/35/2008-IR

24-July-2012

Respected Sirs,

I am constrained to bring to your kind notice the following curious
facts concerning certain irregular actions by your Department /
officers, with the expectation that the situation shall be properly
enquired into and resolved.

As I am given to understand that the File No. 1/35/2008-IR is
presently with the Hon'ble Prime Minister who holds charge of the
Department, I request that a copy of the email is forthwith placed on
the concerned file for his information also.

1) As is contained on DoPT's website in the RTI Circulars section, on
21.05.2010 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in WP(C) 12714/2009 "DDA
versus CIC and Anr." struck down the so-called Central Information
Commission Management Regulations, 2007 promulgated by the Central
information Commission as being bad in law. It is pertinent that I was
the 2nd Respondent in the above cited matter and I supported DDA's
stand that the CIC Management Regulations 2007 were wholly illegal..

2) On 15.09.2010, in a RTI hearing before the Central Information
Commission,. Advocate Rajiv Bansal nominated Counsel for Delhi High
Court, informed Mr. Wajahat Habibullah that in view of the above said
decision the CIC had no authority to constitute Benches to adjudicate
on matters. As recorded in CIC's order in File CIC/WB/C/2010/000030
dated 28.09.2010, the CIC recorded at page 15 therein "steps have been
taken by the nodal Ministry so that Commission can continue to
function in benches".

3) On 10.December 2010, the DoPT published an OM inviting comments by
email before 27.12.2012 on proposed Amendments to Central RTI Rules in
File No. 1/35/2008-IR. The email ID was that of Under Secretary(RTI)
DoPT.

4) That, as an affected party in the pending litigation now before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, I submitted several detailed comments to
the proposed Rule Amendments, which Rule Amendments as are very well
known now were in fact submitted by the Central Information Commission
in coordination with the Centre for Good Governance Hyderabad, by
email well within the time period allowed. All my comments were duly
delivered to the designated email ID.

5) That along with me about 274 other persons, members of HumJanenge
online RTI forum, also responded by email to the said proposed Rule
Amendments, seconding and adding to my own submitted comments. These
were also duly delivered. I am given to understand that even persons
like Ms. Rita Sharma /Secretary NAC personally supported my/our
comments notwithstanding that the NAC's own response/.recommendations
often ran diametrically counter to ours.

6) It appears that due to pressure / extraneous considerations from
certain well known RTI "touts" in the NAC (National Advisory Council)
on/to senior officers of your Department, an administrative decision
was taken not to diarise / properly file the comments submitted by
email to this OM. It was further administratively decided by your
Department that only comments submitted through the NAC or through the
RTI "touts" in the NAC would be placed on the concerned file for
consideration. As an example, comments submitted by one ex-Chief
Justice A.P.Shah sent through the NAC was placed in the concerned file
well after the due date - which is highly unfair and violative of all
principles of natural justice for persons like me who applied through
the front door (instead of through the back door of the NAC) . It is a
matter of deep concern that Justice Shah was provided unofficial
copies of all comments submitted by email and several meetings were
held involving him at NAC sub-group meetings, where officers of DoPT
may have been present, to enable him to submit his / NACs views well
after the due date was over.

7) On or about 27-Jan-2011 I informed Mr. Rajiv Kapoor (former
JS-ATA/DoPT) that our submitted comments had been malafidely destroyed
from the said file. When I met Mr.Kapoor a few days later he told me
that my comments were not on file and were not being considered in
view of the NAC situation. In fact the entire public notice exercise
was only a hollow formality to enable the RTI "touts" / NAC to
manipulate the RTI Rule Amendments.

8) It seems that many other citizens who had submitted comments were
equally aggrieved by the approach of the DoPT concerning Amendment to
RTI Rules. One Cmdr (Retd) Lokesh Batra has been publicising copy of a
DoPT circular dated 25.06.2012 informing that the folder containing
the comments received is misplaced /. untraceable, and which is my
instant CAUSE OF ACTION. It appears that the said folder was
reportedly last with Mr. Rajeev Kapoor or Mr. K.G. Verrma (Director
/RTI) when the fact is that it was illegally taken out of North Block
to show the NAC / Justice Shah and provide informal copies to them.

