Saturday, April 23, 2011

Re: [HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

Dear Mr Anoop Kumar

1) I dispute that Anna Hazare and his nominees constitute or represent civil society.
If we examine the 5, we find that each and every one of them is a former public servant or the progeny. Wouls any reasonable person classify this as an unbiased panel.

2) I dispute that we need a LokPal to tackle corruption in the country. What we need is a Constitutional amendment making military service compulsory for every citizen below the age of 30 for "x" number of years. What we need is a movement to throw out / exterminate the foreign parasites and their progeny who drain our national resources like leeches. What we need is a constitutional amendment bestowing the right on each citizen to bear arms / alternatively the repeal of the Arms Act. What we need is honest and autonomous police forces. What we need is for corrupt advocates and judges to be strung up from the nearest lamppost. What we need is a complete repeal of the Representation of the Peoples Act so that a citizen can only be an MP / MLA for 1 term. The wishlist can go on and on. So stop dreaming and start living.

Sarbajit

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 11:47 AM, S. Anoop Kumar <s.anoopkumar@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,

I have been reading your messages which are mostly Anna bashing or
bashing of the other draft committee members of the  proposed Lok Pall
Bill representing the civil society, that is us.   Mr. Anna Hazare,
Mr. Santosh Hegde, Mr. Arvind Kejriwal, Mr. Shashi Bhushan and Mr.
Prashant Bhushan are only members of the committee drafting the
proposed Lok Pal bill.   They are neither offered any constitution
post nor they are aspiring for one.   Mr. Santosh Hegde served as
Judge of Supreme Court of India and is now Lok Ayuktha of Karnataka
and due to retire soon.

It is a foregone conclusion that India, now considered as one of the
most corrupt nations, needs a strong anti corruption law,  the law
which can be enforceable, swift, fast and result oriented.   For which
we need to have a strong bill.   A deterrent in the first place.  The
bill which is devoid of any short comings and loop holes which would
be conveniently exploited to their advantage by the mighty and
powerful.   In short, we do not need just another bill which is just
seen or read on papers but remains absolutely unenforceable or
powerless.   The toothless tiger.

Mr. Shashi Bhushan has been advocating a strong Lok Pal Bill for the
past 40 years.   He understand the dynamics of both politics and also
law.   Mr. Prashant Bhushan and also Santosh Hegde are other legal
luminaries.   Added with social activists like Mr. Anna Hazare and Mr.
Arvind Kejriwal in the committee, we can atleast hope for a strong and
enforceable bill that would protect the interests of the citizens of
our nation.

Instead of criticizing the draft committee members, and every other
who is supporting the Lok Pal Bill, I wish you concentrate on the
draft bill with constructive suggestions to make it effective and free
from errors or legal loop holes, get it tabled before the parliament
houses and also get it passed.   This would be a great contribution
from your side.  To us as a nation and to our coming generations.

Regards,
S. Anoop Kumar.






On Apr 23, 6:22 pm, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sankar
>
> As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
> Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
> conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
> when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
> to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
> that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
> people will be selected.
>
> Tomorrow if  DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
> Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sankar Pani
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are
> > absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the
> > interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else
> > will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free
> > nation.
>
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Your statements are grossly objectionable.
>
> >> 1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
> >> incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.
>
> >> 2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the fashion
> >> it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first place.
>
> >> 3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
> >> LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
> >> You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
> >> public forum.,
>
> >> Sarbajit
>
> >> On Apr 22, 8:56 am, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > If we start finding faults with each and every person, then only god if
> >> > any
> >> > will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the present
> >> > juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less controversial
> >> > people
> >> > but never possible to find a person who do not have any such allegation.
> >> > to
> >> > me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing committee
> >> > and
> >> > and should judge the objective of the committee.
>
> >> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > Dear Satishji
>
> >> > > For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.
>
> >> > > Sarbajit
>
> >> > > On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > Dear Sarbajit
>
> >> > > > Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>
> >> > > > S.K.Kapoor
>
> >> > > > ________________________________
> >> > > > sense ?
>
> >> > --
> >> > Sankar Prasad Pani
> >> > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> >> > India
> >> > PIN-751007
> >> > Cell- 9437279278http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
> > --
> > Sankar Prasad Pani
> > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> > India
> > PIN-751007
> > Cell- 9437279278
> >http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

[HumJanenge] Photograph of Ms. Omita Paul.

