Hum Janenge

[HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-03T17:22:00.000-08:00

Firstly I m glad that we seem to now acknowledge that fault does not
lie with conduct of a particular IC. In fact any good IC would deal in
the same way, and in your case IC(SS) has gone out of her way to issue
a detailed order showing considerable application of mind, whereas say
erstwhile IC(MA) would have disposed you in a 2 para order.

2) If the PA has not VOLUNTARILY done its 4(1)(d) discloure, (and
which I emphasise they are not to do VOLUNTARILY but AS A MATTER OF
COURSE after the SC Constitutional bench judgment in the S.P.Mukharji
(???) corruption case) in every decision they take, it is open to the
AGGRIEVED UNSUCCESSFUL CANDIDATES to request the PIO to publish the
same, and thereafter to THEMSELVES file section 6 RTI requests.

3) Instead you have attempted to take on the problems of the entire
world (for reasons best known to you) and caused a genuine
apprehension on the part of the PA that their work will come to a
standstill since your RTI request(s) is NOT SPECIFIC !!! . . IC(SS)
after having heard you, has upheld the PA and cited the SC order. She
has however allowed you 1 FULL DAY's INSPECTION of all records (which
the PA wishes to show you) with the right to take copies. Thus as
IC(MA) would famously say "there is no question of information
denial".

4) The ONLY QUESTION you must address is ... "WHAT IS MY LOCUS STANDI
TO DO ALL THIS ?".
There is a clear difference in law between an aggrieved person who
fights for his own rights, and an interloper, intermeddler who acts as
a busybody / blackmailer. Unfortunately even genuine busybodies end up
being characterised as blackmailers and which affects ALL RTI USERS.so
I have no sympathy for such people.

5) Get a copy of the ARSB's "cooked up" explanation and start RTIing
from there.

Sarbajit

On Mar 4, 3:47 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, sir.
> now let us come to actual point.
> ASRB is a recruitment body which carries out recruitment of scientists
> for ICAR. for the last five-six years, none of the non selected or the
> candidate not considered eligible has ever been intimated about the
> reasons for his/her non selection (violation of section 4(1)(d). No
> list of candidates rejected/non selected/not called for interview/non
> shortlisted has ever been published. one even does not come to know as
> to who was selected.
> The ASRB sends recommendations to ICAR. ICAR after getting
> recommendations studies the files and and then sends them back to
> ASRB.
> When I filed application with ASRB they did not disclose anything. in
> the meantime, i also filed application with ICAR asking for inspection
> of records of scientists selected. they were very liberal. so i
> carried out inspection of applications of about 25 people and found
> that atleast 5 of them were not eligible to even apply/not qualified
> to even get shortlisted.
> I then filed a complaint with the prime minister/agriculture
> minister/chairman ASRB highlighting all important facts. copy of the
> same is enclosed.
> PMO marked it to secretary to look into the matter who inturn sent it
> to ASRB for needful. Now i have come to know that ASRB has not done
> anything on this communication and sent a detailed (cooked up reply)
> explanation.
> Now what to do? I would like to get your feedback on this issue.
>
> On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear Sandeep
>
> > I shall confine myself only to her order.
>
> > 1) It is clear therefrom that YOU are a VEXATIOUS RTI BUSYBODY filing
> > RTI applications like a TAXICAB for hire. (At least that is what they
> > are going to say).
>
> > 2) YOU have invited SS's order onto yourself. Aa bail mujhe maar.
>
> > 3) Your arguments for the P&H are stupid (and you have only a small
> > chance of winning - and that too only because the P^H HC is one of the
> > more liberal courts). You would be KICKED OUT in the SC.
>
> > 4) I completely agree with her that PERSONAL details of unsuccessful
> > candidates cannot be disclosed in RTI, even after the fact.
>
> > 5) ">what should one do when the FAA chooses not to give any decision
> > even after her orders ?"
> > Ans: File a 2nd appeal (for the FIRST TIME, because the first of her
> > orders were given in "complaint" jurisdiction in routine).
>
> > Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-03T14:47:00.000-08:00

Ok, sir.
now let us come to actual point.
ASRB is a recruitment body which carries out recruitment of scientists
for ICAR. for the last five-six years, none of the non selected or the
candidate not considered eligible has ever been intimated about the
reasons for his/her non selection (violation of section 4(1)(d). No
list of candidates rejected/non selected/not called for interview/non
shortlisted has ever been published. one even does not come to know as
to who was selected.
The ASRB sends recommendations to ICAR. ICAR after getting
recommendations studies the files and and then sends them back to
ASRB.
When I filed application with ASRB they did not disclose anything. in
the meantime, i also filed application with ICAR asking for inspection
of records of scientists selected. they were very liberal. so i
carried out inspection of applications of about 25 people and found
that atleast 5 of them were not eligible to even apply/not qualified
to even get shortlisted.
I then filed a complaint with the prime minister/agriculture
minister/chairman ASRB highlighting all important facts. copy of the
same is enclosed.
PMO marked it to secretary to look into the matter who inturn sent it
to ASRB for needful. Now i have come to know that ASRB has not done
anything on this communication and sent a detailed (cooked up reply)
explanation.
Now what to do? I would like to get your feedback on this issue.

On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sandeep
>
> I shall confine myself only to her order.
>
> 1) It is clear therefrom that YOU are a VEXATIOUS RTI BUSYBODY filing
> RTI applications like a TAXICAB for hire. (At least that is what they
> are going to say).
>
> 2) YOU have invited SS's order onto yourself. Aa bail mujhe maar.
>
> 3) Your arguments for the P&H are stupid (and you have only a small
> chance of winning - and that too only because the P^H HC is one of the
> more liberal courts). You would be KICKED OUT in the SC.
>
> 4) I completely agree with her that PERSONAL details of unsuccessful
> candidates cannot be disclosed in RTI, even after the fact.
>
> 5) ">what should one do when the FAA chooses not to give any decision
> even after her orders ?"
> Ans: File a 2nd appeal (for the FIRST TIME, because the first of her
> orders were given in "complaint" jurisdiction in routine).
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Mar 3, 9:15 pm, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> recently i had a hot discussion with her. she is not aware of rti
>> rules, regulations etc. she said to me that application forms of the
>> candidates for selection to public post contains personal information
>> and cannot be disclosed.
>> I asked that if this is personal then what is public. she said that i
>> should not advise her. i firmly believe that she is only making a
>> mockery of the rti act.
>> please go through the attached order. I am going to challenge this
>> order in the punjab and haryana high court. she talks of supreme court
>> orders but does not seem to know of the crux of the matter.
>> what should one do when she asks PIO to give an order in complaint
>> case and the PIO chooses not to reply to this order?
>> what should one do when the FAA chooses not to give any decision even
>> after her orders.
>>
>> On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > For one moment forget the SC judgment and recall what we have been
>> > advising in the group.
>>
>> > No IC, not even IC(SS) can ignore genuine complaint cases, such as
>> > where PIOs have not been appointed, or where he refuses to accept RTI
>> > application.etc. I hope you are not saying that she is doing so
>> > because frankly I dont track CIC goings on and their orders anymore.
>>
>> > The problem is when PIO fails to reply, or he gives "misleading" /
>> > "partial" information etc. For years we had all those f***ing NGO
>> > "parasites" (actually I use another word) who advised RTI fools to use
>> > "complaint" (instead of appeal) because a) "It is quicker" b) "CIC has
>> > powers of court" c) "Complaint is not time barred unlike appeal (so
>> > all those 2 year old cases can be revived etc). ....
>>
>> > The recent SC judgment put a stop to all such nonsense, so the NGO
>> > HARAMIS (!!!) are now focused on some meaningless observations in SC
>> > judgments about how too much time is wasted in RTI, how the Govt will
>> > come to a standstill etc....
>>
>> > There is no need for SC to say that the only appeal for a poor or zero
>> > FA decision is a 2nd Appeal to CIC -- BECAUSE THE RTI ACT SAYS SO AND
>> > LEAVES NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE.
>>
>> > IC(SS) is a seasoned bureaucrat, she doesn't make such foolish
>> > mistakes. If I blindly had to chose between supporting an order of
>> > hers versus the say of some disgruntled RTI activist, I would chose
>> > her order any day.
>>
>> > Sarbajit
>>
>> > On Mar 3, 3:16 pm, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> which judgement sir?
>> >> the SC judgement says that information cannot be ordered to be
>> >> supplied in complaint cases. but i am not saying that she should have
>> >> ordered supply of information. she was required to take action on
>> >> complaint (whatever rti act prescribes). there is no supreme court
>> >> order which says that appellant can be forced to file second appeal
>> >> again.
>>
>> >> On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Dear Sandeep
>>
>> >> > When IC(SS) ... and all other ICs .. have a SC judgment allowing them
>> >> > to do what they are doing, what purpose will it solve to file a
>> >> > Petition to the President of India ?
>>
>> >> > Sarbajit
>>
>> >> > On Mar 3, 4:49 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
>> >> >> heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
>> >> >> option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of
>> >> >> FAA
>> >> >> file fresh second appeal.
>> >> >> in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
>> >> >> approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
>> >> >> asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
>> >> >> by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
>> >> >> highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
>> >> >> I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
>> >> >> removal of such commissioners.
>> >> >> please give your feedback/comments
>>
>> >> >> On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > Dear Nidhi (and group)
>>
>> >> >> > After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
>> >> >> > defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry
>> >> >> > has
>> >> >> > published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
>> >> >> > only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of
>> >> >> > what
>> >> >> > .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>>
>> >> >> > So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
>> >> >> > which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in
>> >> >> > terms
>> >> >> > of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh
>> >> >> > remaining
>> >> >> > 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then
>> >> >> > this
>> >> >> > works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
>> >> >> > given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>>
>> >> >> > Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED
>> >> >> > THESE
>> >> >> > 3
>> >> >> > EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get
>> >> >> > for
>> >> >> > study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a
>> >> >> > certain
>> >> >> > MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>>
>> >> >> > Sarbajit
>>
>> >> >> > Sarbajit
>>
>> >> >> > On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> Dear Sarbajit
>>
>> >> >> >> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+
>> >> >> >> figure.
>> >> >> >> He
>> >> >> >> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all
>> >> >> >> registries
>> >> >> >> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a
>> >> >> >> return
>> >> >> >> by
>> >> >> >> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media
>> >> >> >> reports.
>>
>> >> >> >> nidhi
>>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> >> >> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> >> >> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>
>> >> --
>> >> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> >> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> >> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>
>> CIC_SS_A_2011_901804_M_77481[1].pdf
>> 318KViewDownload

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-03T08:47:00.001-08:00

Dear Sandeep

I shall confine myself only to her order.

1) It is clear therefrom that YOU are a VEXATIOUS RTI BUSYBODY filing
RTI applications like a TAXICAB for hire. (At least that is what they
are going to say).

2) YOU have invited SS's order onto yourself. Aa bail mujhe maar.

3) Your arguments for the P&H are stupid (and you have only a small
chance of winning - and that too only because the P^H HC is one of the
more liberal courts). You would be KICKED OUT in the SC.

4) I completely agree with her that PERSONAL details of unsuccessful
candidates cannot be disclosed in RTI, even after the fact.

5) ">what should one do when the FAA chooses not to give any decision
even after her orders ?"
Ans: File a 2nd appeal (for the FIRST TIME, because the first of her
orders were given in "complaint" jurisdiction in routine).

Sarbajit

On Mar 3, 9:15 pm, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> recently i had a hot discussion with her. she is not aware of rti
> rules, regulations etc. she said to me that application forms of the
> candidates for selection to public post contains personal information
> and cannot be disclosed.
> I asked that if this is personal then what is public. she said that i
> should not advise her. i firmly believe that she is only making a
> mockery of the rti act.
> please go through the attached order. I am going to challenge this
> order in the punjab and haryana high court. she talks of supreme court
> orders but does not seem to know of the crux of the matter.
> what should one do when she asks PIO to give an order in complaint
> case and the PIO chooses not to reply to this order?
> what should one do when the FAA chooses not to give any decision even
> after her orders.
>
> On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > For one moment forget the SC judgment and recall what we have been
> > advising in the group.
>
> > No IC, not even IC(SS) can ignore genuine complaint cases, such as
> > where PIOs have not been appointed, or where he refuses to accept RTI
> > application.etc. I hope you are not saying that she is doing so
> > because frankly I dont track CIC goings on and their orders anymore.
>
> > The problem is when PIO fails to reply, or he gives "misleading" /
> > "partial" information etc. For years we had all those f***ing NGO
> > "parasites" (actually I use another word) who advised RTI fools to use
> > "complaint" (instead of appeal) because a) "It is quicker" b) "CIC has
> > powers of court" c) "Complaint is not time barred unlike appeal (so
> > all those 2 year old cases can be revived etc). ....
>
> > The recent SC judgment put a stop to all such nonsense, so the NGO
> > HARAMIS (!!!) are now focused on some meaningless observations in SC
> > judgments about how too much time is wasted in RTI, how the Govt will
> > come to a standstill etc....
>
> > There is no need for SC to say that the only appeal for a poor or zero
> > FA decision is a 2nd Appeal to CIC -- BECAUSE THE RTI ACT SAYS SO AND
> > LEAVES NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE.
>
> > IC(SS) is a seasoned bureaucrat, she doesn't make such foolish
> > mistakes. If I blindly had to chose between supporting an order of
> > hers versus the say of some disgruntled RTI activist, I would chose
> > her order any day.
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On Mar 3, 3:16 pm, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> which judgement sir?
> >> the SC judgement says that information cannot be ordered to be
> >> supplied in complaint cases. but i am not saying that she should have
> >> ordered supply of information. she was required to take action on
> >> complaint (whatever rti act prescribes). there is no supreme court
> >> order which says that appellant can be forced to file second appeal
> >> again.
>
> >> On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Dear Sandeep
>
> >> > When IC(SS) ... and all other ICs .. have a SC judgment allowing them
> >> > to do what they are doing, what purpose will it solve to file a
> >> > Petition to the President of India ?
>
> >> > Sarbajit
>
> >> > On Mar 3, 4:49 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
> >> >> heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
> >> >> option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of FAA
> >> >> file fresh second appeal.
> >> >> in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
> >> >> approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
> >> >> asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
> >> >> by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
> >> >> highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
> >> >> I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
> >> >> removal of such commissioners.
> >> >> please give your feedback/comments
>
> >> >> On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> >> >> > After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
> >> >> > defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
> >> >> > published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
> >> >> > only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
> >> >> > .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> >> >> > So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
> >> >> > which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in
> >> >> > terms
> >> >> > of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
> >> >> > 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
> >> >> > works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
> >> >> > given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> >> >> > Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE
> >> >> > 3
> >> >> > EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
> >> >> > study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
> >> >> > MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> >> >> > Sarbajit
>
> >> >> > Sarbajit
>
> >> >> > On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> Dear Sarbajit
>
> >> >> >> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+
> >> >> >> figure.
> >> >> >> He
> >> >> >> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all
> >> >> >> registries
> >> >> >> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a
> >> >> >> return
> >> >> >> by
> >> >> >> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media
> >> >> >> reports.
>
> >> >> >> nidhi
>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> >> >> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> >> >> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>
> >> --
> >> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> >> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> >> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>
> CIC_SS_A_2011_901804_M_77481[1].pdf
> 318KViewDownload

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-03T08:15:00.000-08:00

recently i had a hot discussion with her. she is not aware of rti
rules, regulations etc. she said to me that application forms of the
candidates for selection to public post contains personal information
and cannot be disclosed.
I asked that if this is personal then what is public. she said that i
should not advise her. i firmly believe that she is only making a
mockery of the rti act.
please go through the attached order. I am going to challenge this
order in the punjab and haryana high court. she talks of supreme court
orders but does not seem to know of the crux of the matter.
what should one do when she asks PIO to give an order in complaint
case and the PIO chooses not to reply to this order?
what should one do when the FAA chooses not to give any decision even
after her orders.

On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> For one moment forget the SC judgment and recall what we have been
> advising in the group.
>
> No IC, not even IC(SS) can ignore genuine complaint cases, such as
> where PIOs have not been appointed, or where he refuses to accept RTI
> application.etc. I hope you are not saying that she is doing so
> because frankly I dont track CIC goings on and their orders anymore.
>
> The problem is when PIO fails to reply, or he gives "misleading" /
> "partial" information etc. For years we had all those f***ing NGO
> "parasites" (actually I use another word) who advised RTI fools to use
> "complaint" (instead of appeal) because a) "It is quicker" b) "CIC has
> powers of court" c) "Complaint is not time barred unlike appeal (so
> all those 2 year old cases can be revived etc). ....
>
> The recent SC judgment put a stop to all such nonsense, so the NGO
> HARAMIS (!!!) are now focused on some meaningless observations in SC
> judgments about how too much time is wasted in RTI, how the Govt will
> come to a standstill etc....
>
> There is no need for SC to say that the only appeal for a poor or zero
> FA decision is a 2nd Appeal to CIC -- BECAUSE THE RTI ACT SAYS SO AND
> LEAVES NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE.
>
> IC(SS) is a seasoned bureaucrat, she doesn't make such foolish
> mistakes. If I blindly had to chose between supporting an order of
> hers versus the say of some disgruntled RTI activist, I would chose
> her order any day.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Mar 3, 3:16 pm, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> which judgement sir?
>> the SC judgement says that information cannot be ordered to be
>> supplied in complaint cases. but i am not saying that she should have
>> ordered supply of information. she was required to take action on
>> complaint (whatever rti act prescribes). there is no supreme court
>> order which says that appellant can be forced to file second appeal
>> again.
>>
>> On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Dear Sandeep
>>
>> > When IC(SS) ... and all other ICs .. have a SC judgment allowing them
>> > to do what they are doing, what purpose will it solve to file a
>> > Petition to the President of India ?
>>
>> > Sarbajit
>>
>> > On Mar 3, 4:49 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
>> >> heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
>> >> option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of FAA
>> >> file fresh second appeal.
>> >> in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
>> >> approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
>> >> asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
>> >> by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
>> >> highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
>> >> I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
>> >> removal of such commissioners.
>> >> please give your feedback/comments
>>
>> >> On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Dear Nidhi (and group)
>>
>> >> > After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
>> >> > defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
>> >> > published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
>> >> > only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
>> >> > .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>>
>> >> > So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
>> >> > which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in
>> >> > terms
>> >> > of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
>> >> > 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
>> >> > works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
>> >> > given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>>
>> >> > Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE
>> >> > 3
>> >> > EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
>> >> > study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
>> >> > MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>>
>> >> > Sarbajit
>>
>> >> > Sarbajit
>>
>> >> > On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Dear Sarbajit
>>
>> >> >> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+
>> >> >> figure.
>> >> >> He
>> >> >> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all
>> >> >> registries
>> >> >> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a
>> >> >> return
>> >> >> by
>> >> >> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media
>> >> >> reports.
>>
>> >> >> nidhi
>>
>> >> --
>> >> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> >> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> >> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> Phone: 91-99929-31181

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] LEARN HOW RTI ACTIVISTS NAILED KRIPYASHANKAR SINGH

2012-03-03T08:05:00.002-08:00

LESSON:- UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL

HOW TO NAIL BIG SHARKS:-

The man behind Kripashankar Singh's fall

ABSTRACTS OF Sanjay Thirwari

We felt that the since Kripashankar Singh is a Congressman and both the state and Centre are being run by Congress governments, the case would never see the light of day.