9) As I was very well aware in advance that such practices regularly
occur in your Department, I had prominently stated in all my comments
that my comments were not to be disclosed to the NAC, or private
persons (like Justice Shah). I was very well aware that NAC has no
power to directly "summon" or requisition records from any Govt
Department, and certainly not documents or comments submitted by
private citizens in response to a public notice.

10) The disappearance of the file/folder containing comments from the
public is not a trivial matter in view of the provisions of the
Official Secrets Act. I am clearly alleging that the disappearance /
"untrace" of these documents was engineered by certain RTI "touts" in
collusion with officers of your Department to harm / cause damage to
affected citizens. As a victim/ affected person I desire that a
thorough enquiry / investigation be conducted into the disappearance
of this file / folder. No harm should ensure to me and the other 274
persons who seconded my comments. In particular I require equal
opportunity of hearing and consideration as was afforded to persons
who had filed their comments through the NAC by your Department. We
are all deeply concerned that "touts" have the free run of your
Department and enjoy extraordinary privileges whereas ordinary
citizens / "aam-aadmi" is made to run around.

11) I also demand that a Police Report / FIR be filed immediately in
connection with this missing file / folder so that the guilty officers
can be identified / prosecuted. I wish to place all facts in my
knowledge before the investigative agencies if this file/folder
continues to remain untraced.

I would appreciate an acknowledgment of this email which contains my
grievances - the substance of which has already been registered as
Public Grievance no. .DOPAT/E/2012/00589 on DARPG portal.

yours faithfully


Sarbajit Roy
B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024

Tel : 09311448069

RE: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi

Dt.11/8/12
I agree that the only remedy lies in challenging the judgements of Mr. Gandhi in high courts rather than entering into acrimonious debate among members.
JKGaur
 
> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 09:09:59 +0530
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi
> From: sroy.mb@gmail.com
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>
> I think the point Mr. Varkey makes is that the documents
> have "vanished" (so there is nothing left for citizens to
> be provided under RTI) - as distinguished from insiders
> (ie. non-citizens) who have retained their own private
> copies to be filed in Courts should the need arise.
>
> On 8/10/12, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Mr Varkey,
> >
> > Do you have documentary proof of what you are saying ?
> > If yes, please provide it.
> > Or it will be assumed to be a figment of your imagination.
> > I have the documents and there is nothing of the sort anywhere.
> > (unless of course I cannot read some of the "intentional" illegible
> > handwriting)
> >
> > RTIwanted
> >
> >
> > On 8/9/12, Baby Varkey <babyjohn.varkey@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Sir,
> >>
> >> Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi sits to adjudicate on
> >> relative rights of various persons arising from a Central legislation.
> >>
> >> *The Central Information Commission is a creation of statute, and every
> >> action of Mr Gandhi must be only within the 4 corners of that statute.*
> >>
> >> When an individual Commissioner repeatedly disagrees over interpretation
> >> of
> >> the statute with each of his brother Commissioners (and officers of the
> >> Commission) and incorporates his disagreement publicly in his orders, it
> >> makes the functioining of the Commission impossible.
> >>
> >> Justice Sanghi on receiving several separate Writ Petitions against Mr
> >> Gandhi controversial orders has come to the correct conclusion and
> >> strictured Mr. Shailesh by name to highlight the seriousness of Mr.
> >> Gandhi's impropriety. While that case was being heard Mr. Chakravarti
> >> (JS-Law) was present in the court and had no answer to Courts' query why
> >> Chief Commissioner was not intervening to withdraw cases from Mr. Gandhi.
> >> *Mr
> >> Chakravarti assured Court he would pass on Court's suggestion to withdraw
> >> cases from Mr. Gandhi.*
> >>
> >> This is the incident resulting in CIC withdrawing cases from Mr. Gandhi.
> >> Mr. Gandhi then approaches Chairperson UPA. The circular is made to
> >> disappear. Mr. Gandhi then victimises Mr. Chakravarti and other CIC
> >> officers making them approach High Court for stay.
> >>
> >> BJ Varkey, Advocate
> >>
> >> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dt.08/08/12
> >>> It is no good talking in riddles and fill in the blanks.
> >>> It is my observation that some are biased against Sailesh Gandhi. We all
> >>> know he is not a legal lumanary nor he has claimed to be so. So If his
> >>> judgements/orders are deficient from that angle, there is no need to
> >>> atribute motives without proof and if one has proof there are remdies
> >>> available.
> >>> JKGaur
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>> Date: eTue, 7 Aug 2012 23:00:46 +0800
> >>> From: djshah1944@yahoo.com
> >>>
> >>> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi
> >>> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Mr Gandhi is encouraging bad practices adopted by one Company for more
> >>> than 19 years in all Courts proceedings!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >>> Once I talked with him when I was in India. Over the phone he replied
> >>> that
> >>> this case is complete!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>> *From:* indrani Mukherjee <juno.im@gmail.com>
> >>> *To:* humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> >>> *Sent:* Monday, 6 August 2012 5:13 AM
> >>> *Subject:* Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi
> >>>
> >>> Dear All
> >>>
> >>> I am sorry to intervene amidst your conversation. The term "Ld." is used
> >>> in the Court orders or even while addressing arguments as a mark of
> >>> respect
> >>> towards even the opponent lawyer and in order to maintain the dignity and
> >>> decorum of the judicial functions. Similarly, the term "Hon'ble Court" is
> >>> used while addressing any Court of judicature. This is my observation
> >>> and
> >>> experience over the last decade of law practice as an advocate.
> >>> Sorry if I have intervened in your discussion, but intent was only to
> >>> share my experience.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dear Prasad
> >>>
> >>> I have no enmity with Mr Shailesh Gandhi.
> >>>
> >>> Insofar as the judgment is concerned, it s a public document.
> >>> Everyone is entitled to form his own opinion while read it.
> >>>
> >>> It is my experience, however, that when a judge uses phrases
> >>> like "Ld. counsel" or "Ld. Commissioner" in orders, more often
> >>> than not it is a code phrase for the next stage implying that the
> >>> Ld. gentleman knows too much for his own good.
> >>>
> >>> Sarbajit
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 8/6/12, prasad vaidya <prasadbvaidya@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> > Mr Sarbjit sir
> >>> > you might have enmity with Mr. Shailesh Gandhi but
> >>> dont
> >>> > use this discussion forum for passing remarks for individual enmity
> >>> > with
> >>> Mr.
> >>> > Gandhi Yours views might be proper according to you but there is also
> >>> other
> >>> > side which may call you as wrong.
> >>> > please dont take it as my advice but take it as my opinion which
> >>> > personal
> >>> > I have gone through Judgment of Justice Sanghi I feel that he wrote
> >>> judgment
> >>> > which is not proper and the way he wrote about Mr. Gandhi in fact he
> >>> > has
> >>> > lowered down the dignity of human by passing remarks which can be said
> >>> > to
> >>> > scandolous in nature and therefore Justice Sanghi is otherwise eligible
> >>> for
> >>> > contempt of his own court.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > viadya
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Regards
> >>>
> >>> Indrani Mukherjee
> >>> Advocate
> >>> 9811394136
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>

[HumJanenge] Help Required

Hi,

One of my application have not received answers in the accordance with the queries raised, also on communication with the concerned CPIO, he has refused to the provide any documents as requested in the application.

Now I have to apply to appellate. Please can any one guide me how to file a complaint or appeal with the appellate with any format, (this is my first time to appeal to an appellate).

Regards,
Hemant

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed

Dear Sarbajit,

I was responding to your comment:

> Unfortunately RTI Act does not allow for TRANSLATED copies
> of records to be given as of right.

and not about translating from language A to language B - where A or B are state languages.