Dear All,

Photographs of Ms Omita Paul, working with Mr Pranab Mukherjee for more than two-and-half-decades, on Net -


http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040421/edit.htm#7


Regards,

-- 
(Babubhai Vaghela)
C 202, Shrinandnagar V, Makarba Road Vejalpur, Ahmedabad - 380051
M -  94276 08632
http://twitter.com/BabubhaiVaghela
About me in Annexure at - http://bit.ly/9xsHFj
http://www.youtube.com/user/vaghelabd
(Administrator - Google Group - Right to Information Act 2005)
http://groups.google.com/group/Right-to-Information-Act-2005/about?hl=en


--- On Sun, 4/24/11, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Ms. Omita Paul & Lokpal Drafting Committee
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Sunday, April 24, 2011, 10:49 AM

;-)

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:45 AM, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
Can anyone (who has watched the television clippings) on the group, please confirm if the lady sitting next to Mr Pranab Mukherjee in the Lokpal drafting committee pictures, is Ms Omita Paul, the ex IC in the CIC ?

RTIwanted

[HumJanenge] Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

Dear Mr. Sarabjit Roy,

I have been reading your messages which are mostly Anna bashing or
bashing of the other draft committee members of the proposed Lok Pall
Bill representing the civil society, that is us. Mr. Anna Hazare,
Mr. Santosh Hegde, Mr. Arvind Kejriwal, Mr. Shashi Bhushan and Mr.
Prashant Bhushan are only members of the committee drafting the
proposed Lok Pal bill. They are neither offered any constitution
post nor they are aspiring for one. Mr. Santosh Hegde served as
Judge of Supreme Court of India and is now Lok Ayuktha of Karnataka
and due to retire soon.

It is a foregone conclusion that India, now considered as one of the
most corrupt nations, needs a strong anti corruption law, the law
which can be enforceable, swift, fast and result oriented. For which
we need to have a strong bill. A deterrent in the first place. The
bill which is devoid of any short comings and loop holes which would
be conveniently exploited to their advantage by the mighty and
powerful. In short, we do not need just another bill which is just
seen or read on papers but remains absolutely unenforceable or
powerless. The toothless tiger.

Mr. Shashi Bhushan has been advocating a strong Lok Pal Bill for the
past 40 years. He understand the dynamics of both politics and also
law. Mr. Prashant Bhushan and also Santosh Hegde are other legal
luminaries. Added with social activists like Mr. Anna Hazare and Mr.
Arvind Kejriwal in the committee, we can atleast hope for a strong and
enforceable bill that would protect the interests of the citizens of
our nation.

Instead of criticizing the draft committee members, and every other
who is supporting the Lok Pal Bill, I wish you concentrate on the
draft bill with constructive suggestions to make it effective and free
from errors or legal loop holes, get it tabled before the parliament
houses and also get it passed. This would be a great contribution
from your side. To us as a nation and to our coming generations.

Regards,
S. Anoop Kumar.


On Apr 23, 6:22 pm, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Sankar
>
> As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
> Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
> conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
> when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
> to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
> that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
> people will be selected.
>
> Tomorrow if  DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
> Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sankar Pani
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are
> > absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the
> > interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else
> > will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free
> > nation.
>
> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Your statements are grossly objectionable.
>
> >> 1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
> >> incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.
>
> >> 2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the fashion
> >> it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first place.
>
> >> 3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
> >> LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
> >> You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
> >> public forum.,
>
> >> Sarbajit
>
> >> On Apr 22, 8:56 am, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > If we start finding faults with each and every person, then only god if
> >> > any
> >> > will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the present
> >> > juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less controversial
> >> > people
> >> > but never possible to find a person who do not have any such allegation.
> >> > to
> >> > me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing committee
> >> > and
> >> > and should judge the objective of the committee.
>
> >> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > Dear Satishji
>
> >> > > For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.
>
> >> > > Sarbajit
>
> >> > > On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > Dear Sarbajit
>
> >> > > > Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>
> >> > > > S.K.Kapoor
>
> >> > > > ________________________________
> >> > > > sense ?
>
> >> > --
> >> > Sankar Prasad Pani
> >> > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> >> > India
> >> > PIN-751007
> >> > Cell- 9437279278http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
> > --
> > Sankar Prasad Pani
> > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> > India
> > PIN-751007
> > Cell- 9437279278
> >http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/

Re: [HumJanenge] Ms. Omita Paul & Lokpal Drafting Committee

;-)

On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:45 AM, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
Can anyone (who has watched the television clippings) on the group, please confirm if the lady sitting next to Mr Pranab Mukherjee in the Lokpal drafting committee pictures, is Ms Omita Paul, the ex IC in the CIC ?