Can you please tell us how you went about filing so many RTIs?

If one person files so many RTI queries, the authorities are bound to doubt the intention of the applicant. So very smartly, we decided to share various government offices amongst me and some of my friends, who have been with me since 2005.

So while one friend filed a RTI in the school in Jaunpur (Uttar Pradesh) from where Kripashankar claims to have cleared his HSC (higher secondary certificate) from, one of us filed an RTI in the income tax department; another filed an RTI in the Mantralaya (the Maharashtra state secretariat).

When one of us filed an RTI in the collector's office, we found that some crucial papers regarding his property are missing! So on and so forth...that is how we were able to compile the data.

Who are these friends? Can you name them?

I do not think is it right to name them. Suffice to say they are friends who have been with me for a long time and are interested in social work just like me.

While we did not face any major hiccups, it was not that easy. The whole process was backed by some serious follow-ups.

It appeared that the system was trying to protect and cover Kripashankar's lies rather than being candid about it in the RTI replies.

Despite writing clearly and to the point, the officers would give half-baked replies or an incomplete set of papers. So there was a lot of follow-up that has gone into this.

For instance, we have still not got any reply on the number of chartered flights he has taken and the expenses incurred.

[rti4empowerment] LEARN HOW RTI ACTIVISTS NAILED KRIPYASHANKAR SINGH

2012-03-03T08:05:00.001-08:00

LESSON:- UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL

HOW TO NAIL BIG SHARKS:-

The man behind Kripashankar Singh's fall

ABSTRACTS OF Sanjay Thirwari

We felt that the since Kripashankar Singh is a Congressman and both the state and Centre are being run by Congress governments, the case would never see the light of day.

Can you please tell us how you went about filing so many RTIs?

When one of us filed an RTI in the collector's office, we found that some crucial papers regarding his property are missing! So on and so forth...that is how we were able to compile the data.

Who are these friends? Can you name them?

I do not think is it right to name them. Suffice to say they are friends who have been with me for a long time and are interested in social work just like me.

While we did not face any major hiccups, it was not that easy. The whole process was backed by some serious follow-ups.

It appeared that the system was trying to protect and cover Kripashankar's lies rather than being candid about it in the RTI replies.

Despite writing clearly and to the point, the officers would give half-baked replies or an incomplete set of papers. So there was a lot of follow-up that has gone into this.

For instance, we have still not got any reply on the number of chartered flights he has taken and the expenses incurred.

[HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-03T06:03:00.000-08:00

For one moment forget the SC judgment and recall what we have been
advising in the group.

No IC, not even IC(SS) can ignore genuine complaint cases, such as
where PIOs have not been appointed, or where he refuses to accept RTI
application.etc. I hope you are not saying that she is doing so
because frankly I dont track CIC goings on and their orders anymore.

The problem is when PIO fails to reply, or he gives "misleading" /
"partial" information etc. For years we had all those f***ing NGO
"parasites" (actually I use another word) who advised RTI fools to use
"complaint" (instead of appeal) because a) "It is quicker" b) "CIC has
powers of court" c) "Complaint is not time barred unlike appeal (so
all those 2 year old cases can be revived etc). ....

The recent SC judgment put a stop to all such nonsense, so the NGO
HARAMIS (!!!) are now focused on some meaningless observations in SC
judgments about how too much time is wasted in RTI, how the Govt will
come to a standstill etc....

There is no need for SC to say that the only appeal for a poor or zero
FA decision is a 2nd Appeal to CIC -- BECAUSE THE RTI ACT SAYS SO AND
LEAVES NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE.

IC(SS) is a seasoned bureaucrat, she doesn't make such foolish
mistakes. If I blindly had to chose between supporting an order of
hers versus the say of some disgruntled RTI activist, I would chose
her order any day.

Sarbajit

On Mar 3, 3:16 pm, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> which judgement sir?
> the SC judgement says that information cannot be ordered to be
> supplied in complaint cases. but i am not saying that she should have
> ordered supply of information. she was required to take action on
> complaint (whatever rti act prescribes). there is no supreme court
> order which says that appellant can be forced to file second appeal
> again.
>
> On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear Sandeep
>
> > When IC(SS) ... and all other ICs .. have a SC judgment allowing them
> > to do what they are doing, what purpose will it solve to file a
> > Petition to the President of India ?
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On Mar 3, 4:49 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
> >> heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
> >> option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of FAA
> >> file fresh second appeal.
> >> in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
> >> approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
> >> asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
> >> by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
> >> highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
> >> I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
> >> removal of such commissioners.
> >> please give your feedback/comments
>
> >> On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> >> > After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
> >> > defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
> >> > published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
> >> > only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
> >> > .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> >> > So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
> >> > which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
> >> > of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
> >> > 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
> >> > works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
> >> > given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> >> > Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
> >> > EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
> >> > study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
> >> > MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> >> > Sarbajit
>
> >> > Sarbajit
>
> >> > On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> Dear Sarbajit
>
> >> >> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure.
> >> >> He
> >> >> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all
> >> >> registries
> >> >> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return
> >> >> by
> >> >> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media
> >> >> reports.
>
> >> >> nidhi
>
> >> --
> >> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> >> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> >> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

2012-03-03T05:46:00.000-08:00

They dont want any of us anywhere near, qualified or not.

Lt Gen SK Bahri (Retd)

From: deodutta rajwade <rajwade49er@yahoo.com>
To: "humjanenge@googlegroups.com" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>; "WeGunners@yahoogroups.com" <WeGunners@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 2 March 2012 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

Are outstanding defence service officers qualified for SUCH posts?

From: Vijendra Singh <vijendra5558@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Cc: Karnataka Intiative RTI <thekirti@yahoogroups.com>; RTI Group <KRTIF@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2012 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

Selection comittee did not perform its duties honestly at all. they were dutiful to see that the govt deptts under the 3 selected govt officers/ I.Cs never denied the asked rti information contrary to rti spirit.

If their ministry / deptt /institution ever denied the information to rti applicants disrespecting the RTI spirit ; those highest officers are also responsible for the misdeeds of info refusals absurdly by their junior officers. So such irresponsible officers must never be selected for pious post of the Info Commissioners.

I am quite sure that the dishonest leaders' committee of manmohansingh, chidambaram, sushmaswaraj never put this test on the candidates; and they absurdly ,illegally , immorally selected the wrongdoers.

I know well ; and whole the world know well that the officers of the 3 deptts under the 3 selected officers/ IC candidates refused several times to provide the bonafide , discloseable information to the RTI seekers absurdly killing the RTI laws and spirit.

Therefore the selection committee has committed sin/ crime knowingly , and conspiringly so that the information can be absurdly, forcibly denied to the rti seekers.

so they have snatched the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO SPEECH from the citizens. Sushmaswaraj has done more wrong because she was not known as dishonest. But now it is evident that not even a single leader in this country is honest.

God save my India.

vijendra singh ,meerut

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

A similar Article But offcourse High lighting Mr Seth Being From Bangalore (or is Residing ?) is Appearing in Todays Deccan Herald.
Since I Come across Several RTI requests being turned down by PIOs in Banks Mostly on Very Silly issues or Requests which never fall under the Fiduciary Capacity Shelter Clause , It would be a Good Proposition to Keenly Observe this Person if Appointed .
I also Understand by Documents Supplied by CIC itself that IBA which is just an Association has issued letters of caution/instructions to CEO's of all Public Sector Banks of What information should be Parted or not. This Association is not a Public authority
Mr Seth was One of the Managing committee member at that time .
For Breveity i cite one Sample refusal under Fiduciary clause being " the Inward register of RTI Appln's includes the details of the applications which were submitted by other parties to the CPIO under the act (meaning RTI act) as this information relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest or disclosure of such information would cause unwarrented invasion of the privacy of any individiual as such information sought cannot be provided
Freinds can offer thier Comments
N vikramsimha , KRIA Koota , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Sat, 25/2/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Saturday, 25 February, 2012, 10:43 PM

> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/former-ib-chief-among-3-new-information-commissioners-at-cic/articleshow/12034174.cms
>
> NEW DELHI: The government has shortlisted a former chief of
> Intelligence Bureau, a banker and a former bureaucrat as
> three new
> Information Commissioners at the transparency panel CIC.
>
> Former IB Chief Rajiv Mathur, former Environment Secretary
> Vijai
> Sharma and Syndicate Bank Chairman and Managing Director
> Basant Seth
> have been shortlisted as new faces at the Central
> Information
> Commission which is overburdened with over 20,000 pending
> appeals
> under the Right to Information Act, official sources said.
>
> A panel headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh which
> included Law
> Minister Salman Khurshid and Leader of Opposition Sushma
> Swaraj
> shortlisted the names of these people recently, they said.
>
> According to the RTI Act, the complete strength of the
> transparency
> panel is a Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Central
> Information
> Commissioners. As of now there are just five Information
> Commissioners
> leaving a shortage of five.
>
> A formal announcement on the appointment would be made
> shortly, they
> said.
>
> Mathur, a 1972 batch IPS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre, has
> served IB
> for nearly three decades including 15 years in Washington.
> He took
> over the reigns of the agency in January 2009, before
> retiring on
> December 31, 2010.
>
> Sharma, a 1974 batch IAS officer, from Uttar Pradesh cadre,
> was
> secretary in Union Environment Ministry before his
> superannuation in
> December 2010.
>
> He held number of positions in the state including State
> Housing
> Secretary, State Environment Secretary and Chairman of State
> Pollution
> Control Board among others.
>
> Seth who is the CMD of Syndicate Bank, Bangalore has held
> senior
> positions in Small Industries Development Bank and Bank of
> India.
>

--
Vijendra Singh
E-19, Janakpuri,
Ajanta Colony, garh road,
Meerut-250004
UP

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-03T02:16:00.000-08:00

which judgement sir?
the SC judgement says that information cannot be ordered to be
supplied in complaint cases. but i am not saying that she should have
ordered supply of information. she was required to take action on
complaint (whatever rti act prescribes). there is no supreme court
order which says that appellant can be forced to file second appeal
again.

On 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sandeep
>
> When IC(SS) ... and all other ICs .. have a SC judgment allowing them
> to do what they are doing, what purpose will it solve to file a
> Petition to the President of India ?
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
> On Mar 3, 4:49 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
>> heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
>> option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of FAA
>> file fresh second appeal.
>> in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
>> approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
>> asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
>> by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
>> highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
>> I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
>> removal of such commissioners.
>> please give your feedback/comments
>>
>> On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Dear Nidhi (and group)
>>
>> > After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
>> > defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
>> > published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
>> > only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
>> > .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>>
>> > So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
>> > which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
>> > of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
>> > 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
>> > works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
>> > given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>>
>> > Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
>> > EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
>> > study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
>> > MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>>
>> > Sarbajit
>>
>> > Sarbajit
>>
>> > On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Dear Sarbajit
>>
>> >> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure.
>> >> He
>> >> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all
>> >> registries
>> >> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return
>> >> by
>> >> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media
>> >> reports.
>>
>> >> nidhi
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> Phone: 91-99929-31181

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T20:13:00.000-08:00

Dear Karira

Even if we accept your figures, it simply means that only about 6,000
cases are pending at CIC - and NOT the 27,000 which they claim.

The 3,000 cases spike is already reflected in the so-called receipts
for Dec. 2011 where over 5,000 cases were "received" compared to the
running average of about 2,000 cases per month.

The other problem is that all RTI appeals were ordered to be
digitised. A PRIVATE agency responsible for this has allegedly walked
off with about 10,000 records and failed to return them despite
considerable followup. Somebody can file an RTI for this to ascertain
its truth, If true, it is scandalous.

Sarbajit

On Mar 3, 7:55 am, C K Jam <rtiwan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mr Sarbajit,
>
> I think you missed my detailed response to your earlier post regarding those lists - the one where I proved that those lists were bogus.
>
> The list put up by Registry of IC (AD) is also bogus.
>
> On complaining very strongly about the correctness of those lists, I was told that the purpose of the lists was to help those appellants/complainants whose files have been lost in the CIC. Apparently there are 3000 to 3500 cases which have gone missing from the CIC, since its inception.
>
> Anyhow, since the list from one month to another also has discrepancies, a RTI is on the way.
>
> RTIwanted
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
> To: Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com>; humjanenge <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 2, 2012 10:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
>
> Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
> defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
> published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
> only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
> .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
> which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
> of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
> 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
> works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
> given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
> EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
> study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
> MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> Sarbajit
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dear Sarbajit
>
> > I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure. He
> > says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all registries
> > (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return by
> > the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media reports.
>
> > nidhi

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T19:59:00.000-08:00

all ex babus will continuing doing what they have been doing- delay/deny the info, what they were doing before getting resettled as ICs, but now with more power and less accountability. we will see in coming days more and more commissions being formed for retiring Babus and Judges to continue the free loot. beniwal

--- On Sat, 3/3/12, Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

From: Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 3 March, 2012, 12:01 AM

Why manual counting seems a ridiculous excersise Dont they have Certain Programme to Maintain such . E Governance . and if One ICs has More Pending why not Shift or reallocate the Dept /State /Ministry ?
Of course My Moot question THREE MORE WHITE ELEPANTS and the One From Blore Retd also on 1/03/2012 therefore No COOLING PERIOD Reason : not yet Known , One may be to Coverup OTS --- One time settlement an Free Opnion offered from another Banker(Mr kini) to me today over telephone .
One More question to me "any order on One time settlements" whether they are also in Shelter clause (sec 8) Well obviously Fidicuiary capacity(sic)?
N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte & RTI Study Center , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Fri, 2/3/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
> To: "Nidhi Sharma" <nidhi2479@gmail.com>, "humjanenge" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Friday, 2 March, 2012, 10:44 PM
> Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD)
> was #2
> defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action.
> IC(AD)'s registry has
> published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims
> to have
> only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half
> of what
> .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC
> (and
> which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst
> offender in terms
> of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh
> remaining
> 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD)
> then this
> works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to
> the info
> given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE
> NEED THESE 3
> EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they
> now get for
> study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a
> certain
> MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> Sarbajit
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2479@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Dear Sarbajit
> >
> > I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the
> 20,000+ figure. He
> > says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now
> asked all registries
> > (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them
> and file a return by
> > the end of this week so that he can actually react to
> the media reports.
> >
> > nidhi
> >
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T19:36:00.000-08:00

Sarabjit sir, could you please write down the operative part of the SC judgement for us to know how the SC allows the CIC/ICs to do whatever they want to do can do. thanks. beniwal

--- On Sat, 3/3/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Date: Saturday, 3 March, 2012, 7:26 AM

Dear Sandeep

When IC(SS) ... and all other ICs .. have a SC judgment allowing them
to do what they are doing, what purpose will it solve to file a
Petition to the President of India ?

Sarbajit

On Mar 3, 4:49 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
> heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
> option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of FAA
> file fresh second appeal.
> in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
> approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
> asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
> by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
> highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
> I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
> removal of such commissioners.
> please give your feedback/comments
>
> On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> > After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
> > defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
> > published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
> > only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
> > .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> > So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
> > which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
> > of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
> > 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
> > works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
> > given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> > Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
> > EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
> > study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
> > MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Dear Sarbajit
>
> >> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure. He
> >> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all registries
> >> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return by
> >> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media reports.
>
> >> nidhi
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Memorandum informing the Truth about Gen VK Singh's age row and seeking Presidential intervention.

2012-03-02T19:11:00.000-08:00

Dear all,

The website containing the Memorandum is up and running. The URL is: www.satyamev-jayate.com

Please read it carefully and circulate it to all your contacts with a request to further spread it.

I am part of this initiative. Work on the site will continue. 70 signatures have already been appended last night itself. I would like to make it clear to all that the site is not soliciting support but is offering a platform for PEOPLE WITH CONSCIENCE to stand up for what they believe in. This also gives us an opportinity to cry out in anguish and appeal to the President of the Republic as one more of our great Institutions bleeds before our very eyes.

Short comments can also be appended.

M.G.Devasahayam

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T18:55:00.000-08:00

Mr Sarbajit,

I think you missed my detailed response to your earlier post regarding those lists - the one where I proved that those lists were bogus.

The list put up by Registry of IC (AD) is also bogus.

On complaining very strongly about the correctness of those lists, I was told that the purpose of the lists was to help those appellants/complainants whose files have been lost in the CIC. Apparently there are 3000 to 3500 cases which have gone missing from the CIC, since its inception.

Anyhow, since the list from one month to another also has discrepancies, a RTI is on the way.

RTIwanted

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2479@gmail.com>; humjanenge <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, March 2, 2012 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

Dear Nidhi (and group)

After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
.IC(SG)'s outstanding is).

So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.

Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??

Sarbajit

Sarbajit

On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2479@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sarbajit
>
> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure. He
> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all registries
> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return by
> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media reports.
>
> nidhi
>

[HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T17:56:00.001-08:00

Dear Sandeep

When IC(SS) ... and all other ICs .. have a SC judgment allowing them
to do what they are doing, what purpose will it solve to file a
Petition to the President of India ?

Sarbajit

On Mar 3, 4:49 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
> heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
> option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of FAA
> file fresh second appeal.
> in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
> approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
> asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
> by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
> highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
> I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
> removal of such commissioners.
> please give your feedback/comments
>
> On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> > After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
> > defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
> > published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
> > only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
> > .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> > So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
> > which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
> > of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
> > 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
> > works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
> > given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> > Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
> > EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
> > study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
> > MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Dear Sarbajit
>
> >> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure. He
> >> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all registries
> >> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return by
> >> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media reports.
>
> >> nidhi
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T15:49:00.000-08:00

I wish to inform as to how pendency is cleared by SS. She has not
heard any complaint case. she asks all complainants to first use
option of first appeal. if there is disattisfaction with order of FAA
file fresh second appeal.
in some cases, there is no response from FAA and the appellant
approaches CIC, then she asks the FAA to give decision. appellant is
asked to approach commission again after decision of FAA.
by this blatant violation of provisions of RTI act, these so called
highly talented ICs clear the pendency of the cases.
I am contemplating filing a petition to president of india to seek
removal of such commissioners.
please give your feedback/comments

On 3/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
> defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
> published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
> only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
> .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
> which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
> of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
> 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
> works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
> given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
> EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
> study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
> MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> Sarbajit
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2479@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear Sarbajit
>>
>> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure. He
>> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all registries
>> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return by
>> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media reports.
>>
>> nidhi
>>
>

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T10:31:00.000-08:00

Why manual counting seems a ridiculous excersise Dont they have Certain Programme to Maintain such . E Governance . and if One ICs has More Pending why not Shift or reallocate the Dept /State /Ministry ?
Of course My Moot question THREE MORE WHITE ELEPANTS and the One From Blore Retd also on 1/03/2012 therefore No COOLING PERIOD Reason : not yet Known , One may be to Coverup OTS --- One time settlement an Free Opnion offered from another Banker(Mr kini) to me today over telephone .
One More question to me "any order on One time settlements" whether they are also in Shelter clause (sec 8) Well obviously Fidicuiary capacity(sic)?
N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte & RTI Study Center , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Fri, 2/3/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
> To: "Nidhi Sharma" <nidhi2479@gmail.com>, "humjanenge" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Friday, 2 March, 2012, 10:44 PM
> Dear Nidhi (and group)
>
> After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD)
> was #2
> defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action.
> IC(AD)'s registry has
> published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims
> to have
> only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half
> of what
> .IC(SG)'s outstanding is).
>
> So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC
> (and
> which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst
> offender in terms
> of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh
> remaining
> 5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD)
> then this
> works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to
> the info
> given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.
>
> Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE
> NEED THESE 3
> EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they
> now get for
> study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a
> certain
> MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??
>
> Sarbajit
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2479@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Dear Sarbajit
> >
> > I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the
> 20,000+ figure. He
> > says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now
> asked all registries
> > (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them
> and file a return by
> > the end of this week so that he can actually react to
> the media reports.
> >
> > nidhi
> >
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

2012-03-02T09:17:00.001-08:00

The qualifications for appointment as IC include that the person must
be"eminent" and have wide knowledge and experience in law, social
service, media, etc etc. See section 12 of RTI Act.