RTIwanted



From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed

Dear Karira

Your citation actually ABSOLUTELY proves that the Punjab Police
must maintain its original records in Punjabi and that applicants
in that State are NOT entitled to demand translated copies to
English under RTI.

Here the applicant wants a translation from the Official Language of
the State into English. In your citation the applicant wanted a translation
from English into the Official language of the State.

Quite different

Sarbajit

On 8/11/12, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mr Sarbajit,
>
> Not absolutely correct.........depends on the circumstances of the case.
>
>
> Please read:
> http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/downloads/court-judgements-rti-issues-1/uttarakhand-hc-orders-scf-provide-translated-74/
>
> RTIwanted
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005"
> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:48 PM
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed
>
> Sir
> .
>
> Unfortunately RTI Act does not allow for TRANSLATED copies
> of records to be given as of right.
>
> OTH if you are e RESPONDENT then the Petitioner must
> serve you with OTs.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Aug 10, 10:42 am, brig sateesh kuthiala <kuthial...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> friends. i need some information from a punjab govt deptt. the documents
>> are all in punjabi. can i ask for translated copies in hindi, which will
>> then become officially and legally acceptable in courts in other states.
>> thanx
>>
>> Sateesh Kuthiala


Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi

I think the point Mr. Varkey makes is that the documents
have "vanished" (so there is nothing left for citizens to
be provided under RTI) - as distinguished from insiders
(ie. non-citizens) who have retained their own private
copies to be filed in Courts should the need arise.

On 8/10/12, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mr Varkey,
>
> Do you have documentary proof of what you are saying ?
> If yes, please provide it.
> Or it will be assumed to be a figment of your imagination.
> I have the documents and there is nothing of the sort anywhere.
> (unless of course I cannot read some of the "intentional" illegible
> handwriting)
>
> RTIwanted
>
>
> On 8/9/12, Baby Varkey <babyjohn.varkey@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sir,
>>
>> Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi sits to adjudicate on
>> relative rights of various persons arising from a Central legislation.
>>
>> *The Central Information Commission is a creation of statute, and every
>> action of Mr Gandhi must be only within the 4 corners of that statute.*
>>
>> When an individual Commissioner repeatedly disagrees over interpretation
>> of
>> the statute with each of his brother Commissioners (and officers of the
>> Commission) and incorporates his disagreement publicly in his orders, it
>> makes the functioining of the Commission impossible.
>>
>> Justice Sanghi on receiving several separate Writ Petitions against Mr
>> Gandhi controversial orders has come to the correct conclusion and
>> strictured Mr. Shailesh by name to highlight the seriousness of Mr.
>> Gandhi's impropriety. While that case was being heard Mr. Chakravarti
>> (JS-Law) was present in the court and had no answer to Courts' query why
>> Chief Commissioner was not intervening to withdraw cases from Mr. Gandhi.
>> *Mr
>> Chakravarti assured Court he would pass on Court's suggestion to withdraw
>> cases from Mr. Gandhi.*
>>
>> This is the incident resulting in CIC withdrawing cases from Mr. Gandhi.
>> Mr. Gandhi then approaches Chairperson UPA. The circular is made to
>> disappear. Mr. Gandhi then victimises Mr. Chakravarti and other CIC
>> officers making them approach High Court for stay.
>>
>> BJ Varkey, Advocate
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dt.08/08/12
>>> It is no good talking in riddles and fill in the blanks.
>>> It is my observation that some are biased against Sailesh Gandhi. We all
>>> know he is not a legal lumanary nor he has claimed to be so. So If his
>>> judgements/orders are deficient from that angle, there is no need to
>>> atribute motives without proof and if one has proof there are remdies
>>> available.
>>> JKGaur
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> Date: eTue, 7 Aug 2012 23:00:46 +0800
>>> From: djshah1944@yahoo.com
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi
>>> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>>>
>>>
>>> Mr Gandhi is encouraging bad practices adopted by one Company for more
>>> than 19 years in all Courts proceedings!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>> Once I talked with him when I was in India. Over the phone he replied
>>> that
>>> this case is complete!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* indrani Mukherjee <juno.im@gmail.com>
>>> *To:* humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>>> *Sent:* Monday, 6 August 2012 5:13 AM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi
>>>
>>> Dear All
>>>
>>> I am sorry to intervene amidst your conversation. The term "Ld." is used
>>> in the Court orders or even while addressing arguments as a mark of
>>> respect
>>> towards even the opponent lawyer and in order to maintain the dignity and
>>> decorum of the judicial functions. Similarly, the term "Hon'ble Court" is
>>> used while addressing any Court of judicature. This is my observation
>>> and
>>> experience over the last decade of law practice as an advocate.
>>> Sorry if I have intervened in your discussion, but intent was only to
>>> share my experience.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Prasad
>>>
>>> I have no enmity with Mr Shailesh Gandhi.
>>>
>>> Insofar as the judgment is concerned, it s a public document.
>>> Everyone is entitled to form his own opinion while read it.
>>>
>>> It is my experience, however, that when a judge uses phrases
>>> like "Ld. counsel" or "Ld. Commissioner" in orders, more often
>>> than not it is a code phrase for the next stage implying that the
>>> Ld. gentleman knows too much for his own good.
>>>
>>> Sarbajit
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/6/12, prasad vaidya <prasadbvaidya@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> > Mr Sarbjit sir
>>> > you might have enmity with Mr. Shailesh Gandhi but
>>> dont
>>> > use this discussion forum for passing remarks for individual enmity
>>> > with
>>> Mr.
>>> > Gandhi Yours views might be proper according to you but there is also
>>> other
>>> > side which may call you as wrong.
>>> > please dont take it as my advice but take it as my opinion which
>>> > personal
>>> > I have gone through Judgment of Justice Sanghi I feel that he wrote
>>> judgment
>>> > which is not proper and the way he wrote about Mr. Gandhi in fact he
>>> > has
>>> > lowered down the dignity of human by passing remarks which can be said
>>> > to
>>> > scandolous in nature and therefore Justice Sanghi is otherwise eligible
>>> for
>>> > contempt of his own court.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > viadya
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Indrani Mukherjee
>>> Advocate
>>> 9811394136
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed

Dear Karira

Your citation actually ABSOLUTELY proves that the Punjab Police
must maintain its original records in Punjabi and that applicants
in that State are NOT entitled to demand translated copies to
English under RTI.

Here the applicant wants a translation from the Official Language of
the State into English. In your citation the applicant wanted a translation
from English into the Official language of the State.

Quite different

Sarbajit

On 8/11/12, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mr Sarbajit,
>
> Not absolutely correct.........depends on the circumstances of the case.
>
>
> Please read:
> http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/downloads/court-judgements-rti-issues-1/uttarakhand-hc-orders-scf-provide-translated-74/
>
> RTIwanted
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005"
> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:48 PM
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed
>
> Sir
> .
>
> Unfortunately RTI Act does not allow for TRANSLATED copies
> of records to be given as of right.
>
> OTH if you are e RESPONDENT then the Petitioner must
> serve you with OTs.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Aug 10, 10:42 am, brig sateesh kuthiala <kuthial...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> friends. i need some information from a punjab govt deptt. the documents
>> are all in punjabi. can i ask for translated copies in hindi, which will
>> then become officially and legally acceptable in courts in other states.
>> thanx
>>
>> Sateesh Kuthiala

[HumJanenge] Govt puts limits on your right to info

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Govt-puts-limits-on-your-right-to-info/Article1-911648.aspx

Now there is a limit to how many questions you can ask under the right
to information law.

The government has introduced a 500-word limit for RTI applications
under new rules notified last week and decided to make applicants pay
for the postage too if the charges exceed Rs. 50.

Right to Information Rules, 2012 has been in the works for 21 months
that saw civil society accuse the government of curbing its right
through the backdoor.