RTIwanted

[HumJanenge] Ms. Omita Paul & Lokpal Drafting Committee

Can anyone (who has watched the television clippings) on the group, please confirm if the lady sitting next to Mr Pranab Mukherjee in the Lokpal drafting committee pictures, is Ms Omita Paul, the ex IC in the CIC ?

RTIwanted

[HumJanenge] Even Kiran Bedi can't defend Anna Hazare's lies - can Arvind Kejriwal ?

Dear Members

Last week 1 posed 3 simple issues for clarification to Ms. Kiran Bedi when she requested this group to not spread "lies" (for Gods sake) about Anna Hazare. These were very simple queries like - Has Anna Hazare won the Magsaysay award or not ?

Regrettably Ms Bedi has run away from my public call for her do so so. Yesterday she had the gall to appear on National Television to state that concerned citizens like me should write in to Arvind Kejriwal's Ghaziabad address with our suggestions on Lok Pal Bill. This incidentally is the same address from Arvind sends his spammy PCRF letters from.

In the interest of transparency, let me publicly state my position on this in the form of an open email to Ms Kiran Bedi.

Dear Ms Bedi

1) Your conduct on the 5th of April 2011 near Janpath is a disgrace to the police force whose uniform you once wore. I am especially concerned that you did not see fit to express any regret / remorse for your anti-national behaviour that day.

2)  Citizens like me decline to participate in the foreign financed tamasha you and your co-Magsaysay awardees have organised to distract the citizens from the wholesale loot of India's resources by your cronies..

3) The people of India can easily see through the attempts by corrupt former public servants (now acting as foreign controlled agent provacateurs)  to hijack and subvert our nation's functioning democratic institutions.

Sarbajit Roy

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

Hypocritcal or hypothetical ?

As per me, Anna Hazare is not eligible for the post of CVC (. But neither was Annapurna Dixit to be appointed as an IC. Eternal vigilance is the watchword --. If we dont defend our rights they will be taken from us.

Unfortunately we have a surplus of lazy, useless, hypocrites of the armchair variety (("a corrupt Lokpal Bill is better than no Lokpal Bill at all") in this group. I think it is high time we get rid of all the deadwood from our groups.

Sarbajit

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Abhimanyu <who.will.file.rti@gmail.com> wrote:
sarbajit
plz dont make hypocratical asumptions
anna will never be CVC.

 
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sankar

As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
people will be selected.

Tomorrow if  DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

sarbajit
plz dont make hypocratical asumptions
anna will never be CVC.


 
On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Sankar

As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
people will be selected.

Tomorrow if  DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?

Sarbajit

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sankar Pani
<sankarprasadpani@gmail.com> wrote:
> could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are
> absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the
> interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else
> will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free
> nation.
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Your statements are grossly objectionable.
>>
>> 1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
>> incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.
>>
>> 2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the fashion
>> it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first place.
>>
>> 3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
>> LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
>> You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
>> public forum.,
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Apr 22, 8:56 am, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > If we start finding faults with each and every person, then only god if
>> > any
>> > will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the present
>> > juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less controversial
>> > people
>> > but never possible to find a person who do not have any such allegation.
>> > to
>> > me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing committee
>> > and
>> > and should judge the objective of the committee.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Dear Satishji
>> >
>> > > For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.
>> >
>> > > Sarbajit
>> >
>> > > On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > Dear Sarbajit
>> >
>> > > > Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>> >
>> > > > S.K.Kapoor
>> >
>> > > > ________________________________
>> > > > sense ?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sankar Prasad Pani
>> > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
>> > India
>> > PIN-751007
>> > Cell- 9437279278http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
>
> --
> Sankar Prasad Pani
> A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> India
> PIN-751007
> Cell- 9437279278
> http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
>
>

[HumJanenge] PUBLIC GRIEVANCE PETITION : Inre D.O. 372/11/2011-AVD.III dated 5.April.2011

To:
The Department of Personnel and Training, by
a) Ms. Alka Sirohi / Secretary
b) Mr. Rajiv Kapur / JS-AT&A (Nodal PG Officer)

23-April-2011

BY EMAIL

Dear Madam / Sir,

I refer to the subject D.O of 5.April.2011. In connection therewith I am caused to list out some of my grievances for your kind examination and redressal.