On 3/2/12, deodutta rajwade <rajwade49er@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Are outstanding defence service officers qualified for SUCH posts?
> ________________________________
> From: Vijendra Singh <vijendra5558@gmail.com>
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Cc: Karnataka Intiative RTI <thekirti@yahoogroups.com>; RTI Group
> <KRTIF@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 2, 2012 8:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information
> Commissioners at CIC
>
>
> Selection comittee did not perform its duties honestly at all. they were
> dutiful to see that the govt deptts under the 3 selected govt officers/
> I.Cs never denied the asked rti information contrary to rti spirit.
> If their ministry / deptt /institution ever denied the information to rti
> applicants disrespecting the RTI spirit ; those highest officers are also
> responsible for the misdeeds of info refusals absurdly by their junior
> officers. So such irresponsible officers must never be selected for pious
> post of the Info Commissioners.
> I am quite sure that the dishonest leaders' committee of manmohansingh,
> chidambaram, sushmaswaraj never put this test on the candidates; and they
> absurdly ,illegally , immorally selected the wrongdoers.
> I know well ; and whole the world know well that the officers of the 3
> deptts under the 3 selected officers/ IC candidates refused several
> times to provide the bonafide , discloseable information to the RTI
> seekers absurdly killing the RTI laws and spirit.
> Therefore the selection committee has committed sin/ crime knowingly , and
> conspiringly so that the information can be absurdly, forcibly denied to the
> rti seekers.
> so they have snatched the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO SPEECH from the citizens.
> Sushmaswaraj has done more wrong because she was not known as dishonest.
> But now it is evident that not even a single leader in this country is
> honest.
> God save my India.
> vijendra singh ,meerut
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in>
> wrote:
>
> A similar Article But offcourse High lighting Mr Seth Being From Bangalore
> (or is Residing ?) is Appearing in Todays Deccan Herald.
>> Since I Come across Several RTI requests being turned down by PIOs in
>> Banks Mostly on Very Silly issues or Requests which never fall under the
>> Fiduciary Capacity Shelter Clause , It would be a Good Proposition to
>> Keenly Observe this Person if Appointed .
>>I also Understand by Documents Supplied by CIC itself that IBA which is
>> just an Association has issued letters of caution/instructions to CEO's of
>> all Public Sector Banks of What information should be Parted or not. This
>> Association is not a Public authority
>>Mr Seth was One of the Managing committee member at that time .
>>For Breveity i cite one Sample refusal under Fiduciary clause being " the
>> Inward register of RTI Appln's includes the details of the applications
>> which were submitted by other parties to the CPIO under the act (meaning
>> RTI act) as this information relates to personal information the
>> disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest
>> or disclosure of such information would cause unwarrented invasion of the
>> privacy of any individiual as such information sought cannot be provided
>>Freinds can offer thier Comments
>>N vikramsimha , KRIA Koota , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road ,
>> Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.
>>
>>
>>--- On Sat, 25/2/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
>>> Subject: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information
>>> Commissioners at CIC
>>> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005"
>>> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
>>> Date: Saturday, 25 February, 2012, 10:43 PM
>>
>>> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/former-ib-chief-among-3-new-information-commissioners-at-cic/articleshow/12034174.cms
>>>
>>> NEW DELHI: The government has shortlisted a former chief of
>>> Intelligence Bureau, a banker and a former bureaucrat as
>>> three new
>>> Information Commissioners at the transparency panel CIC.
>>>
>>> Former IB Chief Rajiv Mathur, former Environment Secretary
>>> Vijai
>>> Sharma and Syndicate Bank Chairman and Managing Director
>>> Basant Seth
>>> have been shortlisted as new faces at the Central
>>> Information
>>> Commission which is overburdened with over 20,000 pending
>>> appeals
>>> under the Right to Information Act, official sources said.
>>>
>>> A panel headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh which
>>> included Law
>>> Minister Salman Khurshid and Leader of Opposition Sushma
>>> Swaraj
>>> shortlisted the names of these people recently, they said.
>>>
>>> According to the RTI Act, the complete strength of the
>>> transparency
>>> panel is a Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Central
>>> Information
>>> Commissioners. As of now there are just five Information
>>> Commissioners
>>> leaving a shortage of five.
>>>
>>> A formal announcement on the appointment would be made
>>> shortly, they
>>> said.
>>>
>>> Mathur, a 1972 batch IPS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre, has
>>> served IB
>>> for nearly three decades including 15 years in Washington.
>>> He took
>>> over the reigns of the agency in January 2009, before
>>> retiring on
>>> December 31, 2010.
>>>
>>> Sharma, a 1974 batch IAS officer, from Uttar Pradesh cadre,
>>> was
>>> secretary in Union Environment Ministry before his
>>> superannuation in
>>> December 2010.
>>>
>>> He held number of positions in the state including State
>>> Housing
>>> Secretary, State Environment Secretary and Chairman of State
>>> Pollution
>>> Control Board among others.
>>>
>>> Seth who is the CMD of Syndicate Bank, Bangalore has held
>>> senior
>>> positions in Small Industries Development Bank and Bank of
>>> India.
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Vijendra Singh
> E-19, Janakpuri,
> Ajanta Colony, garh road,
> Meerut-250004
> UP

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-03-02T09:14:00.000-08:00

Dear Nidhi (and group)

After my email post to the HJ list specifying that IC(AD) was #2
defaulter, the CIC has been stung into action. IC(AD)'s registry has
published their pending cases on CIC's website. She claims to have
only 220 Appeals and 150 Complaints pending (ie. about half of what
.IC(SG)'s outstanding is).

So it is quite obvious that of the known pendency of the CIC (and
which we must assume to be true), IC-SG is the worst offender in terms
of pendency at around 850 cases, and even assuming that teh remaining
5 ICs had an average of 400 cases each (avg. of CIC + AD) then this
works out to 2,000 cases which is almost exactly equal to the info
given to me of "around 2,700" pending cases only.

Satyanand's Mishra's own figures damn him. WHY THEN DO WE NEED THESE 3
EXTRA ICs ? Is it because of all those paid holidays they now get for
study tours / junkets to New Zealand and Scandanavia where a certain
MNC financed NGO is hosting them. ??

Sarbajit

On 2/27/12, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi2479@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sarbajit
>
> I met Mr Satyanand Mishra last week. He stands by the 20,000+ figure. He
> says that is the real pendency with CIC. He has now asked all registries
> (ICs) to manually count every case pending with them and file a return by
> the end of this week so that he can actually react to the media reports.
>
> nidhi
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

2012-03-02T08:57:00.000-08:00

Are outstanding defence service officers qualified for SUCH posts?

Therefore the selection committee has committed sin/ crime knowingly , and conspiringly so that the information can be absurdly, forcibly denied to the rti seekers.

God save my India.

vijendra singh ,meerut

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

A similar Article But offcourse High lighting Mr Seth Being From Bangalore (or is Residing ?) is Appearing in Todays Deccan Herald.
Since I Come across Several RTI requests being turned down by PIOs in Banks Mostly on Very Silly issues or Requests which never fall under the Fiduciary Capacity Shelter Clause , It would be a Good Proposition to Keenly Observe this Person if Appointed .
I also Understand by Documents Supplied by CIC itself that IBA which is just an Association has issued letters of caution/instructions to CEO's of all Public Sector Banks of What information should be Parted or not. This Association is not a Public authority
Mr Seth was One of the Managing committee member at that time .
For Breveity i cite one Sample refusal under Fiduciary clause being " the Inward register of RTI Appln's includes the details of the applications which were submitted by other parties to the CPIO under the act (meaning RTI act) as this information relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest or disclosure of such information would cause unwarrented invasion of the privacy of any individiual as such information sought cannot be provided
Freinds can offer thier Comments
N vikramsimha , KRIA Koota , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Sat, 25/2/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Saturday, 25 February, 2012, 10:43 PM

> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/former-ib-chief-among-3-new-information-commissioners-at-cic/articleshow/12034174.cms
>
> NEW DELHI: The government has shortlisted a former chief of
> Intelligence Bureau, a banker and a former bureaucrat as
> three new
> Information Commissioners at the transparency panel CIC.
>
> Former IB Chief Rajiv Mathur, former Environment Secretary
> Vijai
> Sharma and Syndicate Bank Chairman and Managing Director
> Basant Seth
> have been shortlisted as new faces at the Central
> Information
> Commission which is overburdened with over 20,000 pending
> appeals
> under the Right to Information Act, official sources said.
>
> A panel headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh which
> included Law
> Minister Salman Khurshid and Leader of Opposition Sushma
> Swaraj
> shortlisted the names of these people recently, they said.
>
> According to the RTI Act, the complete strength of the
> transparency
> panel is a Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Central
> Information
> Commissioners. As of now there are just five Information
> Commissioners
> leaving a shortage of five.
>
> A formal announcement on the appointment would be made
> shortly, they
> said.
>
> Mathur, a 1972 batch IPS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre, has
> served IB
> for nearly three decades including 15 years in Washington.
> He took
> over the reigns of the agency in January 2009, before
> retiring on
> December 31, 2010.
>
> Sharma, a 1974 batch IAS officer, from Uttar Pradesh cadre,
> was
> secretary in Union Environment Ministry before his
> superannuation in
> December 2010.
>
> He held number of positions in the state including State
> Housing
> Secretary, State Environment Secretary and Chairman of State
> Pollution
> Control Board among others.
>
> Seth who is the CMD of Syndicate Bank, Bangalore has held
> senior
> positions in Small Industries Development Bank and Bank of
> India.
>

--
Vijendra Singh
E-19, Janakpuri,
Ajanta Colony, garh road,
Meerut-250004
UP

Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

2012-03-02T06:49:00.000-08:00

Therefore the selection committee has committed sin/ crime knowingly , and conspiringly so that the information can be absurdly, forcibly denied to the rti seekers.

God save my India.

vijendra singh ,meerut

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

A similar Article But offcourse High lighting Mr Seth Being From Bangalore (or is Residing ?) is Appearing in Todays Deccan Herald.
Since I Come across Several RTI requests being turned down by PIOs in Banks Mostly on Very Silly issues or Requests which never fall under the Fiduciary Capacity Shelter Clause , It would be a Good Proposition to Keenly Observe this Person if Appointed .
I also Understand by Documents Supplied by CIC itself that IBA which is just an Association has issued letters of caution/instructions to CEO's of all Public Sector Banks of What information should be Parted or not. This Association is not a Public authority
Mr Seth was One of the Managing committee member at that time .
For Breveity i cite one Sample refusal under Fiduciary clause being " the Inward register of RTI Appln's includes the details of the applications which were submitted by other parties to the CPIO under the act (meaning RTI act) as this information relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest or disclosure of such information would cause unwarrented invasion of the privacy of any individiual as such information sought cannot be provided
Freinds can offer thier Comments
N vikramsimha , KRIA Koota , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Sat, 25/2/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Saturday, 25 February, 2012, 10:43 PM

> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/former-ib-chief-among-3-new-information-commissioners-at-cic/articleshow/12034174.cms
>
> NEW DELHI: The government has shortlisted a former chief of
> Intelligence Bureau, a banker and a former bureaucrat as
> three new
> Information Commissioners at the transparency panel CIC.
>
> Former IB Chief Rajiv Mathur, former Environment Secretary
> Vijai
> Sharma and Syndicate Bank Chairman and Managing Director
> Basant Seth
> have been shortlisted as new faces at the Central
> Information
> Commission which is overburdened with over 20,000 pending
> appeals
> under the Right to Information Act, official sources said.
>
> A panel headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh which
> included Law
> Minister Salman Khurshid and Leader of Opposition Sushma
> Swaraj
> shortlisted the names of these people recently, they said.
>
> According to the RTI Act, the complete strength of the
> transparency
> panel is a Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Central
> Information
> Commissioners. As of now there are just five Information
> Commissioners
> leaving a shortage of five.
>
> A formal announcement on the appointment would be made
> shortly, they
> said.
>
> Mathur, a 1972 batch IPS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre, has
> served IB
> for nearly three decades including 15 years in Washington.
> He took
> over the reigns of the agency in January 2009, before
> retiring on
> December 31, 2010.
>
> Sharma, a 1974 batch IAS officer, from Uttar Pradesh cadre,
> was
> secretary in Union Environment Ministry before his
> superannuation in
> December 2010.
>
> He held number of positions in the state including State
> Housing
> Secretary, State Environment Secretary and Chairman of State
> Pollution
> Control Board among others.
>
> Seth who is the CMD of Syndicate Bank, Bangalore has held
> senior
> positions in Small Industries Development Bank and Bank of
> India.
>

--
Vijendra Singh
E-19, Janakpuri,
Ajanta Colony, garh road,
Meerut-250004
UP

[HumJanenge] CIC Press release: 3 new ICs administered oath of office on 01.03.2012

2012-03-01T18:30:00.001-08:00

No. of ICs has gone up to 9 today.

Re: [HumJanenge] VICTORY: Lame excuses wont wash in RTI : P&H HC

2012-03-01T14:30:00.000-08:00

Is it possible to get full copy of this Order or pl provide link to get it.
Thanks ,
N.Varma

On 1 March 2012 21:32, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

CHANDIGARH: Punjab and Haryana high court has made it clear that
excuses like "shortage of staff", "extra work" cannot be accepted as
grounds for declining information under RTI Act.

While pronouncing the order, Justice Augustine George Masih observed,
"If such excuses are accepted, the RTI Act would become redundant and
ineffective, and would frustrate the objective for which it has been
enacted. Such internal administrative reasons cannot be treated as a
defense for not supplying information."

The ruling has come in the wake of a writ petition filed against an
order passed by the state information commission (SIC), Punjab, on
June 14, 2010. SIC had imposed a penalty of Rs 25,000 against the
state public information officer of Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Lal
Singh Tiwana, for a delay of more than five months in supplying
information to RTI applicant Gurwinderjeet Singh from Ludhiana.

Justice Masih rejected all reasons put forth by Tiwana and concurred
with those given by SIC for imposing a penalty on the information
officer for delay in information to the complainant.

In his petition filed against the SIC orders, Tiwana had stated that
Ludhiana Improvement Trust was functioning with only 40% of sanctioned
staff strength and there was a heavy rush of public for registration
of plots on the basis of original price under a scheme which was
expiring. He had argued that additional work of census was being done
by the staff, which resulted into delay in supplying information to
the complainant.

Justice Masih, however, accepted the petitioner's contention, that
although the RTI application was received in January 2010, the
petitioner-information officer had joined the trust on transfer on May
11, 2010, and therefore, was not responsible for the delay on the part
of his predecessor. Accordingly, Justice Masih held that the
petitioner-information officer has to be imposed a penalty at the rate
of Rs 250 per day for a period of 75 days, amounting to Rs 18,750.

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

[HumJanenge] VICTORY: Lame excuses wont wash in RTI : P&H HC

2012-03-01T08:02:00.001-08:00

CHANDIGARH: Punjab and Haryana high court has made it clear that
excuses like "shortage of staff", "extra work" cannot be accepted as
grounds for declining information under RTI Act.

While pronouncing the order, Justice Augustine George Masih observed,
"If such excuses are accepted, the RTI Act would become redundant and
ineffective, and would frustrate the objective for which it has been
enacted. Such internal administrative reasons cannot be treated as a
defense for not supplying information."

The ruling has come in the wake of a writ petition filed against an
order passed by the state information commission (SIC), Punjab, on
June 14, 2010. SIC had imposed a penalty of Rs 25,000 against the
state public information officer of Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Lal
Singh Tiwana, for a delay of more than five months in supplying
information to RTI applicant Gurwinderjeet Singh from Ludhiana.

Justice Masih rejected all reasons put forth by Tiwana and concurred
with those given by SIC for imposing a penalty on the information
officer for delay in information to the complainant.

In his petition filed against the SIC orders, Tiwana had stated that
Ludhiana Improvement Trust was functioning with only 40% of sanctioned
staff strength and there was a heavy rush of public for registration
of plots on the basis of original price under a scheme which was
expiring. He had argued that additional work of census was being done
by the staff, which resulted into delay in supplying information to
the complainant.

Justice Masih, however, accepted the petitioner's contention, that
although the RTI application was received in January 2010, the
petitioner-information officer had joined the trust on transfer on May
11, 2010, and therefore, was not responsible for the delay on the part
of his predecessor. Accordingly, Justice Masih held that the
petitioner-information officer has to be imposed a penalty at the rate
of Rs 250 per day for a period of 75 days, amounting to Rs 18,750.

[HumJanenge] Space department denies information to Nair

2012-03-01T07:59:00.001-08:00

Bangalore
Space department denies information to Nair

The Department of Space (DoS) has declined to provide key documents
sought by former Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) chairman G
Madhavan Nair to know the basis on which the government debarred him
and three other retired space scientists in January from holding
official
posts.

"Taking shelter under a specific clause of the Right to Information
(RTI) Act, the DoS withheld vital information on the reports of the
two committees that probed the Antrix-Devas deal and resulted in
action against me and three other colleagues," a disappointed Nair
said.

A week after the government blacklisted the four noted scientists,
Nair filed an application under the RTI Act, 2005 with the DoS and
ISRO, seeking details of the high level team that recommended action
against him and three other technocrats.

"Though it is mandatory under the RTI Act to furnish documents I have
asked for within 30 days of my application, I received a reply from
DoS' RTI officer Tuesday repeating all that is already in the public
domain but not the specific information, including documents and
notings pertaining to the recommendation for action against us," Nair
asserted.

The three other blacklisted scientists are former scientific secretary
A Bhaskarnarayana, ISRO's former satellite centre director KN Shankara
and former Antrix Corporation executive director KR Sridharamurthi.

Expressing inability to share the specific information, the official
wrote to Nair that as per the rule 8(1)(H) of the RTI Act, he could
not furnish the relevant documents as they pertain to investigation
and prosecution of the offenders.