Sonia Gandhi-led National Advisory Council (NAC) had taken up
negotiations with the government on behalf of the civil society. As
part of a compromise formula, the Department of Personnel and Training
(DoPT), however, has agreed to give up the move to bar applicants from
raising more than one subject. http://www.hindustantimes.com/Images/Popup/2012/8/11-08-12-pg-10a.jpg

It was part of the same deal that the NAC agreed to the 500-word limit
but emphasised that applications exceeding this limit should not be
rejected. The July 31 notification, however, does not explicitly
incorporate this disclaimer, leaving applicants at the mercy of
government departments.

Incidentally, the NAC had declared less than four months ago that the
new rules "have been put in abeyance". But the Prime Minister's Office
– which had been holding on to the file since January – appears to
have cleared the restrictions.

Maharashtra CM Prithviraj Chavan, who had pushed the original proposal
as the central minister in 2010, has implemented a similar set of
"retrograde" rules in the state.

The new rules also make it mandatory for poorest citizens to produce a
BPL certificate every time they seek information to get fee exemption.

The only positive news is an enabling provision to let applicants pay
online if this facility is available with public authorities. Once
this facility is set up when the postal department launches online
postal orders, NRIs would be able to use

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed

Mr Sarbajit,

Not absolutely correct.........depends on the circumstances of the case.

Please read:

http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/downloads/court-judgements-rti-issues-1/uttarakhand-hc-orders-scf-provide-translated-74/

RTIwanted



From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:48 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed

Sir
.

Unfortunately RTI Act does not allow for TRANSLATED copies
of records to be given as of right.

OTH if you are e RESPONDENT then the Petitioner must
serve you with OTs.

Sarbajit

On Aug 10, 10:42 am, brig sateesh kuthiala <kuthial...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> friends. i need some information from a punjab govt deptt. the documents are all in punjabi. can i ask for translated copies in hindi, which will then become officially and legally acceptable in courts in other states. thanx
>
> Sateesh Kuthiala


Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi

Mr Varkey,

Do you have documentary proof of what you are saying ?
If yes, please provide it.
Or it will be assumed to be a figment of your imagination.
I have the documents and there is nothing of the sort anywhere.
(unless of course I cannot read some of the "intentional" illegible handwriting)