1) That the link to the said D.O is only accessible via a Java based scroller under the header "What's New" on the website of the Department from the homepage. Consequently the DO is only essentially accessible to persons with Java enabled browsers and is thereby in conflict with requirement of sub-section 4(1)(a) of RTI Act 2005 administered by your Department. Had the DoPT cared to designate a competent senior officer as "Transparency Officer", perhaps such niggling irritants would not agitate public spirited citizens like myself against your Department.

2) That by this DO, private citizens like myself who satisfy completely the requirements for appointment as Vigilance Commissioner or Chief Vigilance Commissioner are being manipulated out of the process. In so far as my own case goes, I am demonstrably an eminent person of impeccable integrity and impartiality having expertise and experience in banking and finance, including insurance and banking, law, vigilance and investigations etc. In fact I would go so far as to say, in all modesty, that Government would be hard pressed to find a more suitable candidate than I for such positions. It is another matter entirely that I shun public office to concentrate on social work and religious research in my capacity as spiritual leader of millions of Indian citizens who profess the Adi Dharm way of life.

3) I would therefore request you to remove the extra-statutory requirement of paras 7 and 8 of the impugned DO that names / CVs for persons falling under the second portion of s/s 3(3)(b) of the Act suggested for consideration for appointment as CVC should only be forwarded by the sponsoring department of the administrative Ministry concerned, and would not be directly entertained by the DoPT. Such a provision is patently de-hors the concerned enactment and I would request you to kindly review the said paragraphs in view of my objection. I also protest that it is not clear to me which would be the concerned department if I was to throw my hat in the ring for consideration.

PS: I would also like to remind you that the Department has still not acknowledged my similar public grievance concerning nominations of private persons to the drafting committee for Central Lok Pal legislation which was outsourced to one Mr "Anna" Hazare @ camp New Delhi.

With best wishes

Sarbajit Roy

B-59 Defence Colony
New Delhi 110024

Tel : 09311448069


Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

Dear Sankar

As I have already asked the concerned Ministry, I need to know why say
Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare is "cleaner" than me. Or
conversely why I am "dirtier" / "blacker" than they are. It is only
when every clean and honest citizen of India starts formally demanding
to know these things (as we are entitled to demand to know in law)
that there will be transparency in public appointments and clean
people will be selected.

Tomorrow if DoPT suggests Mr Shanti Bhushan or Mr Anna Hazare as
Chief Vigilance Commissioner should we accept this like little sheep ?

Sarbajit

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Sankar Pani
<sankarprasadpani@gmail.com> wrote:
> could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are
> absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the
> interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else
> will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free
> nation.
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Your statements are grossly objectionable.
>>
>> 1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
>> incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.
>>
>> 2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the fashion
>> it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first place.
>>
>> 3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
>> LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
>> You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
>> public forum.,
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Apr 22, 8:56 am, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > If we start finding faults with each and every person, then only god if
>> > any
>> > will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the present
>> > juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less controversial
>> > people
>> > but never possible to find a person who do not have any such allegation.
>> > to
>> > me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing committee
>> > and
>> > and should judge the objective of the committee.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > Dear Satishji
>> >
>> > > For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.
>> >
>> > > Sarbajit
>> >
>> > > On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > Dear Sarbajit
>> >
>> > > > Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>> >
>> > > > S.K.Kapoor
>> >
>> > > > ________________________________
>> > > > sense ?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Sankar Prasad Pani
>> > A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
>> > India
>> > PIN-751007
>> > Cell- 9437279278http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
>
> --
> Sankar Prasad Pani
> A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> India
> PIN-751007
> Cell- 9437279278
> http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/
>
>
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

kapoor sir is absolutely correct

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsatish@yahoo.com> wrote:
I don't think who is corrupt or less corrupt on panel of drafting committee is important issue.

Even if most corrupt while drafting, does not favour corrupt and incorporates the needs of common citizens  to curb corruption is enough.

People who do not want "lokpal bill" as it will hurt their interests are crying foul.