"It is unfortunate that I have been denied my legitimate right to know
what offence I had committed for such an action. Instead of responding
to my specific queries on the probe reports and reasons for annulling
the Devas contract, I have been given the terms of reference under
which the two committees investigated the deal and that their reports
were on the official websites for reference," Nair pointed out.

Without naming the DoS secretary (K. Radhakrishnan), who is also
chairman of the state-run ISRO and secretary of the Space Commission,
Nair said under the guise of a particular clause and section, the
department was making mockery of the RTI Act as its response showed
someone was hiding facts, which would otherwise expose him.

"The DoS has refused to divulge information on the issues pertaining
to the Devas agreement, approval cycles and correspondence that took
place among the concerned. It's an act of cowardice on the part of the
department to suppress facts and deny justice to a former official who
also held the same post and worked in the organisation for over four
decades," Nair observed.

Asked on his next move to seek justice, Nair said he would consult
legal experts before approaching the chief information commissioner
for evidence, including specific documents, file notings and names of
those who took arbitrary decisions to cancel the Devas deal and accuse
them of wrong doing.

"Though I have better things to do, I will spare time to take the
matter to logical conclusion as we have been held guilty without being
heard to defend or explain our role in the spectrum deal," Nair added.

The 68-year rocket scientist is away at Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala
till Sunday and plans to take up the legal battle on return to the
city on Monday.

[HumJanenge] IESM's RTI "tent pegs" "C-I-C's retirement home stolen from war widows

2012-03-01T07:55:00.001-08:00

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_presidents-4498-sq-ft-retirement-home-is-spread-over-2-lakh-sq-ft_1657085

C-I-C == Commander In Chief

President's 4,498 sq ft retirement home is spread over 2 lakh sq ft

Although the former president of India is entitled to live in a house
admeasuring not more than 4,498 sq ft, land admeasuring 2,61,000 sq ft
has been allotted for the post-retirement accommodation in Khadki of
president Pratibha Patil.

Justice for Jawans (JFJ) Right to Information (RTI) activist Anup
Awasthi and Indian Ex-servicemen Movement (IESM) found the facts
through an RTI query.

According to the reply to the RTI requisition sent to the President of
India Office, the President's Emoluments and Pension Act, 1951, and
the rules framed there under President's Pension Rule, 1962, govern
these matters.

As per the rules, "A place where Government owned accommodation is
allotted to a retired President, the size of the residence shall be
comparable to a residence allotted to a Minister in the Union Council
of Ministers and if the highest type of Government residence available
at a particular place is less in size than a residence allotted to a
Minister in the Union Council of Ministers, the highest type of
accommodation available at that place shall be allotted to the ex-
President. At present, a minister is entitled to a plinth area of the
bungalow as 4498 sq ft."

The RTI reply further states, "where suitable Government residence is
not available for allotment to a retired President, the size of the
residence to be taken on lease to be provided to a retired President
shall have a living area not exceeding 2,000 sq ft."

Col (retd) Suresh Patil of JFJ had earlier written a letter on
September 14 to the president inquiring about the possession of the
property in Khadki to which the reply received was that the land is on
lease and will remain the property of Defence Estates.

According to the reply sent by the president's secretariat, "The old
grant property is a defence land given on lease and the lease has
expired. It was resumed by the defence estate officer after following
the due procedure for use of residential premises for the president on
her retirement as per the entitlement of a former president of India."

Patil and his associates objected to even the ongoing construction on
the land. "Why are new constructions carried out in the land when
there is adequate government accommodation already available in the
cantonments? These constructions are illegal which has also resulted
to the felling of trees in the area without the permission of the
forest department," Awasthi said.

IESM, Maharashtra convenor Ravindra Pathak said that this land should
have been allotted to the war widows and to build an old age home.

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-29T21:55:00.000-08:00

Please be away from pseudo secularists and work with what your consciousness demands.

Humanity should get preference over all religious instructions Some people are valued more for such deeds..

With kind regards

A.K.BHATTACHARYYA

F.I.StructE (UK), FIE (India), FIBE, FIRT
H-2A, Hauzkhas, New Delhi -16, Ph:011-26854127

--- On Sun, 2/26/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Sunday, February 26, 2012, 11:43 PM

Dear Col Singh

I freely admit that you have raised important issues, which is why
your messages are allowed. It is equally true that we may not be on
the same frequency as presently I am also experiencing rajasik gunas..
My family is heavily from Army background (although to be fair my
marriage was conducted by an Admiral and my wife was selected by an
AVM) with very strong roots to Hindutva tradition. In fact the term
"Hindutva" was originated / coined by persons from my family.
Particularly I would direct you to read the work by Raj Narain Bose
(Grand father of Indian Nationalism) titled as "Superiority of
Hinduism over all other religions" which was based on views of one of
my ancestors. Incidentally, Mr Bose was maternal grandfather of Sri
Aurobindo.. I am enclosing a PDF summary dated 1882 for your
reference..

Actually I propose that the term "Hindutva" (as it OUGHT to be
understood but isn't) is substituted for "secularism" in the Indian
Constitution.

Sarbajit

On 2/26/12, Col Thakur Singh <thakursinghk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr sarbajit,
>
> I respect all the good values/ vitues; of whichever religion,
> country/village/ people these may be ! immaterial.
> I am beyond religion ie; follow spiritualism .
>
> Vivekananda said ; ' It is not in our hands to be born out of religion,
> but we must die out of religion , meaning thereby -go beyond religion
>
> come along i will take u the land of God and not the mullahs; - Mr
> dictator/mderator sahab - it is in your hands to delete my post but not
> creation /getting me united in this group - learn to be tolerate enough
> and keep your communication channels open , dont shut it down that being
> easy and any body can do it having inflated ego .
>
> you have not been able to catch what i have said above or what i meant ,
> we not being at the same frequency, if yes tell me what it is OK?
>
> Regards
>
> col thakur singh
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Col Singh
>>
>> As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
>> However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.
>>
>> India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
>> go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
>> need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
>> AYATOLLAHS.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > *Dear All,*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term 'secular'
>> > state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
>> > ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS' ,GURUS'
>> > upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same to
>> > have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
>> > respect for our values in society.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR '
>> > in
>> > our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to
>> follow
>> > our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
>> > the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal means
>> > etc.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *Your comments please,.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *regards *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *Col thakur Singh*
>> > *9873379995*
>

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-02-29T09:13:00.000-08:00

RTI is toothless act and it is strange what you expect from it. Best thing is to approach court.

Regards,
Rajeev Yadav,
National President,
(B.Sc., M.B.A., L.L.B., P.G.D. Human Rights),
Adhikaar the rights path,
+919811242471.
www.adhikaar.in
.

--- On Mon, 27/2/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Monday, 27 February, 2012, 4:52 AM

I had filed a complaint in august 2010 related to no reply from
petroleum ministry related to information demanded on section 4. when
i filed rti as to ask the action taken, it was decided on feb 15 with
issuance of notice. many of the cases filed by in may 2011 (IC-SS) are
yet to be heard.
i had filed many cases in feb 2011 related to bsnl (MLS). all except
one are yet to be heard.
I had filed many cases related to income tax department, CBDT in
november 2011. all are yet to be heard.
even there is no mention on the cic website about cases filed against
bsnl, income tax

On 2/26/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear members
>
> I have just had a PRIVATE chat with some people authorised to speak on
> behalf of CIC (I am fighting them in a case before SC)
>
> 1) The actual outstanding pendency in the CIC is only around 2,700
> cases (data wef Jan/Feb 2012)
>
> 2) The biggest culprit in terms of cases stuck is IC(Shailesh Gandhi)
> who has around 800-900 cases stuck with him, some from as far back as
> July 2011. In comparison CIC(SM) is up to date with a a pendency of
> around 40-50 days.
>
> 3) No. 2 in terms of delay is IC(AD).
>
> 4) Whereas the CIC website reflects that around 27,000 cases are
> pending, there is some computer glitch and the figure has been
> multiplied by 10 due to file movement and poor dak records..
>
> I have no comments on these statements. My dear readers are encouraged
> to share their views.to the list.
>
> Sarbajit

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-29T08:20:00.001-08:00

Dear Sir

Unfortunately MODERN SCIENTIFIC METHODS do not bear out hypothesis
like "Aryan Invasion Theory" etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics_and_Archaeogenetics_of_South_Asia
I direct your attention to the last statement therein

"The genetic affinities of both the ancestry components are
incompatible with substantial gene flow into the region during Max
Mueller's purported Indo-Aryan invasion 3,500 years ago"

It is foreigners like him who have diluted our history, religion and
culture with their pseudo-knowledge of India's "sacred verses".

Sarbajit

On 2/29/12, mmp kala <mmp_kala@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I disagree that Rig Veda states that Hindus came from Persia; the book
> contains no history but is a collection of RICHAs (verses) composed by
> various sages and passed on to the next generation through word of mouth
> (SHRUTIs) of their disciples and followers (there was possibly no script and
> the Richas had to be pronounced exactly in the same manner as that
> prescribed by the composer else one was to be consigned to hell after
> death). It was Ved Vyas and his disciples who compiled and wrote down the
> Vedas.
>
> The historians believe that the first immigration to India was from Central
> Asia and Afghanistan. The Aryans came via the Khaibar Pass and settled down
> in Indo-Gangetic plains.. Subsequently the Sumerians (Aryans in Persia)
> came via the Bolan Pass and settled in Baluchistan, Sind, Rajasthan and
> Central India. The natives were few and could not fight the new comers who
> had horse, bow and arrows and a well organized social structure. They would
> therefore resort to attack by night and were called nishachar. In Sanskrit,
> Dasyu is other word for the enemy, and those of them who were defeated and
> captured were called Daas or slaves. The Aryans ushered education and
> knowledge,; their way of life was soon accepted in South India also.
>
> Yes, Hinduism encompasses the various ways of life system in vogue amongst
> the Aryans who initially worshiped all that was super natural. It was a way
> of life of the Aryans which was called Hinduism much later; initially there
> were the Aryas and the Anaryas in India.
>
> Col MMP Kala.
>
> --- On Tue, 28/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE
> To: "Surendera M. Bhanot" <bhanot1952@gmail.com>, "humjanenge"
> <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Tuesday, 28 February, 2012, 11:02 PM
>
> Dear Surendra,
>
> The Sanskrit term Sindhu refers to the river Indus (pronounced "In-doos")
>
> The people from Persia (which includes Iran) referred to people on the
> other side of the river as Hindoos, just as some Maharashtrians living
> on one side of a certain mountain range refer to those on the other
> side as "ghatis".
>
> In any case for 1000's of years now it is quite clear who the Hindoos
> are ... ARYANS who came running across the Indus river after being
> defeated by the PERSIANS. The native people of India are NOT Hindus,
> but have had "Hinduism" IMPOSED on them. All this is clearly explained
> in the Rig Veda (which is the only authentic Veda - the rest either
> having being considerably corrupted over time or considerably
> fabricated). In fact the losing Aryans call their "Gods" as "Devas"
> and their Devils as "Asura". Whereas the victorious Persians call
> their God as "Ahura" and their devils as "DEVils". (BTW, I am not
> saying all this or making it up, it is published by the
> Ethnographer-General of the Govt of India in 1912.)
>
> So it is immaterial if Hinduism is tainted or not, or the language is
> tainted or not. IT is what is accepted by the majority people of this
> country,if you dont like it REFORM IT or emigrate to Pakistan.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On 2/28/12, Surendera M. Bhanot <bhanot1952@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear Friends,
>>
>> Hindu is a tainted name came from the Sindhu, meaning people living in the
>> Sidhu Ghati. This name was invented by the aranians. So there is no
>> mythological history of the name Hindu. Its like the naming a new-born.
>> Nobody names himself. Its the others who mane you to recognise you.
>> Sarabjit is not the name you gave to yourself. It was bestowed on you by
>> your nears and dears.
>

RE: [HumJanenge] Scandinavian Cruise through HBI

2012-02-29T04:32:00.000-08:00

thanks for info.

regards,

Maj. Gen.(Retd) D.N.Kathuria,

V-3,Sacred Heart Town,
Wanwadi,
Pune- 411040
020-26852093/9850821311

Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:39:13 +0530
Subject: [HumJanenge] Scandinavian Cruise through HBI
From: lidder.hbi@gmail.com
To: lidder.hbi@gmail.com

Dear Sir ,

We are sending over the itinerary of the Scandinavian Cruise for your perusal please. The cruise departure date fixed is 07 Jul ex Copenhagen.

Eagerly awaiting your positive response and to welcome you on board.

With best wishes,

Mrs Amarjit Lidder
&
Brig (Retd) SBS Lidder

Holiday Bash International
Pune, India
Tel : +91-20-66015020
Fax : +91-20-26055158
Mob : +91-9423582779; 9823012276
http://holidaybash.net
Alternate E-mail : contact@holidaybash.net

KIWI Specialist
South African FUNDI Agent
Certified Austrian Specialist
Scott Agent & Canadian Explorer Expert
I Know Americas Certified Agent

Enjoy A Unique Travel Experience With us

Re: [HumJanenge] FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-28T21:01:00.000-08:00

Friends,

I disagree that Rig Veda states that Hindus came from Persia; the book contains no history but is a collection of RICHAs (verses) composed by various sages and passed on to the next generation through word of mouth (SHRUTIs) of their disciples and followers (there was possibly no script and the Richas had to be pronounced exactly in the same manner as that prescribed by the composer else one was to be consigned to hell after death). It was Ved Vyas and his disciples who compiled and wrote down the Vedas.

The historians believe that the first immigration to India was from Central Asia and Afghanistan. The Aryans came via the Khaibar Pass and settled down in Indo-Gangetic plains.. Subsequently the Sumerians (Aryans in Persia) came via the Bolan Pass and settled in Baluchistan, Sind, Rajasthan and Central India. The natives were few and could not fight the new comers who had horse, bow and arrows and a well organized social structure. They would therefore resort to attack by night and were called nishachar. In Sanskrit, Dasyu is other word for the enemy, and those of them who were defeated and captured were called Daas or slaves. The Aryans ushered education and knowledge,; their way of life was soon accepted in South India also.

Yes, Hinduism encompasses the various ways of life system in vogue amongst the Aryans who initially worshiped all that was super natural. It was a way of life of the Aryans which was called Hinduism much later; initially there were the Aryas and the Anaryas in India.

Col MMP Kala.

--- On Tue, 28/2/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE
To: "Surendera M. Bhanot" <bhanot1952@gmail.com>, "humjanenge" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, 28 February, 2012, 11:02 PM

Dear Surendra,

The Sanskrit term Sindhu refers to the river Indus (pronounced "In-doos")

The people from Persia (which includes Iran) referred to people on the
other side of the river as Hindoos, just as some Maharashtrians living
on one side of a certain mountain range refer to those on the other
side as "ghatis".

In any case for 1000's of years now it is quite clear who the Hindoos
are ... ARYANS who came running across the Indus river after being
defeated by the PERSIANS. The native people of India are NOT Hindus,
but have had "Hinduism" IMPOSED on them. All this is clearly explained
in the Rig Veda (which is the only authentic Veda - the rest either
having being considerably corrupted over time or considerably
fabricated). In fact the losing Aryans call their "Gods" as "Devas"
and their Devils as "Asura". Whereas the victorious Persians call
their God as "Ahura" and their devils as "DEVils". (BTW, I am not
saying all this or making it up, it is published by the
Ethnographer-General of the Govt of India in 1912.)

So it is immaterial if Hinduism is tainted or not, or the language is
tainted or not. IT is what is accepted by the majority people of this
country,if you dont like it REFORM IT or emigrate to Pakistan.

Sarbajit

On 2/28/12, Surendera M. Bhanot <bhanot1952@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> Hindu is a tainted name came from the Sindhu, meaning people living in the
> Sidhu Ghati. This name was invented by the aranians. So there is no
> mythological history of the name Hindu. Its like the naming a new-born.
> Nobody names himself. Its the others who mane you to recognise you.
> Sarabjit is not the name you gave to yourself. It was bestowed on you by
> your nears and dears.

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-28T09:49:00.001-08:00

The trishul waving LUMPEN element is completely ignorant of what
Hinduism actually is.
Every year Delhi is invaded for about 3 or 4 days by Shiv Bhakts doing
"kavad seva". They are completely "hopped out" on a mix of loud music,
drugs and "faith". They race around on motor-cycles and trucks
flaunting their lumpen-ness. It is futile to teach them anything.
Blind fanaticism is dangerous in all religions. To such people we must
clearly say you are NOT a HINDU. The people who demolished the Babri
Masjid were NOT HIndus. The people who burnt a train at Godhra were
NOT Hindus. Just as the people who killed 200 people in Mumbai were
NOT Muslims.

The terms "pseudo secular" refers to people like Salman Khurshid who
take the high moral ground in Parliament and on TV, but say all kinds
of different things to get their kith and kin elected. So you are
right, such people are NOT secular, NOT Hindu and NOT EVEN Muslim.
They are NOTHING.

Sir, You know very well that the senior officers exhorting people to
vote for political parties are the dregs of the Army who toadied and
fawned their way to their "seniority" while meritorious officers were
sidelined and overlooked.

Sarbajit

On 2/28/12, pavan nair <pavannair1@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr Roy,
> I appreciate your response. For me the term 'hindutva' represents the
> politico-militant side of hinduism. A picture of trishul waving men wearing
> saffron coloured headbands comes to mind. That certainly does not represent
> hinduism which is a way of life rather than a religion. The term
> 'pseudo-secular' has been coined by the right. You are either secular or
> you are not. There will certainly be people in the Congress also who are
> non-secular. I feel that the connotation of 'secular' is quite different
> from 'hindutva'. For instance, the army was secular till about a decade
> ago. For the first time an ex-service organisation has recently asked its
> members to vote for the BJP. This is a dangerous trend. I may vote for the
> BJP on my own but to be told to do so by an organisationheaded by several
> senior and eminent officers indicates that something is wrong. I would also
> think that a truly secular person would be liberal, tolerant and open. Col
> Nair
>

Re: [HumJanenge] FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-28T09:32:00.000-08:00

Dear Surendra,

The Sanskrit term Sindhu refers to the river Indus (pronounced "In-doos")

The people from Persia (which includes Iran) referred to people on the
other side of the river as Hindoos, just as some Maharashtrians living
on one side of a certain mountain range refer to those on the other
side as "ghatis".

In any case for 1000's of years now it is quite clear who the Hindoos
are ... ARYANS who came running across the Indus river after being
defeated by the PERSIANS. The native people of India are NOT Hindus,
but have had "Hinduism" IMPOSED on them. All this is clearly explained
in the Rig Veda (which is the only authentic Veda - the rest either
having being considerably corrupted over time or considerably
fabricated). In fact the losing Aryans call their "Gods" as "Devas"
and their Devils as "Asura". Whereas the victorious Persians call
their God as "Ahura" and their devils as "DEVils". (BTW, I am not
saying all this or making it up, it is published by the
Ethnographer-General of the Govt of India in 1912.)