RTIwanted

On 8/9/12, Baby Varkey <babyjohn.varkey@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sir,
>
> Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi sits to adjudicate on
> relative rights of various persons arising from a Central legislation.
>
> *The Central Information Commission is a creation of statute, and every
> action of Mr Gandhi must be only within the 4 corners of that statute.*
>
> When an individual Commissioner repeatedly disagrees over interpretation of
> the statute with each of his brother Commissioners (and officers of the
> Commission) and incorporates his disagreement publicly in his orders, it
> makes the functioining of the Commission impossible.
>
> Justice Sanghi on receiving several separate Writ Petitions against Mr
> Gandhi controversial orders has come to the correct conclusion and
> strictured Mr. Shailesh by name to highlight the seriousness of Mr.
> Gandhi's impropriety. While that case was being heard Mr. Chakravarti
> (JS-Law) was present in the court and had no answer to Courts' query why
> Chief Commissioner was not intervening to withdraw cases from Mr. Gandhi.
> *Mr
> Chakravarti assured Court he would pass on Court's suggestion to withdraw
> cases from Mr. Gandhi.*
>
> This is the incident resulting in CIC withdrawing cases from Mr. Gandhi.
> Mr. Gandhi then approaches Chairperson UPA. The circular is made to
> disappear. Mr. Gandhi then victimises Mr. Chakravarti and other CIC
> officers making them approach High Court for stay.
>
> BJ Varkey, Advocate
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Gaur J K <gaurjk@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>  Dt.08/08/12
>> It is no good talking in riddles and fill in the blanks.
>> It is my observation that some are biased against Sailesh Gandhi. We all
>> know he is not a legal lumanary nor he has claimed to be so. So If his
>> judgements/orders are deficient from that angle, there is no need to
>> atribute motives without proof and if one has proof there are remdies
>> available.
>> JKGaur
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>  Date: eTue, 7 Aug 2012 23:00:46 +0800
>> From: djshah1944@yahoo.com
>>
>> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi
>> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>>
>>
>>  Mr Gandhi is encouraging bad practices adopted by one Company for more
>> than 19 years in all Courts proceedings!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> Once I talked with him when I was in India. Over the phone he replied
>> that
>> this case is complete!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* indrani Mukherjee <juno.im@gmail.com>
>> *To:* humjanenge@googlegroups.com
>> *Sent:* Monday, 6 August 2012 5:13 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Mr. Shailesh Gandhi
>>
>>  Dear All
>>
>> I am sorry to intervene amidst your conversation. The term "Ld." is used
>> in the Court orders or even while addressing arguments as a mark of
>> respect
>> towards even the opponent lawyer and in order to maintain the dignity and
>> decorum of the judicial functions. Similarly, the term "Hon'ble Court" is
>> used while addressing any Court of judicature.  This is my observation
>> and
>> experience over the last decade of law practice as an advocate.
>> Sorry if I have intervened  in your discussion, but intent was only to
>> share my experience.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Prasad
>>
>> I have no enmity with Mr Shailesh Gandhi.
>>
>> Insofar as the judgment is concerned, it s a public document.
>> Everyone is entitled to form his own opinion while read it.
>>
>> It is my experience, however, that when a judge uses phrases
>> like "Ld. counsel" or "Ld. Commissioner" in orders, more often
>> than not it is a code phrase for the next stage implying that the
>> Ld. gentleman knows too much for his own good.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>>
>> On 8/6/12, prasad vaidya <prasadbvaidya@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Mr Sarbjit sir
>> >                    you might have enmity with Mr. Shailesh Gandhi but
>> dont
>> > use this discussion forum for passing remarks for individual enmity
>> > with
>> Mr.
>> > Gandhi Yours views might be proper according to you but there is also
>> other
>> > side which may call you as wrong.
>> > please dont take it as my advice but take it as my opinion which
>> > personal
>> > I have gone through Judgment of Justice Sanghi I feel that he wrote
>> judgment
>> > which is not proper and the way he wrote about Mr. Gandhi in fact he
>> > has
>> > lowered down the dignity of human by passing remarks which can be said
>> > to
>> > scandolous in nature and therefore Justice Sanghi is otherwise eligible
>> for
>> > contempt of his own court.
>> >
>> >
>> > viadya
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards
>>
>> Indrani Mukherjee
>> Advocate
>> 9811394136
>>
>>
>>
>


RE: [HumJanenge] advice needed

Dear Brig Kuthiala,
   Re: ur query.
   I suggest U ask Brig Harwant Singh, who is member of our IESM in C'Garh. nHe is clued up in  such matters & may be able to guide / help U.
   A 'cc' of this mail is also endorsed to him.
   U can now write to him directly.

For Brig Harwant only -- Sir. Can U help please ??

Best Wishes
Maj Gen A.J.B.Jaini, AVSM
Member Governing body of IESM
presently Fm - USA 


From: kuthiala27@hotmail.com
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: [HumJanenge] advice needed
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 11:12:33 +0530

friends. i need some information from a punjab govt deptt. the documents are all in punjabi. can i ask for translated copies in hindi, which will then become officially and legally acceptable in courts in other states. thanx

Sateesh Kuthiala

[HumJanenge] advice needed


Dear Dr. Gupta,
 
I need your advice urgently and want to talk to you on phone;  but your both ph one numbers are beyond reach.
 
Kindly contact at phone number 9136161231  
 
Regards,
 
Hari Goyal
 
 
--- On Fri, 10/8/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: advice needed
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Friday, 10 August, 2012, 4:05 PM

if the volume is low, i can translate.