So it is immaterial if Hinduism is tainted or not, or the language is
tainted or not. IT is what is accepted by the majority people of this
country,if you dont like it REFORM IT or emigrate to Pakistan.

Sarbajit

On 2/28/12, Surendera M. Bhanot <bhanot1952@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> Hindu is a tainted name came from the Sindhu, meaning people living in the
> Sidhu Ghati. This name was invented by the aranians. So there is no
> mythological history of the name Hindu. Its like the naming a new-born.
> Nobody names himself. Its the others who mane you to recognise you.
> Sarabjit is not the name you gave to yourself. It was bestowed on you by
> your nears and dears.

[HumJanenge] Scandinavian Cruise through HBI

2012-02-28T04:09:00.000-08:00

Dear Sir ,

We are sending over the itinerary of the Scandinavian Cruise for your perusal please. The cruise departure date fixed is 07 Jul ex Copenhagen.

Eagerly awaiting your positive response and to welcome you on board.

With best wishes,

Mrs Amarjit Lidder
&
Brig (Retd) SBS Lidder

Holiday Bash International
Pune, India
Tel : +91-20-66015020
Fax : +91-20-26055158
Mob : +91-9423582779; 9823012276
http://holidaybash.net
Alternate E-mail : contact@holidaybash.net

KIWI Specialist
South African FUNDI Agent
Certified Austrian Specialist
Scott Agent & Canadian Explorer Expert
I Know Americas Certified Agent

Enjoy A Unique Travel Experience With us

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-27T20:51:00.000-08:00

Dear Mr Roy,

I appreciate your response. For me the term 'hindutva' represents the politico-militant side of hinduism. A picture of trishul waving men wearing saffron coloured headbands comes to mind. That certainly does not represent hinduism which is a way of life rather than a religion. The term 'pseudo-secular' has been coined by the right. You are either secular or you are not. There will certainly be people in the Congress also who are non-secular. I feel that the connotation of 'secular' is quite different from 'hindutva'. For instance, the army was secular till about a decade ago. For the first time an ex-service organisation has recently asked its members to vote for the BJP. This is a dangerous trend. I may vote for the BJP on my own but to be told to do so by an organisationheaded by several senior and eminent officers indicates that something is wrong. I would also think that a truly secular person would be liberal, tolerant and open. Col Nair

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:48 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Col Nair

Although you apparently disagree with me, I fully agree with you.

1) There is nothing wrong with secularism. In fact everything is right
with secularism.
2) I agree that we (ie. "India" ie. "Bharat") have diverse communities
and religions. This is our strength.
3) I agree we should be part of OIC. We have more Muslims than 90% of
their membership.
4) I agree that we should peeve the Pakis.

The problem is not "secularism" but "pseudo-secularism" as practised
by Nehru-Gandhi devil worshipping clan, and which has been imposed on
India by their Grand Masters.

Similarly there is nothing wrong with "Hindutva". It simply refers to
the all encompassing tolerance Hindus (ie. Indians) have for all
religions. As specifically stated by Raj Narain Bose in that 1882
article I emailed at point VIII on page #2, "Hinduism is pre-
eminently tolerant to all other religions and believes that each man
will attain salvation if he follows his own religion". This is what
Hindutva is all about and I dont see why anyone is confused between
Hindutva and secularism.

Sarbajit

On Feb 27, 2:30 pm, pavan nair <pavanna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I entirely disagree. What is wrong with the word 'secularism'? We have
> diverse communities and religions. In fact we should be a part of the OIC.
> That would peeve the Pakis!! Col Pavan Nair
>

> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Col Singh
>
> > I freely admit that you have raised important issues, which is why
> > your messages are allowed. It is equally true that we may not be on
> > the same frequency as presently I am also experiencing rajasik gunas..
> > My family is heavily from Army background (although to be fair my
> > marriage was conducted by an Admiral and my wife was selected by an
> > AVM) with very strong roots to Hindutva tradition. In fact the term
> > "Hindutva" was originated / coined by persons from my family.
> > Particularly I would direct you to read the work by Raj Narain Bose
> > (Grand father of Indian Nationalism) titled as "Superiority of
> > Hinduism over all other religions" which was based on views of one of
> > my ancestors. Incidentally, Mr Bose was maternal grandfather of Sri
> > Aurobindo.. I am enclosing a PDF summary dated 1882 for your
> > reference..
>
> > Actually I propose that the term "Hindutva" (as it OUGHT to be
> > understood but isn't) is substituted for "secularism" in the Indian
> > Constitution.
>
> > Sarbajit
>

> > On 2/26/12, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Dear Mr sarbajit,
>
> > > I respect all the good values/ vitues; of whichever religion,
> > > country/village/ people these may be ! immaterial.
> > > I am beyond religion ie; follow spiritualism .
>
> > > Vivekananda said ; ' It is not in our hands to be born out of religion,
> > > but we must die out of religion , meaning thereby -go beyond religion
>
> > > come along i will take u the land of God and not the mullahs; - Mr
> > > dictator/mderator sahab - it is in your hands to delete my post but not
> > > creation /getting me united in this group - learn to be tolerate enough
> > > and keep your communication channels open , dont shut it down that being
> > > easy and any body can do it having inflated ego .
>
> > > you have not been able to catch what i have said above or what i meant ,
> > > we not being at the same frequency, if yes tell me what it is OK?
>
> > > Regards
>
> > > col thakur singh
>

> > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com>

> > wrote:
>
> > >> Dear Col Singh
>
> > >> As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
> > >> However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.
>
> > >> India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
> > >> go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
> > >> need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
> > >> AYATOLLAHS.
>
> > >> Sarbajit
>
> > >> On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > *Dear All,*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term
> > 'secular'
> > >> > state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
> > >> > ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS'
> > ,GURUS'
> > >> > upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same
> > to
> > >> > have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
> > >> > respect for our values in society.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR '
> > >> > in
> > >> > our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to
> > >> follow
> > >> > our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
> > >> > the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal
> > means
> > >> > etc.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *Your comments please,.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *regards *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *Col thakur Singh*
> > >> > *9873379995*

[HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-27T11:18:00.000-08:00

Dear Col Nair

Although you apparently disagree with me, I fully agree with you.

1) There is nothing wrong with secularism. In fact everything is right
with secularism.
2) I agree that we (ie. "India" ie. "Bharat") have diverse communities
and religions. This is our strength.
3) I agree we should be part of OIC. We have more Muslims than 90% of
their membership.
4) I agree that we should peeve the Pakis.

The problem is not "secularism" but "pseudo-secularism" as practised
by Nehru-Gandhi devil worshipping clan, and which has been imposed on
India by their Grand Masters.

Similarly there is nothing wrong with "Hindutva". It simply refers to
the all encompassing tolerance Hindus (ie. Indians) have for all
religions. As specifically stated by Raj Narain Bose in that 1882
article I emailed at point VIII on page #2, "Hinduism is pre-
eminently tolerant to all other religions and believes that each man
will attain salvation if he follows his own religion". This is what
Hindutva is all about and I dont see why anyone is confused between
Hindutva and secularism.

Sarbajit

On Feb 27, 2:30 pm, pavan nair <pavanna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I entirely disagree. What is wrong with the word 'secularism'? We have
> diverse communities and religions. In fact we should be a part of the OIC.
> That would peeve the Pakis!! Col Pavan Nair
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Col Singh
>
> > I freely admit that you have raised important issues, which is why
> > your messages are allowed. It is equally true that we may not be on
> > the same frequency as presently I am also experiencing rajasik gunas..
> > My family is heavily from Army background (although to be fair my
> > marriage was conducted by an Admiral and my wife was selected by an
> > AVM) with very strong roots to Hindutva tradition. In fact the term
> > "Hindutva" was originated / coined by persons from my family.
> > Particularly I would direct you to read the work by Raj Narain Bose
> > (Grand father of Indian Nationalism) titled as "Superiority of
> > Hinduism over all other religions" which was based on views of one of
> > my ancestors. Incidentally, Mr Bose was maternal grandfather of Sri
> > Aurobindo.. I am enclosing a PDF summary dated 1882 for your
> > reference..
>
> > Actually I propose that the term "Hindutva" (as it OUGHT to be
> > understood but isn't) is substituted for "secularism" in the Indian
> > Constitution.
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On 2/26/12, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Dear Mr sarbajit,
>
> > > I respect all the good values/ vitues; of whichever religion,
> > > country/village/ people these may be ! immaterial.
> > > I am beyond religion ie; follow spiritualism .
>
> > > Vivekananda said ; ' It is not in our hands to be born out of religion,
> > > but we must die out of religion , meaning thereby -go beyond religion
>
> > > come along i will take u the land of God and not the mullahs; - Mr
> > > dictator/mderator sahab - it is in your hands to delete my post but not
> > > creation /getting me united in this group - learn to be tolerate enough
> > > and keep your communication channels open , dont shut it down that being
> > > easy and any body can do it having inflated ego .
>
> > > you have not been able to catch what i have said above or what i meant ,
> > > we not being at the same frequency, if yes tell me what it is OK?
>
> > > Regards
>
> > > col thakur singh
>
> > > On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >> Dear Col Singh
>
> > >> As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
> > >> However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.
>
> > >> India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
> > >> go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
> > >> need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
> > >> AYATOLLAHS.
>
> > >> Sarbajit
>
> > >> On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> > *Dear All,*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term
> > 'secular'
> > >> > state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
> > >> > ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS'
> > ,GURUS'
> > >> > upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same
> > to
> > >> > have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
> > >> > respect for our values in society.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR '
> > >> > in
> > >> > our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to
> > >> follow
> > >> > our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
> > >> > the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal
> > means
> > >> > etc.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *Your comments please,.*
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *regards *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *
> > >> > *Col thakur Singh*
> > >> > *9873379995*

Re: [.RTI.] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-27T06:26:00.000-08:00

Dear All,

Yes, some body had coined a term which has the key for VALUE BASED EDUCATION (I forgot it) that will

bring the desired change in our society if the education system is changed now under the aegis of

govt, certainly the society will get transformed into satvik one , making it live able harmoniously

for all of us . The change will come into effect within a short span , such is the power of education system/ schools.

Nature is of course on the path to change but some of us are instrumental in that process.

we hope to be a part of the desired change.

Thanks for your valuable suggestion .

regards

Col Thakur Singh

('Sahaj Marg' Abhyasi)

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:57 AM, RAKSHPAL ABROL <rakshpalabrol@hotmail.com> wrote:

Dear Sir,
Our Constitution was amended in the year 1976.the preamble was changed as We the people of India,having solemnly resolved to constitute India into "Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic and to secure to all citizens- Justice, social,economic and political, Liberty of thoughts,expression belief faith and worship ;Equality of status and of opportunity and to promote among them all Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and intergrity of the Nation.

In our constituent assembly this twenty sixth day of November,1949 do hereby ADOPT ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION.
The people of India never knew this change till 1989.
The people who came to power never took the opportunity to highlight the amendment carried by Smt Indira Gandhi under Article 368.

We have no one above except the Speaker of Lok sabha.
The President is rubber Stamp.

Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 22:58:19 +0530
From: thakursinghk@gmail.com
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: [.RTI.] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

Dear Mr sarbajit,

I respect all the good values/ vitues; of whichever religion, country/village/ people these may be ! immaterial.
I am beyond religion ie; follow spiritualism .

Vivekananda said ; ' It is not in our hands to be born out of religion,
but we must die out of religion , meaning thereby -go beyond religion

come along i will take u the land of God and not the mullahs; - Mr dictator/mderator sahab - it is in your hands to delete my post but not creation /getting me united in this group - learn to be tolerate enough and keep your communication channels open , dont shut it down that being easy and any body can do it having inflated ego .

you have not been able to catch what i have said above or what i meant , we not being at the same frequency, if yes tell me what it is OK?

Regards

col thakur singh

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Col Singh

As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.

India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
AYATOLLAHS.

Sarbajit

On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Dear All,*
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term 'secular'

> state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
> ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS' ,GURUS'
> upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same to

> have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
> *
> *
> *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
> respect for our values in society.*
> *
> *
> *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR ' in

> our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to follow
> our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
> the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal means

> etc.*
> *
> *
> *Your comments please,.*
> *
> *
> *regards *
> *
> *
> *Col thakur Singh*
> *9873379995*

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-27T01:30:00.000-08:00

I entirely disagree. What is wrong with the word 'secularism'? We have diverse communities and religions. In fact we should be a part of the OIC. That would peeve the Pakis!! Col Pavan Nair

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 11:43 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Col Singh

I freely admit that you have raised important issues, which is why
your messages are allowed. It is equally true that we may not be on
the same frequency as presently I am also experiencing rajasik gunas..
My family is heavily from Army background (although to be fair my
marriage was conducted by an Admiral and my wife was selected by an
AVM) with very strong roots to Hindutva tradition. In fact the term
"Hindutva" was originated / coined by persons from my family.
Particularly I would direct you to read the work by Raj Narain Bose
(Grand father of Indian Nationalism) titled as "Superiority of
Hinduism over all other religions" which was based on views of one of
my ancestors. Incidentally, Mr Bose was maternal grandfather of Sri
Aurobindo.. I am enclosing a PDF summary dated 1882 for your
reference..

Actually I propose that the term "Hindutva" (as it OUGHT to be
understood but isn't) is substituted for "secularism" in the Indian
Constitution.

Sarbajit

On 2/26/12, Col Thakur Singh <thakursinghk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr sarbajit,
>
> I respect all the good values/ vitues; of whichever religion,
> country/village/ people these may be ! immaterial.
> I am beyond religion ie; follow spiritualism .
>
> Vivekananda said ; ' It is not in our hands to be born out of religion,
> but we must die out of religion , meaning thereby -go beyond religion
>
> come along i will take u the land of God and not the mullahs; - Mr
> dictator/mderator sahab - it is in your hands to delete my post but not
> creation /getting me united in this group - learn to be tolerate enough
> and keep your communication channels open , dont shut it down that being
> easy and any body can do it having inflated ego .
>
> you have not been able to catch what i have said above or what i meant ,
> we not being at the same frequency, if yes tell me what it is OK?
>
> Regards
>
> col thakur singh
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Col Singh
>>
>> As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
>> However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.
>>
>> India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
>> go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
>> need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
>> AYATOLLAHS.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > *Dear All,*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term 'secular'
>> > state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
>> > ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS' ,GURUS'
>> > upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same to
>> > have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
>> > respect for our values in society.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR '
>> > in
>> > our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to
>> follow
>> > our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
>> > the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal means
>> > etc.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *Your comments please,.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *regards *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *Col thakur Singh*
>> > *9873379995*
>

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-02-26T23:47:00.000-08:00

My Inference with the Statistics which you brought out indicates that the Three new ICs going to be appointed will enjoy ! or Shall i also Deduce that Each case Now Heared will have Enough Time for Hearing relevant or irrelevant things on Both sides , because all our hearings and Also videio Conferences end up with an maximum 12 minutes !
N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Sun, 26/2/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Sunday, 26 February, 2012, 10:21 PM
> Dear members
>
> I have just had a PRIVATE chat with some people authorised
> to speak on
> behalf of CIC (I am fighting them in a case before SC)
>
> 1) The actual outstanding pendency in the CIC is only around
> 2,700
> cases (data wef Jan/Feb 2012)
>
> 2) The biggest culprit in terms of cases stuck is
> IC(Shailesh Gandhi)
> who has around 800-900 cases stuck with him, some from as
> far back as
> July 2011. In comparison CIC(SM) is up to date with a a
> pendency of
> around 40-50 days.
>
> 3) No. 2 in terms of delay is IC(AD).
>
> 4) Whereas the CIC website reflects that around 27,000 cases
> are
> pending, there is some computer glitch and the figure has
> been
> multiplied by 10 due to file movement and poor dak
> records..
>
> I have no comments on these statements. My dear readers are
> encouraged
> to share their views.to the list.
>
> Sarbajit
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Panel: Bring NGOs, PPPs under RTI

2012-02-26T19:11:00.000-08:00

This Guy is right.... We have a puppet as a prime minister. We should regret that we may require kamkazi/fiyadeen style of working for elimination of the corruption.

It is good Gandhi has passed away, else we would have experience a monopoly corruption from Congress. All the politicians fight for something

Regards,

Mr. Hemant Kshirsagar

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Sujit Patwardhan <patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com> wrote:

With a Prime Minister unfit to be a Govt clerk what else can we expect? You are right about Hospitals and the blank protection to anything "Nuclear". Mahatma Gandhi must be happy to be dead and gone from this land.
--
Sujit

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:07 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

A "high level panel" on public health has said that NGOs (code word
for societies and trusts) should be brought under RTI Act. Next they
will say that every hospital with an X-ray machine should be exempted
from RTI as a "nuclear installation". Amend the RTI Act to allow this
and clarify the situation once and for all.

More rubbish from our national newspapers who have run out of news to
publish.

Sarbajit

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Panel-Bring-NGOs-PPPs-under-RTI/Article1-816075.aspx

"Every non-government organisation (NGO) and Public-Private
Partnership (PPP) project should come under purview of the Right To
Information Act, a panel appointed by Prime Manmohan Singh has said. A
high-level panel on public health has told the government that RTI
should be made mandatory for all NGOs and public private partnerships
working in the social sector such as health to improve transparency
and accountability. "

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

- J. Krishnamurti

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sujit Patwardhan
patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com
sujit@parisar.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India
Tel: +91 20 25537955
Cell: +91 98220 26627
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blog: http://motif.posterous.com/

Parisar: www.parisar.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-02-26T18:48:00.000-08:00

Mr Sarbajit,

That is NOT true !

The person you met from the CIC wants to tell you what you want to hear so that you can spread misinformation on this group

1. My Second Appeals and Complaints filed way back in Dec 2009 are still pending.

2. The first pending list put up by the Registry of CIC SM had only 6 of my cases listed as pending, when actually they are 18. The other 12 files are lying below the chair of Mr PKPS !

3. The new pending list put up by CIC SMs registry shows no cases pending against my name. Where did those 18 cases disappear suddenly ?

4. 6 other cases in CIC SMs registry (not included in the 18 listed above) are also not appearing anywhere. On 30 Dec 2011, during a visit to the CIC, I had personally seen 4 of those files on his table. The other two files were seen on the table of a subordinate in the ante chamber of CIC SM - with the handwritten remarks of CIC SM "This is an important matter raised by the appellant and the matter should be scheduled for hearing as soon as possible".

But once gain, no trace of those. Now it is nearly March 2012. Why haven't they been scheduled and Notices issued ?

5. The less said about the Registry's of IC DS and SS, the better.

I have 2 cases pending in IC DSs registry. Cases pertaining to the same PA and filed much after my filing dates have already been heard and decided, although mine are still pending. My case filing dates are 25/1/2011 and 5/6/2011

Ditto with Registry of IC SS - 2 cases pending since Jan and March 2011.

6. The IC voted as "Best" by this group (IC MLS) is no better. A order dictated by him on 30 Dec 2011, in my presence, was uploaded on the CIC website on 21 February 2012 - after several rounds of follow up from my side. The signed order has still not been received by me till today - probably this IC and his staff take the term "snail mail" very literally !

You can verify all the above from the CIC website.

Do not believe in all the non sense dished out by people in the CIC. Officers and Staff of the CIC do not even know what is happening under their own noses - unless of course they have a vested interest in the matter/case.

PS: A-la Khushwant Singh, I have enough material now, to write a joke book based on experiences with the CIC inward department and the different Registry's !

RTIwanted

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012 10:21 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

Dear members

I have just had a PRIVATE chat with some people authorised to speak on
behalf of CIC (I am fighting them in a case before SC)

1) The actual outstanding pendency in the CIC is only around 2,700
cases (data wef Jan/Feb 2012)

2) The biggest culprit in terms of cases stuck is IC(Shailesh Gandhi)
who has around 800-900 cases stuck with him, some from as far back as
July 2011. In comparison CIC(SM) is up to date with a a pendency of
around 40-50 days.

3) No. 2 in terms of delay is IC(AD).

4) Whereas the CIC website reflects that around 27,000 cases are
pending, there is some computer glitch and the figure has been
multiplied by 10 due to file movement and poor dak records..

I have no comments on these statements. My dear readers are encouraged
to share their views.to the list.

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-02-26T15:22:00.000-08:00

I had filed a complaint in august 2010 related to no reply from
petroleum ministry related to information demanded on section 4. when
i filed rti as to ask the action taken, it was decided on feb 15 with
issuance of notice. many of the cases filed by in may 2011 (IC-SS) are
yet to be heard.
i had filed many cases in feb 2011 related to bsnl (MLS). all except
one are yet to be heard.
I had filed many cases related to income tax department, CBDT in
november 2011. all are yet to be heard.
even there is no mention on the cic website about cases filed against
bsnl, income tax

On 2/26/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear members
>
> I have just had a PRIVATE chat with some people authorised to speak on
> behalf of CIC (I am fighting them in a case before SC)
>
> 1) The actual outstanding pendency in the CIC is only around 2,700
> cases (data wef Jan/Feb 2012)
>
> 2) The biggest culprit in terms of cases stuck is IC(Shailesh Gandhi)
> who has around 800-900 cases stuck with him, some from as far back as
> July 2011. In comparison CIC(SM) is up to date with a a pendency of
> around 40-50 days.
>
> 3) No. 2 in terms of delay is IC(AD).
>
> 4) Whereas the CIC website reflects that around 27,000 cases are
> pending, there is some computer glitch and the figure has been
> multiplied by 10 due to file movement and poor dak records..
>
> I have no comments on these statements. My dear readers are encouraged
> to share their views.to the list.
>
> Sarbajit

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-26T10:13:00.001-08:00

Dear Col Singh

I freely admit that you have raised important issues, which is why
your messages are allowed. It is equally true that we may not be on
the same frequency as presently I am also experiencing rajasik gunas..
My family is heavily from Army background (although to be fair my
marriage was conducted by an Admiral and my wife was selected by an
AVM) with very strong roots to Hindutva tradition. In fact the term
"Hindutva" was originated / coined by persons from my family.
Particularly I would direct you to read the work by Raj Narain Bose
(Grand father of Indian Nationalism) titled as "Superiority of
Hinduism over all other religions" which was based on views of one of
my ancestors. Incidentally, Mr Bose was maternal grandfather of Sri
Aurobindo.. I am enclosing a PDF summary dated 1882 for your
reference..

Actually I propose that the term "Hindutva" (as it OUGHT to be
understood but isn't) is substituted for "secularism" in the Indian
Constitution.

Sarbajit

On 2/26/12, Col Thakur Singh <thakursinghk@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr sarbajit,
>
> I respect all the good values/ vitues; of whichever religion,
> country/village/ people these may be ! immaterial.
> I am beyond religion ie; follow spiritualism .
>
> Vivekananda said ; ' It is not in our hands to be born out of religion,
> but we must die out of religion , meaning thereby -go beyond religion
>
> come along i will take u the land of God and not the mullahs; - Mr
> dictator/mderator sahab - it is in your hands to delete my post but not
> creation /getting me united in this group - learn to be tolerate enough
> and keep your communication channels open , dont shut it down that being
> easy and any body can do it having inflated ego .
>
> you have not been able to catch what i have said above or what i meant ,
> we not being at the same frequency, if yes tell me what it is OK?
>
> Regards
>
> col thakur singh
>
> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Col Singh
>>
>> As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
>> However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.
>>
>> India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
>> go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
>> need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
>> AYATOLLAHS.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > *Dear All,*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term 'secular'
>> > state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
>> > ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS' ,GURUS'
>> > upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same to
>> > have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
>> > respect for our values in society.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR '
>> > in
>> > our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to
>> follow
>> > our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
>> > the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal means
>> > etc.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *Your comments please,.*
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *regards *
>> > *
>> > *
>> > *Col thakur Singh*
>> > *9873379995*
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-26T09:28:00.000-08:00

Dear Mr sarbajit,

I respect all the good values/ vitues; of whichever religion, country/village/ people these may be ! immaterial.

I am beyond religion ie; follow spiritualism .

Vivekananda said ; ' It is not in our hands to be born out of religion,

but we must die out of religion , meaning thereby -go beyond religion

come along i will take u the land of God and not the mullahs; - Mr dictator/mderator sahab - it is in your hands to delete my post but not creation /getting me united in this group - learn to be tolerate enough and keep your communication channels open , dont shut it down that being easy and any body can do it having inflated ego .

you have not been able to catch what i have said above or what i meant , we not being at the same frequency, if yes tell me what it is OK?

Regards

col thakur singh

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 10:30 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Col Singh

As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.

India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
AYATOLLAHS.

Sarbajit

On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Dear All,*
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term 'secular'

> state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
> ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS' ,GURUS'
> upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same to

> have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
> *
> *
> *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
> respect for our values in society.*
> *
> *
> *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR ' in

> our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to follow
> our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
> the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal means

> etc.*
> *
> *
> *Your comments please,.*
> *
> *
> *regards *
> *
> *
> *Col thakur Singh*
> *9873379995*

[HumJanenge] Re: FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-26T09:00:00.001-08:00

Dear Col Singh

As a moderator of this list I was considering deleting your post.
However, you have raised very important (NON-RTI) issues.

India is a secular state. If you dont like the term "secular" please
go and live in Pakistan / Iran where they have all the Sanskar you
need based on values and traditions of MULLAHS / MAULVIS /
AYATOLLAHS.

Sarbajit

On Feb 26, 9:40 pm, Col Thakur Singh <thakursin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Dear All,*
> *
> *
> *
> *
> *could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term 'secular'
> state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos
> ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS' ,GURUS'
> upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same to
> have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.*
> *
> *
> *To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having
> respect for our values in society.*
> *
> *
> *What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR ' in
> our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to follow
> our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of
> the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal means
> etc.*
> *
> *
> *Your comments please,.*
> *
> *
> *regards *
> *
> *
> *Col thakur Singh*
> *9873379995*

Re: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-02-26T08:57:00.000-08:00

my appeal against company registrar mumbai which is filled in october 2011 is pending till date

viadya

--- On Sun, 26/2/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Subject: [HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Date: Sunday, 26 February, 2012, 10:21 PM

Dear members

I have just had a PRIVATE chat with some people authorised to speak on
behalf of CIC (I am fighting them in a case before SC)

1) The actual outstanding pendency in the CIC is only around 2,700
cases (data wef Jan/Feb 2012)

2) The biggest culprit in terms of cases stuck is IC(Shailesh Gandhi)
who has around 800-900 cases stuck with him, some from as far back as
July 2011. In comparison CIC(SM) is up to date with a a pendency of
around 40-50 days.

3) No. 2 in terms of delay is IC(AD).

4) Whereas the CIC website reflects that around 27,000 cases are
pending, there is some computer glitch and the figure has been
multiplied by 10 due to file movement and poor dak records..

I have no comments on these statements. My dear readers are encouraged
to share their views.to the list.

Sarbajit

[HumJanenge] No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.

2012-02-26T08:51:00.000-08:00

Dear members

I have just had a PRIVATE chat with some people authorised to speak on
behalf of CIC (I am fighting them in a case before SC)

1) The actual outstanding pendency in the CIC is only around 2,700
cases (data wef Jan/Feb 2012)

2) The biggest culprit in terms of cases stuck is IC(Shailesh Gandhi)
who has around 800-900 cases stuck with him, some from as far back as
July 2011. In comparison CIC(SM) is up to date with a a pendency of
around 40-50 days.

3) No. 2 in terms of delay is IC(AD).

4) Whereas the CIC website reflects that around 27,000 cases are
pending, there is some computer glitch and the figure has been
multiplied by 10 due to file movement and poor dak records..

I have no comments on these statements. My dear readers are encouraged
to share their views.to the list.

Sarbajit

[HumJanenge] FINDING SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TERM,'SECULAR' STATE

2012-02-26T08:40:00.000-08:00

Dear All,

could you enlighten me , what is the substitute for the term 'secular' state, wherein we should be able to re-establish our ethos ,culture, trad-ions and respect the values our RISHI'S , YOGIS' ,GURUS' upheld to enable our present and future generations to inculcate same to have SATVIK and meaningful LIFE.

To follow the modern education system yet with our own culture having respect for our values in society.

What is the particular term , a substitute for the term ,'SECULAR ' in our constitution following which it will be obligatory for us all to follow our culture ,'SANSKAR' so enrich which will remove our most of the problems like greed, hoarding, amassing wealth through illegal means etc.

Your comments please,.

regards

Col thakur Singh

9873379995

Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-26T06:59:00.000-08:00

Dear Activists,

I can give many cases against Delhi Development Authority where no paper moves from one desk to another till money is not paid. Secondly, DDA does not implement CIC decisions for years together (since 31.03.2009). No help is there from Secretary, DDA, Joint REGISTRAR in this matter. CIC and Vice-Chairman present one and the earlier one
have been found helpless.

I shall give full details on hearing from any activist who is ready to take up this case during Budget session.

Hari Goyal
rtidwarka@yahoo.co.in

--- On Sat, 25/2/12, Manoj Kamra <manojkamra@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Manoj Kamra <manojkamra@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 25 February, 2012, 10:51 PM

Dear Sarbajit Roy ji,

       AICTE ---forget about 4.1.b , this notorous body of Mr.Kapil sibal is adamant to ignore applications.A little part of 4.1.b exposing major corruption for AICTE are------------------

                    (a) list of engg colleges recognised by AICTE------- since last five/ten years -------yearwise

                    (b) staff strength of AICTE regional/head office in last five/ten years (as same staff is handling 10-times work (10-times earning))

                    (c) last two inspection reports of engg colleges of rajasthan(or any state) --------as per its RTI reply, AICTE declared to have destroyed and retaining only last inspection report whereas as per AICTE Act, inspection is to be carried out at least once in every two years.



              Such suo-motu information especially, list of engg colleges is not being made available.



, Highcourts-------- Even CIC decisions are not being complied. How can we expect 4.1.b information.

with regards

manoj k.kamra

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Members

VERY URGENT - please respond.

One of our members, who is very high up with a leading
newspaper/publishing group has kindly offered to file "at least" 1,000
RTI requests to PIOs of various CENTRAL public authorities asking for
their suo-moto disclosure of section 4(1)(b).

The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then highlighted as
a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.

I would therefore request our members to email me (or to the group)
working EMAIL IDs of each and every CPIO of those CENTRAL public
authorities they are interested in exposing.

As I know that many of our members are otherwise quite lazy arm-chair
RTI warriors, I shall regularly be posting this appeal to stimulate
them into action.

Sarbajit

[HumJanenge] Re: on AICTE and fake certificates

2012-02-26T05:33:00.000-08:00

Dear Agnes

You hold very strong opinions and are all ready to go charging off
into battle using RTI.

RTI is very weak weapon IN ITSELF.

I am an engineer, and can doubtless suggest a few questions you can
ask your MP. Unfortunately, engineers like me, Mr Shailesh Gandhi, Mr
Arvind Kejriwal and Mr. Karira etc. would have ourselves forgotten
the answers we learned in college

Sarbajit

On 2/26/12, Agnes Kharshiing <akharshiing@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear Mr Manoj,got your mail to Mr Roy and could not help but give a few
> things of what could be true.. AICTE is not providing as most engineering
> degrees are fake and bought. ...The MP form Shillong, from our State says he
> is an BE engineer from Jalpaiguri but such classes are not there. He never
> attended his work when he was SDO and that proves he does not know his job.
> Now we just have to trap these engineers and ask them a few basic questions
> related to their studies. Just a suggestion and I would like to file an
> RTI....on this.Agnes KharshiingPresident of the CSWOShillong Meghalaya

[HumJanenge] STOP mailing me in "humjanenge@googlegroups.com"

2012-02-26T05:28:00.000-08:00

IMPORTANT

IF
you are receiving emails from this list and are NOT a member,

THEN
you are receiving FORWARDED emails, so

GOTO
https://lists.riseup.net/www/sigrequest/humjanenge

enter your email ID
and UNSUBSCRIBE manually

HJ@gg cannot unsubscribe you.

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

2012-02-25T22:30:00.000-08:00

A similar Article But offcourse High lighting Mr Seth Being From Bangalore (or is Residing ?) is Appearing in Todays Deccan Herald.
Since I Come across Several RTI requests being turned down by PIOs in Banks Mostly on Very Silly issues or Requests which never fall under the Fiduciary Capacity Shelter Clause , It would be a Good Proposition to Keenly Observe this Person if Appointed .
I also Understand by Documents Supplied by CIC itself that IBA which is just an Association has issued letters of caution/instructions to CEO's of all Public Sector Banks of What information should be Parted or not. This Association is not a Public authority
Mr Seth was One of the Managing committee member at that time .
For Breveity i cite one Sample refusal under Fiduciary clause being " the Inward register of RTI Appln's includes the details of the applications which were submitted by other parties to the CPIO under the act (meaning RTI act) as this information relates to personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest or disclosure of such information would cause unwarrented invasion of the privacy of any individiual as such information sought cannot be provided
Freinds can offer thier Comments
N vikramsimha , KRIA Koota , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.

--- On Sat, 25/2/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Saturday, 25 February, 2012, 10:43 PM
> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/former-ib-chief-among-3-new-information-commissioners-at-cic/articleshow/12034174.cms
>
> NEW DELHI: The government has shortlisted a former chief of
> Intelligence Bureau, a banker and a former bureaucrat as
> three new
> Information Commissioners at the transparency panel CIC.
>
> Former IB Chief Rajiv Mathur, former Environment Secretary
> Vijai
> Sharma and Syndicate Bank Chairman and Managing Director
> Basant Seth
> have been shortlisted as new faces at the Central
> Information
> Commission which is overburdened with over 20,000 pending
> appeals
> under the Right to Information Act, official sources said.
>
> A panel headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh which
> included Law
> Minister Salman Khurshid and Leader of Opposition Sushma
> Swaraj
> shortlisted the names of these people recently, they said.
>
> According to the RTI Act, the complete strength of the
> transparency
> panel is a Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Central
> Information
> Commissioners. As of now there are just five Information
> Commissioners
> leaving a shortage of five.
>
> A formal announcement on the appointment would be made
> shortly, they
> said.
>
> Mathur, a 1972 batch IPS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre, has
> served IB
> for nearly three decades including 15 years in Washington.
> He took
> over the reigns of the agency in January 2009, before
> retiring on
> December 31, 2010.
>
> Sharma, a 1974 batch IAS officer, from Uttar Pradesh cadre,
> was
> secretary in Union Environment Ministry before his
> superannuation in
> December 2010.
>
> He held number of positions in the state including State
> Housing
> Secretary, State Environment Secretary and Chairman of State
> Pollution
> Control Board among others.
>
> Seth who is the CMD of Syndicate Bank, Bangalore has held
> senior
> positions in Small Industries Development Bank and Bank of
> India.
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T21:33:00.000-08:00

How about starting with Syndicate Bank ?

Whose CMD has been selected to be a new IC in the CIC !

RTIwanted

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Members

VERY URGENT - please respond.

One of our members, who is very high up with a leading
newspaper/publishing group has kindly offered to file "at least" 1,000
RTI requests to PIOs of various CENTRAL public authorities asking for
their suo-moto disclosure of section 4(1)(b).

The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then highlighted as
a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T21:05:00.000-08:00

By "non implementation" do you only mean - NO implementation OR does it also include "poor quality" or a "part" impelmentation ?

RTIwanted

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 7:39 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

Dear Members

VERY URGENT - please respond.

The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then highlighted as
a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T21:01:00.000-08:00

But ICs who filed RTI applications before becoming ICs, in fact withdrew their second appeals / complaints when they came up for hearing !

RTiwanted

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 12:35 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

I think it should be made mandatory for all ICs to file at least 5
RTIs a month in their personal capacity to test if the system is
working.

Re: [HumJanenge] Panel: Bring NGOs, PPPs under RTI

2012-02-25T20:35:00.000-08:00

I think Sarbajit was making a different point.

:-)

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:53 PM, R. S. Fauzdar <fauzdarrs@yahoo.com> wrote:

Yes! I agree 100% with you, since I came across 2 such NGO,s groups geting hell lot of money from Govt in the name of looking after the welfare of Widows in VRINDABAN & its amazing to know that they are living in a Pathetic conditions.

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 12:07 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Panel: Bring NGOs, PPPs under RTI

A "high level panel" on public health has said that NGOs (code word
for societies and trusts) should be brought under RTI Act. Next they
will say that every hospital with an X-ray machine should be exempted
from RTI as a "nuclear installation". Amend the RTI Act to allow this
and clarify the situation once and for all.

More rubbish from our national newspapers who have run out of news to
publish.

Sarbajit

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Panel-Bring-NGOs-PPPs-under-RTI/Article1-816075.aspx

"Every non-government organisation (NGO) and Public-Private
Partnership (PPP) project should come under purview of the Right To
Information Act, a panel appointed by Prime Manmohan Singh has said. A
high-level panel on public health has told the government that RTI
should be made mandatory for all NGOs and public private partnerships
working in the social sector such as health to improve transparency
and accountability. "

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

- J. Krishnamurti

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sujit Patwardhan
patwardhan.sujit@gmail.com
sujit@parisar.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India
Tel: +91 20 25537955
Cell: +91 98220 26627
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blog: http://motif.posterous.com/

Parisar: www.parisar.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [HumJanenge] Panel: Bring NGOs, PPPs under RTI

2012-02-25T20:32:00.000-08:00

With a Prime Minister unfit to be a Govt clerk what else can we expect? You are right about Hospitals and the blank protection to anything "Nuclear". Mahatma Gandhi must be happy to be dead and gone from this land.

Sujit

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:07 PM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

A "high level panel" on public health has said that NGOs (code word
for societies and trusts) should be brought under RTI Act. Next they
will say that every hospital with an X-ray machine should be exempted
from RTI as a "nuclear installation". Amend the RTI Act to allow this
and clarify the situation once and for all.

More rubbish from our national newspapers who have run out of news to
publish.