On 8/10/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sir
>
> You can apply for CERTIFIED COPIES of EXISTING RECORD.
>
> You must then get translated and file OFFICIAL TRANSLATION
> (there is a procedure for this which your counsel will brief
> you) to the Court you are filing in AT YOUR OWN COST.
>
> Unfortunately RTI Act does not allow for TRANSLATED copies
> of records to be given as of right.
>
> OTH if you are e RESPONDENT then the Petitioner must
> serve you with OTs.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Aug 10, 10:42 am, brig sateesh kuthiala <kuthial...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>> friends. i need some information from a punjab govt deptt. the documents
>> are all in punjabi. can i ask for translated copies in hindi, which will
>> then become officially and legally acceptable in courts in other states.
>> thanx
>>
>> Sateesh Kuthiala
>


--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1722, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Mr. Shailesh Gandhi

Central Information Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi sits to adjudicate on
relative rights of various persons arising from a Central legislation.
 
*The Central Information Commission is a creation of statute, and every
action of Mr Gandhi must be only within the 4 corners of that statute.*
 
When an individual Commissioner repeatedly disagrees over interpretation of
the statute with each of his brother Commissioners (and officers of the
Commission) and incorporates his disagreement publicly in his orders, it
makes the functioining of the Commission impossible.
 
Justice Sanghi on receiving several separate Writ Petitions against Mr
Gandhi controversial orders has come to the correct conclusion and
strictured Mr. Shailesh by name to highlight the seriousness of Mr.
Gandhi's impropriety. While that case was being heard Mr. Chakravarti
(JS-Law) was present in the court and had no answByer to Courts' query why
Chief Commissioner was not intervening to withdraw cases from Mr. Gandhi. *Mr
Chakravarti assured Court he would pass on Court's suggestion to withdraw
cases from Mr. Gandhi.*
 
This is the incident resulting in CIC withdrawing cases from Mr. Gandhi.
Mr. Gandhi then approaches Chairperson UPA. The circular is made to
disappear. Mr. Gandhi then victimises Mr. Chakravarti and other CIC
officers making them approach High Court for stay.
 
-- By the logic of this post, anything done by Wajahat Habibullah(being 1st Info Comm) becomes gospel truth and nothing can be done to undo his sins.

Would you please elaborate where did you find anything done by Mr. Gandhi, which was outside 4 corners of statute? I can show you many instances of other commissioners violating 4 corners of statute.

I hope you have read that Mr Singhi has also appreciated the fact that Mr. Gandhi also has a right of his opinion.

It would be interesting to know the source of your information where cases were withdrawn from Mr. Gandhi and he apporached UPA chairperson and the mysterious circular. Please do not shoot in dark...

Girish Mittal




Re: [HumJanenge] DoPT Notifies new RTI appeal rules

This file is moving because of SC case no. Civil Appeal 2023/2012
which is listed for final disposal in July 2012.

On 8/9/12, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/New-RTI-appeal-rules-notified/Article1-910489.aspx
>
>
> New RTI appeal rules notified
>
>
> Aloke Tikku, Hindustan Times
> New Delhi, August 08, 2012
>
>
> The government has notified a new set of rules for moving the Central
> Information Commission (CIC) against government departments, laying down the
> basic standards that the appeal will have to meet to be taken up. The new
> rules were notified by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) at
> the request of the CIC that was grappling with incoherent and incomplete
> appeals.
> Chief Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra said the commission had not
> insisted on a format or content of an appeal in the initial phase since the
> implementation of the law was still in its infancy.
> "But now that the number of RTI appeals has gone up, it has become extremely
> difficult for us to cope with incomplete, and sometimes illegible appeals,"
> Mishra told Hindustan Times.
> In the past, the CIC has accepted letters written to the commission as
> formal appeals and got around to putting together the necessary paperwork at
> its own initiative.
> With nearly a million RTI applications filed annually, the proportion of
> appeals has also increased considerably. As the CIC, Mishra has about 1,233
> pending appeals to deal with.
> As a result of the backlog, a denial of information appeal would have to
> wait for about 8 to 12 months before the information commissioner can take
> up the case.
> The new rules – notified on 31 July but yet not put in public domain by DoPT
> – not only lists the documents that would need to accompany an appeal but
> also lays down a format for the applications.
> Deviation from the format would not be a ground for rejecting an appeal to
> ensure that the poor were not discriminated against.
>
> But for the rest, "I think it is only fair to expect people to cooperate
> with us".