Sarbajit

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Panel-Bring-NGOs-PPPs-under-RTI/Article1-816075.aspx

"Every non-government organisation (NGO) and Public-Private
Partnership (PPP) project should come under purview of the Right To
Information Act, a panel appointed by Prime Manmohan Singh has said. A
high-level panel on public health has told the government that RTI
should be made mandatory for all NGOs and public private partnerships
working in the social sector such as health to improve transparency
and accountability. "

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

Parisar: www.parisar.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T20:30:00.000-08:00

Dear gupta ji, did you get acknowledgement for your petition ? rgds. beniwal
--- On Sat, 25/2/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 25 February, 2012, 2:42 PM

the petition sent to the CJI on section 4 is enclosed. it was sent on
june 29 2011.

On 2/25/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sir,
> I have send the application related to section 4(1)(b) to Directorate
> of estates, Ministry of Petroleum, Bharat petroleum corporation
> limited, Hindustan Petroleum corporation limited, Indian Oil
> Corporation limited. the application sent to the directorate of
> estates is enclosed.
> regards
> sandeep
>
> On 2/25/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Dear Members
>>
>> VERY URGENT - please respond.
>>
>> One of our members, who is very high up with a leading
>> newspaper/publishing group has kindly offered to file "at least" 1,000
>> RTI requests to PIOs of various CENTRAL public authorities asking for
>> their suo-moto disclosure of section 4(1)(b).
>>
>> The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then highlighted as
>> a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.
>>
>> I would therefore request our members to email me (or to the group)
>> working EMAIL IDs of each and every CPIO of those CENTRAL public
>> authorities they are interested in exposing.
>>
>> As I know that many of our members are otherwise quite lazy arm-chair
>> RTI warriors, I shall regularly be posting this appeal to stimulate
>> them into action.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On 2/24/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This article shows the archaic, ill-informed and "cover up" mindset at
>>> CIC.
>>> I think it should be made mandatory for all ICs to file at least 5
>>> RTIs a month in their personal capacity to test if the system is
>>> working.
>>>
>>> Section 4(1)(b) disclosure is not neither the beginning nor the end of
>>> RTI. Implement 4(1)(a)fFIRST and THEN 4(1)(c) and 4(1)(d). I (and many
>>> other RTI experts) say that 4(1)(b) can safely be scrapped from the
>>> RTI Act if the rest of section 4 is implemented.
>>>
>>> Sarbajit
>>>
>>> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/government-judiciary-not-interested-in-rti-disclosures-cic-satyananda-mishra/articleshow/12013178.cms
>>>
>>> Speaking to ET, Central Information Commissioner Satyananda Mishra
>>> said, "The biggest issue on RTI Act implementation is whether the
>>> government departments have implemented Section 4 (1) (b) and
>>> voluntarily disclosed information on their websites. We have got a
>>> study done and when I say that none of the websites of Government of
>>> India follow the disclosure law, it is not an exaggeration. Even the
>>> high courts are no better."
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T20:10:00.000-08:00

Is it possible that we file a petition in the apex court related so
same. problem is that i do not know a lawyer who can file the case
with reasonable costs. Let us all contribute for the cause.

On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will also file applications to 15 public authorities. please provide
> me the names of such public authorities. if there is a specific
> application drafted, please send me.
>
> On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>> rk.maggo@nic.in (Department of pharmaceuticals)
>>
>> On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Secretary, Department of fertilizers (PIO mail not working) :
>>> fertsec@nic.in
>>>
>>> On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> sarbajit sir,
>>>> Please redraft my application so that i could get proper information.
>>>> let the group members also be guided in the matter.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> r.mohan87@nic.in, "saradac" <sarada.khan@nic.in (ministry of youth
>>>>> affairs and sports)
>>>>> usadmn@dae.gov.in (APIO in case of department of atomic energy)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2/25/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Manoj
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I m replying about your email as well as those of Dr. Sandeep Gupta.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Dr Gupta's applications/petitions are not properly drafted (in my
>>>>>> humble opinion). He is unlikely to get any reply from SC, and only
>>>>>> small / partial info from MoUD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Your own email about AICTE is not very clear.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is precisely because of such issues that a leading NATIONAL News
>>>>>> group plans to file over 1,000 RTI requests which will definitely get
>>>>>> some results. We also plan that an identical copy of the RTI request
>>>>>> is filed by some like minded Members of Parliament
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What we need are latest EMAIL IDs of all CPIOs of troublesome P/
>>>>>> As. !!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I repeat
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What we need are latest EMAIL Ids of all CPIOs of troublesome P/
>>>>>> As. !!!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please assist us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sarbajit
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 25, 10:21 pm, Manoj Kamra <manojka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Sarbajit Roy ji,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> AICTE ---forget about 4.1.b , this notorous body of Mr.Kapil
>>>>>>> sibal
>>>>>>> is adamant to ignore applications.A little part of 4.1.b exposing
>>>>>>> major
>>>>>>> corruption for AICTE are------------------
>>>>>>> (a) list of engg colleges recognised by
>>>>>>> AICTE------- since last five/ten years -------yearwise
>>>>>>> (b) staff strength of AICTE regional/head office
>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>> last five/ten years (as same staff is handling 10-times work
>>>>>>> (10-times
>>>>>>> earning))
>>>>>>> (c) last two inspection reports of engg colleges
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> rajasthan(or any state) --------as per its RTI reply, AICTE declared
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> have destroyed and retaining only last inspection report whereas as
>>>>>>> per
>>>>>>> AICTE Act, inspection is to be carried out at least once in every
>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>> years.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Such suo-motu information especially, list of engg
>>>>>>> colleges
>>>>>>> is not being made available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> , Highcourts-------- Even CIC decisions are not being complied. How
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> expect 4.1.b information.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with regards
>>>>>>> manoj k.kamra
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Dear Members
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > VERY URGENT - please respond.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > One of our members, who is very high up with a leading
>>>>>>> > newspaper/publishing group has kindly offered to file "at least"
>>>>>>> > 1,000
>>>>>>> > RTI requests to PIOs of various CENTRAL public authorities asking
>>>>>>> > for
>>>>>>> > their suo-moto disclosure of section 4(1)(b).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then
>>>>>>> > highlighted
>>>>>>> > as
>>>>>>> > a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > I would therefore request our members to email me (or to the
>>>>>>> > group)
>>>>>>> > working EMAIL IDs of each and every CPIO of those CENTRAL public
>>>>>>> > authorities they are interested in exposing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > As I know that many of our members are otherwise quite lazy
>>>>>>> > arm-chair
>>>>>>> > RTI warriors, I shall regularly be posting this appeal to
>>>>>>> > stimulate
>>>>>>> > them into action.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > Sarbajit
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>>>>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>>>>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>>>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>>>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T20:07:00.000-08:00

I will also file applications to 15 public authorities. please provide
me the names of such public authorities. if there is a specific
application drafted, please send me.

On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
> rk.maggo@nic.in (Department of pharmaceuticals)
>
> On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Secretary, Department of fertilizers (PIO mail not working) :
>> fertsec@nic.in
>>
>> On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> sarbajit sir,
>>> Please redraft my application so that i could get proper information.
>>> let the group members also be guided in the matter.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/26/12, Sandeep gupta <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> r.mohan87@nic.in, "saradac" <sarada.khan@nic.in (ministry of youth
>>>> affairs and sports)
>>>> usadmn@dae.gov.in (APIO in case of department of atomic energy)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/25/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Manoj
>>>>>
>>>>> I m replying about your email as well as those of Dr. Sandeep Gupta.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Dr Gupta's applications/petitions are not properly drafted (in my
>>>>> humble opinion). He is unlikely to get any reply from SC, and only
>>>>> small / partial info from MoUD.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) Your own email about AICTE is not very clear.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is precisely because of such issues that a leading NATIONAL News
>>>>> group plans to file over 1,000 RTI requests which will definitely get
>>>>> some results. We also plan that an identical copy of the RTI request
>>>>> is filed by some like minded Members of Parliament
>>>>>
>>>>> What we need are latest EMAIL IDs of all CPIOs of troublesome P/
>>>>> As. !!!
>>>>>
>>>>> I repeat
>>>>>
>>>>> What we need are latest EMAIL Ids of all CPIOs of troublesome P/
>>>>> As. !!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Please assist us.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sarbajit
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 25, 10:21 pm, Manoj Kamra <manojka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Sarbajit Roy ji,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AICTE ---forget about 4.1.b , this notorous body of Mr.Kapil
>>>>>> sibal
>>>>>> is adamant to ignore applications.A little part of 4.1.b exposing
>>>>>> major
>>>>>> corruption for AICTE are------------------
>>>>>> (a) list of engg colleges recognised by
>>>>>> AICTE------- since last five/ten years -------yearwise
>>>>>> (b) staff strength of AICTE regional/head office
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> last five/ten years (as same staff is handling 10-times work
>>>>>> (10-times
>>>>>> earning))
>>>>>> (c) last two inspection reports of engg colleges
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> rajasthan(or any state) --------as per its RTI reply, AICTE declared
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> have destroyed and retaining only last inspection report whereas as
>>>>>> per
>>>>>> AICTE Act, inspection is to be carried out at least once in every two
>>>>>> years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Such suo-motu information especially, list of engg
>>>>>> colleges
>>>>>> is not being made available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> , Highcourts-------- Even CIC decisions are not being complied. How
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> expect 4.1.b information.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> with regards
>>>>>> manoj k.kamra
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > Dear Members
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > VERY URGENT - please respond.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > One of our members, who is very high up with a leading
>>>>>> > newspaper/publishing group has kindly offered to file "at least"
>>>>>> > 1,000
>>>>>> > RTI requests to PIOs of various CENTRAL public authorities asking
>>>>>> > for
>>>>>> > their suo-moto disclosure of section 4(1)(b).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then highlighted
>>>>>> > as
>>>>>> > a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > I would therefore request our members to email me (or to the group)
>>>>>> > working EMAIL IDs of each and every CPIO of those CENTRAL public
>>>>>> > authorities they are interested in exposing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > As I know that many of our members are otherwise quite lazy
>>>>>> > arm-chair
>>>>>> > RTI warriors, I shall regularly be posting this appeal to stimulate
>>>>>> > them into action.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > Sarbajit
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>>>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>>>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
>> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
>> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

Re: [.RTI.] Re: [HumJanenge] Panel: Bring NGOs, PPPs under RTI

2012-02-25T17:45:00.000-08:00

these are already under RTI. I have been able to get information from
many NGOs under RTI. but there should be some proof that these have
got some funding from the government directly or indirectly. Meaning
of indirectly: Got exemption from income tax department, got land at
concessional rates, got exemption in revenue payment while purchasing
land, got land at discretionary quota or similar benefits.
i have got many judgements of the punjab state information commission
which have ordered disclosure.

On 2/25/12, Mohammed Afzal <mohdafzal1963@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Yes indeed, if there is transparency in running the affairs of the NGOs, I
> see no reason why they resist coming under the preview of the RTI act.
>
> Regds - Mohammed Afzal.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 24-Feb-2012, at 12:53 PM, "R. S. Fauzdar" <fauzdarrs@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes! I agree 100% with you, since I came across 2 such NGO,s groups
>> geting hell lot of money from Govt in the name of looking after the
>> welfare of Widows in VRINDABAN & its amazing to know that they are living
>> in a Pathetic conditions.
>>
>> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
>> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005"
>> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
>> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 12:07 PM
>> Subject: [HumJanenge] Panel: Bring NGOs, PPPs under RTI
>>
>> A "high level panel" on public health has said that NGOs (code word
>> for societies and trusts) should be brought under RTI Act. Next they
>> will say that every hospital with an X-ray machine should be exempted
>> from RTI as a "nuclear installation". Amend the RTI Act to allow this
>> and clarify the situation once and for all.
>>
>> More rubbish from our national newspapers who have run out of news to
>> publish.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Panel-Bring-NGOs-PPPs-under-RTI/Article1-816075.aspx
>>
>> "Every non-government organisation (NGO) and Public-Private
>> Partnership (PPP) project should come under purview of the Right To
>> Information Act, a panel appointed by Prime Manmohan Singh has said. A
>> high-level panel on public health has told the government that RTI
>> should be made mandatory for all NGOs and public private partnerships
>> working in the social sector such as health to improve transparency
>> and accountability. "
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1778, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[HumJanenge] Re: Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T09:36:00.001-08:00

Hi Manoj

I m replying about your email as well as those of Dr. Sandeep Gupta.

1) Dr Gupta's applications/petitions are not properly drafted (in my
humble opinion). He is unlikely to get any reply from SC, and only
small / partial info from MoUD.

2) Your own email about AICTE is not very clear.

It is precisely because of such issues that a leading NATIONAL News
group plans to file over 1,000 RTI requests which will definitely get
some results. We also plan that an identical copy of the RTI request
is filed by some like minded Members of Parliament

What we need are latest EMAIL IDs of all CPIOs of troublesome P/
As. !!!

I repeat

What we need are latest EMAIL Ids of all CPIOs of troublesome P/
As. !!!

Please assist us.

Sarbajit

On Feb 25, 10:21 pm, Manoj Kamra <manojka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sarbajit Roy ji,
>
> AICTE ---forget about 4.1.b , this notorous body of Mr.Kapil sibal
> is adamant to ignore applications.A little part of 4.1.b exposing major
> corruption for AICTE are------------------
> (a) list of engg colleges recognised by
> AICTE------- since last five/ten years -------yearwise
> (b) staff strength of AICTE regional/head office in
> last five/ten years (as same staff is handling 10-times work (10-times
> earning))
> (c) last two inspection reports of engg colleges of
> rajasthan(or any state) --------as per its RTI reply, AICTE declared to
> have destroyed and retaining only last inspection report whereas as per
> AICTE Act, inspection is to be carried out at least once in every two years.
>
> Such suo-motu information especially, list of engg colleges
> is not being made available.
>
> , Highcourts-------- Even CIC decisions are not being complied. How can we
> expect 4.1.b information.
>
> with regards
> manoj k.kamra
>
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Members
>
> > VERY URGENT - please respond.
>
> > One of our members, who is very high up with a leading
> > newspaper/publishing group has kindly offered to file "at least" 1,000
> > RTI requests to PIOs of various CENTRAL public authorities asking for
> > their suo-moto disclosure of section 4(1)(b).
>
> > The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then highlighted as
> > a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.
>
> > I would therefore request our members to email me (or to the group)
> > working EMAIL IDs of each and every CPIO of those CENTRAL public
> > authorities they are interested in exposing.
>
> > As I know that many of our members are otherwise quite lazy arm-chair
> > RTI warriors, I shall regularly be posting this appeal to stimulate
> > them into action.
>
> > Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Government, judiciary not interested in RTI disclosures

2012-02-25T09:21:00.000-08:00

Dear Sarbajit Roy ji,

AICTE ---forget about 4.1.b , this notorous body of Mr.Kapil sibal is adamant to ignore applications.A little part of 4.1.b exposing major corruption for AICTE are------------------

(a) list of engg colleges recognised by AICTE------- since last five/ten years -------yearwise

(b) staff strength of AICTE regional/head office in last five/ten years (as same staff is handling 10-times work (10-times earning))

(c) last two inspection reports of engg colleges of rajasthan(or any state) --------as per its RTI reply, AICTE declared to have destroyed and retaining only last inspection report whereas as per AICTE Act, inspection is to be carried out at least once in every two years.

Such suo-motu information especially, list of engg colleges is not being made available.

, Highcourts-------- Even CIC decisions are not being complied. How can we expect 4.1.b information.

with regards

manoj k.kamra

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Members

VERY URGENT - please respond.

One of our members, who is very high up with a leading
newspaper/publishing group has kindly offered to file "at least" 1,000
RTI requests to PIOs of various CENTRAL public authorities asking for
their suo-moto disclosure of section 4(1)(b).

The most shocking cases of non-implementation will then highlighted as
a daily series spanning over 2 weeks.

I would therefore request our members to email me (or to the group)
working EMAIL IDs of each and every CPIO of those CENTRAL public
authorities they are interested in exposing.

As I know that many of our members are otherwise quite lazy arm-chair
RTI warriors, I shall regularly be posting this appeal to stimulate
them into action.

Sarbajit

[HumJanenge] Former IB chief among 3 new Information Commissioners at CIC

2012-02-25T09:13:00.001-08:00

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/former-ib-chief-among-3-new-information-commissioners-at-cic/articleshow/12034174.cms

NEW DELHI: The government has shortlisted a former chief of
Intelligence Bureau, a banker and a former bureaucrat as three new
Information Commissioners at the transparency panel CIC.

Former IB Chief Rajiv Mathur, former Environment Secretary Vijai
Sharma and Syndicate Bank Chairman and Managing Director Basant Seth
have been shortlisted as new faces at the Central Information
Commission which is overburdened with over 20,000 pending appeals
under the Right to Information Act, official sources said.

A panel headed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh which included Law
Minister Salman Khurshid and Leader of Opposition Sushma Swaraj
shortlisted the names of these people recently, they said.

According to the RTI Act, the complete strength of the transparency
panel is a Chief Information Commissioner and 10 Central Information
Commissioners. As of now there are just five Information Commissioners
leaving a shortage of five.

A formal announcement on the appointment would be made shortly, they
said.

Mathur, a 1972 batch IPS officer of Uttar Pradesh cadre, has served IB
for nearly three decades including 15 years in Washington. He took
over the reigns of the agency in January 2009, before retiring on
December 31, 2010.

Sharma, a 1974 batch IAS officer, from Uttar Pradesh cadre, was
secretary in Union Environment Ministry before his superannuation in
December 2010.

He held number of positions in the state including State Housing
Secretary, State Environment Secretary and Chairman of State Pollution
Control Board among others.

Seth who is the CMD of Syndicate Bank, Bangalore has held senior
positions in Small Industries Development Bank and Bank of India.

Re: [HumJanenge] Conspiracy behind Army Chief's Age Row - THE STATESMAN

2012-02-25T08:36:00.000-08:00

Come on Mam, please be compassionate for the have nots INDIANS not for the System Generated Generals. The false status, the false pride etc we had enough of these of these carrier bureaucrats, they only count present and post service benefits. We are yet to reach to the level of AME/ISRA standard of Military Leaders and it is a reality. Yeas it is, believe it
AK Mazumder
Ex-Sergeant

Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel

From: sujata singh <singhsujata2001@yahoo.com>

Sender: humjanenge@googlegroups.com

Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:04:35 +0800 (SGT)

To: <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>

ReplyTo: humjanenge@googlegroups.com

Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Conspiracy behind Army Chief's Age Row - THE STATESMAN

It is a sad reflection on the present government that an outstanding Chief like Gen. V.K. Singh has been treated so shabbily.Very sad indeed.
Sujata Singh
......

From: Janardan Sharma <contactjps@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, 20 February 2012 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Conspiracy behind Army Chief's Age Row - THE STATESMAN

The article is indeed a very moving expression of anguish and sense of injustice with the treatment meted out to a very courageous, competent and above all an upright and honest officer . the article reaffirms the manoeuvrings and behind the curtain ,schemings that go on to ensure that a particular person makes it to the COAS .Once the persons make it to the rank of Major General ,the ones who have a clear edge and are aspiring for the top rank set into motion their long term strategy for attaining their objective. they not only rely heavily on their god father in the army but also cultivate chosen bureaucrats and politicians to facilitate their upward mobility. In fact considerable time , energy and resources are directed towards this end at the cost of neglect to their primary responsibilities.All possible permutations and combinations are taken into account and strategies worked like in the war game to score over the rivals and competitors.

In the case of General VK Singh ,as mentioned in the article and well known otherwise, the shoddy controversy was rigged up as per the plan to ensure that the matter comes up only towards the end of his tenure .in accordance with the current policy of abiding by the seniority principle for the post of the COAS, the promotion to the appointment of army commanders plays a pivotal role in achieving the objective.It is virtually also decided as to who will be the chief unless the two army commanders have the same birthday which would be rare. It can be safely assumed that virtual nomination of LT General Bikram Singh for the top post was contrived at that moment. So this chanakyesque politics and strategems come into force and this facade of the Govt's policy of adhering to the established chain of succession is all humbug.

The fact that General VK SIngh cotinued to represent even after having been appointed as army commander makes it obvious that he had not reconciled to the change in DOB. In fact he was tricked by false assurances about setting right the anomaly and virtually coerced to keep mum on the issue for his own good. while Gen JJ Singh rigged up the issue to facilitate the elevationof Bikram singh, it was the dishonourable duo ,Deepak Kapoor and Avadesh prasad whose misdeeds is well known, who put into effect the devious plan. there surely must be some ulterior motive and something to be gained by these illustrious personalities in indulging in such murky deals.

This should be an eye opener for the Nation as to what shenanigans and devious games are being indulged into at the highest rung of army leadership and its consequences on the army's efficiency and morale.As for the political leadership this is a game they enjoy playing and practising to perfection. the fact that so called Honest and 'Mr clean PM and 'Mr honest' Defence Minister were unable to settle the matter speaks highly of the state of affairs.

It is no doubt the most shameful episode in the history of Indian Army.

Col JP Sharma

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Devasahayam MG <mgd@airtelmail.in> wrote:

Dear All,

As promised herewith is the lead Article in today's THE STATESMAN that bares the deep rooted conspiracy that led to the sordid episode of the Army Chief's age row. It is for sure that the 'motivated media' would try and suppress it, but Truth always has an uncanny way of surfacing and then prevailing

M.G.Devasahayam
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

http://thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=400557&catid=38

THE STATESMAN

Special Article

19 February 2012

VK Singh's age-battle
Ball Back In Centre's Court

By Sam Rajappa

An honest man's the noblest work of God.
~ Alexander Pope

HONESTY is a vanishing commodity, according to a recent research study by Essex University. Paul Whiteley, author of the report, says low-level dishonesty has increased across the social classes, although the younger generation is, on the whole, even less scrupulous than the older one. In 1712, Jonathan Swift wrote a treatise on "The Art of Political Lying." If defence minister AK Antony read either of the reports, this raging controversy about the date of birth of the Chief of the Army Staff, General VK Singh, could have been avoided. There is an age-old dispute between moderates and rigorists.

Antony is a moderate who believes a few lies are acceptable if they serve the larger interest of statecraft, like Oskar Schindler, who did not hesitate to lie to Hitler's storm troopers to save the lives of more than 1,000 of his Jewish employees. General Singh belongs to the school of thought of Immanuel Kant, one of the renowned exponents of the rigorist position, and landed himself in this unseemly controversy.

The media, for whatever interest they were serving, saw in the 10 February order of the Supreme Court, the army chief losing his age war. Nowhere in the brief 12-paragraph judgment can one find the Supreme Court telling General Singh to change his date of birth to suit the interests of the government.

The operative part of the judgment reads: "As a matter of fact, the question before us in the writ petition is not about the determination of actual date of birth of the petitioner, but it concerns the recognition of a particular date of birth of the petitioner by the respondent (Union of India) in the official service record. In view of the statement made by Goolam Vahanvati, Attorney-General, and the limited controversy in the writ petition, counsel for the petitioner does not wish to press the matter further and he seeks withdrawal of the writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn." Where is the question of who won and who lost?

Earlier in the day, Vahanavati handed over to the Bench a short affidavit by KL Nandwani, deputy secretary in the Defence ministry, seeking to treat the second part of his 30 December 2011, order to the Adjutant General's branch to change VK Singh's date of birth from 10 May 1951 to 10 May 1950, and send a "strict compliance report at the earliest without further loss of time," as withdrawn and confine it to the first part only which holds the statutory complaint by the petitioner as not maintainable.

The Bench granted permission and observed: "In view thereof, the petitioner's grievance with regard to the part of the order dated 30 December 2011, which deals with the merits of the controversy, does not survive." The judgment took care to record Vahanavati's statement that the government had not questioned the integrity or bona fide of the petitioner. "The writ petition was on a matter of principle and it did not reflect any lack of faith or confidence in the petitioner's ability to lead the army." The judges took particular care to avoid any obiter dicta in their order. What is, however, regrettable in this sordid saga of age controversy is the government ignoring primary and legally accepted documents like birth certificate and school leaving certificate and giving credence to non-legal documents like an application form which can be easily manipulated. Birth is a natural occurrence ordained by Providence and its date and time cannot be altered by any government order.

The ball is now in the court of defence minister Antony who had ordered a junior-level officer in his ministry to write to the Adjutant General to change the date of birth of General Singh to 10 May 1950, when the matter was sub judice. The letter had to be withdrawn on order of the Supreme Court. The Military Secretary, Lt.-Gen. GM Nair, in his letter A/4501/01(GEN/MS(1) dated 01 July 2011, to the defence minister, marked 'confidential,' wrote: On scrutiny of past records pertaining to Selection Boards, it has been observed that the MDSs pertaining to Gen. VK Singh which were drawn up at the time of his consideration for promotion to select ranks reflect the date of birth of the General Officer as 10 May 1951." The letter goes on to give his promotion as Major-General on 25 October 2001, Lieutenant-General on 18/19 September 2003, and as Army Commander on 30 September 2005, all based on his actual date of birth. The letter said that copies of the relevant MDS sheets are available with the ministry of defence for verification, and added for good measure that "this has been brought to the notice of the defence minister." This document, a photocopy of which is available with The Statesman, makes it clear that till Manmohan Singh became Prime Minister, there was no dichotomy between the records maintained by the Military Secretary branch and the Adjutant General branch pertaining to the date of birth of VK Singh.

The plot began to thicken when Gen. Joginder Jaswant Singh of Maratha Light Infantry took over as Chief of the Army Staff on 1 February 2005. He was the first-ever Sikh to rise to the top in the Indian Army. In the preceding months, as Gen. NC Vij's tenure was coming to an end, there was speculation that JJ Singh would be superseded by Lt.-Gen. Shammi Mehta, an Armoured Corps officer. The Shiromani Gurdwara Prabanthak Committee issued a strongly worded statement favouring JJ Singh which was prominently featured in The Tribune and a few other newspapers. The Tribune was used again, this time to pillory Gen. VK Singh.

For the first time in the history of the Indian Army, the communal card came into play, though the SGPC statement might not have had any bearing on the Appointments Committee headed by Manmohan Singh clearing JJ Singh's elevation to the top slot. Within months of taking over, he plotted a succession plan. That Deepak Kapoor would take over from JJ Singh was well known by then. After Kapoor who would depend on the Selection Board which was to meet towards the end of 2005 to decide on which officers were to be promoted to the Lieutenant-General's rank.

After working out various permutations and combinations, JJ Singh discovered that VK Singh, who was a Corps Commander by then, would be the obvious choice to succeed Kapoor, but if his tenure could be curtailed to two years, the way could be cleared for Bikram Singh, the present chief of the Eastern Command, to take over in May 2012. At that time, Bikram Singh was not a front- runner as there were other officers with better credentials ahead of him in the succession pyramid. But they could be sidelined with a bit of deft tweaking.

Those to be neutralised included Brigadiers Padam Budhwar and MM Chaudhary, and Majors-General Shujan Chatterjee, AK Singh and Ravi Arora, a gold medalist from the same batch as Bikram Singh. Raising VK Singh's age issue before his Lieutenant-General Board would have eliminated him from the race and in the process, Bikram Singh too would have been knocked out. For JJ Singh's succession plan to succeed, VK Singh had to remain in office till 31 May. On 3 May 2006, the Military Secretary branch was asked to rake up VK Singh's date of birth issue based on an error in his application form at the time of joining the NDA as a teenager, and asked to accept, in writing, that he was born in 1950, with the promise of an inquiry which was never held.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 7:05 AM, Prakash Katoch <prakashkatoch7@gmail.com> wrote:

This article by Mrinalini Singh needs to be read coupled with the fact how the government has used the media (The Fourth Estate) – in line with what MK Dhar, former Joint Director Intelligence Bureau wrote in his book 'Top Secret – India's Intelligence Unveiled' wherein he says, "The susceptibility of the fourth estate to the intelligence community had tied our hands down. They are one of the too many holy Indian cows. Some of them, as described by a senior member of the fourth estate, 'taxi on hire.' any paymaster can hire this particular brand."

Incredible India marches on !

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Colonelrajan Srinivas <colonelrajan44@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 8:34 PM
Subject: Article - HOW CAN GREAT OAKS SWAY WITH THE WIND? - Mrinalini Singh
To: M V <militaryveterans@yahoogroups.com>, veteransindia <VeteransIndia@yahoogroups.com>, ExecutiveGpMilitaryVeteransIndia@yahoogroups.com, sappersjune1963 <SappersJune1963@yahoogroups.com>, 268hippos <268Hippos@yahoogroups.com>, MaduraiAppathuraiIyerClan@yahoogroups.com, 98BigStreet@yahoogroups.com, elephantlodge <ElephantLodge@yahoogroups.co.in>

OUTLOOKINDIA.COM

HOW CAN GREAT OAKS SWAY WITH THE WIND?

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?279938#.Tz-yG2XuVCA.email

MRINALINI SINGH

When he was a lieutenant general, V.K. Singh gave it in writing that he had faith in his army chief. This cannot be construed as 'acceptance' of a wrong DoB.

MRINALINI SINGH

An error had been made regarding the date of birth of my father at the time of filling up the UPSC form when he had applied for admission to the National Defence Academy (NDA). This was detected instantly and certain steps were taken to correct the year of birth even before he joined the academy. In fact, he reported 13 days late to the NDA as the date was being sorted out. This was obviously taken due note of, for all NDA records then showed his year of birth as 1951. Three years later, when he moved from the NDA to the Indian Military Academy (IMA), he was told to write the date of birth as in the UPSC form. He pointed out that this had been corrected and was told that this would be verified by a board of officers. The pre-commission advisory board checked and verified his particulars; his IMA identity card and his record of service duly stated that he was born in 1951. For the next few decades, ever since his commissioning into the army, his year of birth in all records, whether in the military secretariat or the adjutant general's branch, was 1951. The only exception was the Army List, which is published keeping the original UPSC form as reference point. Even in this case, as the date of birth had to be verified against the school-leaving certificate, the entry was erroneous.

On May 3, 2006, 19 days after the results of the selection board for lieutenant generals had been declassified, the military secretary at the time, Lt Gen Richard Khare, first wrote to Gen V.K. Singh claiming there was a discrepancy in the records of the two branches. This set off a chain of events that eventually led to the army chief first filing a statutory complaint and then referring the matter to the Supreme Court.

On February 3, 2012, the SC, in its wisdom, castigated the government, stating that the due process of natural justice had not been followed and the process had been "vitiated" in addressing the army chief's statutory complaint. The attorney general at that time asked for an adjournment, which was granted. During the second hearing, a week later, the attorney general started proceedings by submitting an affidavit by way of which it withdrew its order dated December 30, 2011, that rejected the statutory complaint. In view of the government's move, and the praise about the general's professional and personal conduct, our lawyer felt there was no point in pressing the matter further, especially since the court had made it clear that in light of the government's stance, there was nothing further to be discussed from a legal point of view. As a citizen of India, the army chief has already expressed his grateful thanks to the learned judges of the apex court for addressing the issue.

***

My Ambition

I don't want to be,
A wealthy man,
Nor I want to be,
A working man.

I want to be,
A great soldier,
Fighting on the front,
with a gun on my shoulder,

I want to die for,
My great, beloved nation,
And for my enemy,
I shall have no compassion,

I want to let the
Chinese know
That Indians can die,
For their Motherland.

(A poem written by Gen V.K. Singh as a Std VIII student,

culled from his school magazine)

***

The order passed by the court is not ambiguous in its content. I am bitterly disappointed at the deliberate spin given in the media to the proceedings in the court, which in my view and understanding are quite contrary to what the honourable judges have said in their order. Firstly, the order does not uphold an error in the threshold document, nor does it say anything about the legality of either of the two dates of birth. There's also nothing to suggest that the so-called 'acceptance letters' exist. While it is true that these points came up during the hearing—as did many other statements, which include the much talked about "wise men move with the wind" remark of the judges—but these were arguments that in my understanding cannot be confused with the order passed by the learned judges.

If the government had not withdrawn its order of December 30 concerning my father's statutory appeal, the arguments in the court would have had a different flavour and intensity and all the facts given above would have come into play, requiring adjudication. But this did not happen, and my father's critics have gone to town, repeatedly harping that there are three occasions when he had "moved with the wind" and given acceptance letters to the year of birth being 1950. This is blatantly untrue, and I would like to set the record straight.

Contrary to what is being projected, there has never been any such 'acceptance letter'. In 2006, he was perhaps the only serving lieutenant general in the history of the nation to be asked to furnish a fresh date of birth prior to being cleared for appointment as a corps commander. This despite the fact that just a few weeks prior to that, the military secretariat branch records had cleared him for promotion based on a 1951 year of birth. The then army chief, Gen J.J. Singh, my father's chief at the time, had categorically told him that there was merely a clerical discrepancy in the records. This would be sorted out, and for that he needed to accept that he had faith in the army chief's decisions. This would be in the interest of the organisation, as it was otherwise holding up the appointments of all corps commanders. Once the army chief had this letter, it was projected to the defence ministry that there was an 'acceptance letter' procured from my father, acknowledging the year of birth as 1950. The fact that my father, then a lieutenant general, continued to ask the military secretariat branch even after that how and why the army chief had been advised to make him declare a new year of birth underlines the fact that in 2006 there was no such 'acceptance'.

The question that needs to be asked of the then army chief, the military secretary (Lt Gen Khare) and the judge advocate general (Maj Gen Nilender Kumar), who together initiated what was clearly not the standard operating procedure in 2006, is: Why did they make an exception in this case only? These gentlemen have found immunity in red tape, aided perhaps by some deft management of the media, which has sidestepped this question, while my father is accused of "bending with the wind". In my view, this is where the injustice lies.

As for the second and third 'acceptance' letters, it is loosely being said they had been written in 2008 and 2009. This immediately begs the question that if there was a 'first acceptance' letter, then, what was the need for a second and a third one to be asked for? The situation here is slightly more complex. The army chief at this point of time was Gen Deepak Kapoor and the military secretary Lt Gen Avdhesh Prakash. It is a well known fact that these two gentlemen, both professionally and otherwise, differed sharply from my father (then a lieutenant general) and if the former had his way, my father would not have headed the Eastern Command. Professionally, there was nothing that could be used by the army chief to damage my father, so the 'age issue' was once again raked up to provoke him into disobeying a direct order to accept an incorrect year of birth. The army chief is the most powerful man in the army and a series of letters were written which have to be seen in their entirety to get the complete picture. Opinions should not be based on an isolated sentence which cites "the larger organisational interest". Had this logic been true—that Lt Gen V.K. Singh 'accepted' the year of birth as 1950 so as to head the Eastern Command and later become army chief—he would have shut the cupola and not stirred the issue at all during his tenure as eastern army commander before taking over as the chief. However, he continued to write to the military secretary (Lt Gen Prakash), going systematically along accepted lines of redressing the clerical error within the army.

Honour and izzat are words that are emblazoned on a soldier's heart. Apart from being the daughter of Gen V.K. Singh, I too am an army wife and have seen from close quarters the man I call my father stand up for what he considers is the right thing to do.

In this rather one-sided slanging match, it is also being implied by his critics that the army chief would be better off fighting for one-rank-one-pay, war memorials, weapon systems and all the other problems that haunt the system. I am not going to get drawn into what all he has done as the army chief; that's best left to others and that is a part of his job anyway. For me, his worldview is best encapsulated in a quote from Ernest Hemingway that he uses often: "Few men for the right cause brave the disrespect of their fellow men, the censure of their colleagues and ignorance of society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential vital quality of those who seek to change a world which yields out painfully to change."

(Mrinalini Singh is the daughter of Gen V.K. Singh)

—as told to Chander Suta Dogra

Re: [rti4empowerment] RTI Act - Government Circular

2012-02-25T07:12:00.000-08:00

Because, Chief Secretary has published thei suo-motu as per section
4(1)(b) of the RTI Act, 2005

On 2/22/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Anand
>
> Your post is very confusing.
> I fail to see the logic of how/why Chief Secretary is a public
> authority based on your facts.
> Please amplify.
>
> Sarbajit
> On 2/22/12, Anand Acf <acfanand@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Long before when KK Mishra earlier Chief Secretary of Karnataka and
>> Ex. Chief Information Commission of Karnataka was arguing with me that
>> CS is not a Public Authority.
>>
>> But My made an application under section 4(4) supply of the copy of
>> the su-motu published as per section 4(1)(b) of the Act.
>>
>> Then out going CS Vatsala Vatsa issued copy of the 4(1)(b) stating
>> that ACR of all IAS, IPS and IFS with them.
>>
>> Hence Public Authority.
>>
>> On 2/17/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Under 2(h) the Secretary of your CS is essentially saying that he is
>>> not covered under RTI, ie. your CS is not covered under definition of
>>> "public authority".
>>>
>>> You wanted to know if you can question "any" CS. The answer is you can
>>> question "some" CSes.
>>> ie. only those which ARE included within 2(h)'s 4 cases. (usually
>>> 2(h)(d)).
>>> There are conflicting High Court decisions on this.
>>>
>>> The Secretary of a CS has the right power to issue circulars TO ITS
>>> MEMBERS. These are usually issued under the Societies Act / Rues and
>>> can always be overturned by the General Body at a GBM if you have the
>>> numbers..
>>>
>>> Sarbajit
>>>
>>> On 2/17/12, shailmala kumari <shailmala1@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>>>> Dear Members,
>>>>
>>>> I have one question from the members regarding the Government Circular.
>>>>
>>>> What is a Government Circular? Who has the authority to issue Circulars
>>>> OR
>>>> what is the position (designation) of the particular official issuing
>>>> the
>>>> Circular?
>>>>
>>>> If I ask question through RTI Act to any Cooperative Society, does the
>>>> Secretary of the Cooperative Society has right to issue a circular and
>>>> deny
>>>> any
>>>> information under Section 2H of the RTI Act?
>>>>
>>>> Any information regarding this would be highly appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shailmala
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Anand S.
>> Coordinator, Anti Corruption Forum
>> Bangalore 560 085.
>> Cell No. +91-87928-91066
>>
>

--
Anand S.
Coordinator, Anti Corruption Forum
Bangalore 560 085.
Cell No. +91-87928-91066