S.K.Kapoor


From: Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free nation.

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Your statements are grossly objectionable.

1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.

2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the fashion
it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first place.

3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
public forum.,

Sarbajit

On Apr 22, 8:56 am, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we start finding faults with each and every person, then only god if any
> will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the present
> juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less controversial people
> but never possible to find a person who do not have any such allegation. to
> me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing committee and
> and should judge the objective of the committee.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Satishji
>
> > For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Dear Sarbajit
>
> > > Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>
> > > S.K.Kapoor
>
> > > ________________________________
> > > sense ?
>
> --
> Sankar Prasad Pani
> A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> India
> PIN-751007
> Cell- 9437279278http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/



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





Re: [HumJanenge] Anna Hazare "a most corrupt individual and a hypocrite" says Suresh Jain

First wait for the jan lokpal bill to come in, don't allege any wrong
doings of Shanti Bhusan et al at the moment. Its a habit of the
politician and others to allege and suppressed the crusade. Peoples
know who is and what type people are.


saito
On 4/22/11, Sustainable Livelihood <rilum_foundation@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Why anna ji,
> why him, he has been able to bring us all together from west to east north
> to south and even the north eastern state join the campaign... poor man he
> has nothing.... and still we are punching at him. May the almighty God
> shower him with much courage.
> Bantei lyngdoh
>
> --- On Thu, 4/7/11, Arun Rai <rai_vnit@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>
>
> From: Arun Rai <rai_vnit@yahoo.co.in>
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Anna Hazare "a most corrupt individual and a
> hypocrite" says Suresh Jain
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Date: Thursday, April 7, 2011, 7:38 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Why dont we think that the final outcome of the Jan Lok Pal Bill is in
> greater interest rather then an individual Mr Hazare.
>
> I dont know Mr Hazare and his intention - but the intention for this Jan Lok
> Pal Bill if for greater good and lets not divert
>
> our united energy to other issue which will confuse us.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thankyou,
>
> Arun Rai,
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Thu, 7 April, 2011 5:29:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Anna Hazare "a most corrupt individual and a
> hypocrite" says Suresh Jain
>
> And what happened to the Rs. 75 lakhs ?
>
> Is it not a fact that when the Co-Op banks in question demanded a copy
> of the approvals from the Charity Commissioner, Hazare instead
> unleashed his RTI army on them and made all sorts of allegations about
> Co-Op banks / CoOp Societies , many of which he later withdrew ?
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Diwan Singh <diwans2007@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you want to do social work with real zeal, its not possible to do so
>> much
>> reporting. No wonder, so many NGOs that start with good objectives land up
>> doing paper work. Anna openly told the donors that he can not send so many
>> reports whether they give donations in future or not. Its a reality that
>> we
>> have to understand and not measure an individuals on lack of innocuous
>> paper
>> work. His work talks much more than any paper work would do.
>> These paper works also ensure that only 15% of Govt.'s funds reach the
>> true
>> beneficiary in villages. Why we want to blame Anna for the ills that
>> should
>> be done away with. He has dared to fight those ills. Kudos to him.
>>
>> Diwan
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 12:25 PM, S.D. Sharma <anonsharma@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Anna Hazare is "a most corrupt individual and a hypocrite" said Suresh
>>> Jain, a former NCP minister of Maharashtra who is engaged in cross
>>> defamation criminal complaints with Hazare since 2003. The focus of Mr
>>> Sureshdada Jain's complaint revolves around certain charitable trusts set
>>> up
>>> by Hazare with foreign funds received as awards like Magsaay award and
>>> counter bank loans taken but not reported to Charity Commissioner which
>>> Anna
>>> later admitted to.
>>
>>
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: about 2nd appeal hearing

Hi Abhijit Mehta/Others,
What Complaint should be submitted to CIC against it's own SIC? What
type of Violation of it's orders are you talking about when the RTI
Activist wants to get the PIO penalised with max. penalty, DE
conducted, Disciplinary Action taken, etc. for 'Deriliction of duty'?
One should be extremely lucky to get the PIO penalised or other type
of action to be taken against him.

Rgds
Rakesh

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 1:51 PM, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
> As per my opinion, you have to send a complaint to the CIC for
> violation of its orders. after some time ask cic under rti about the
> course of action on your complaint.
>
>
> On 4/22/11, Abhijit Mehta <abhijit@abhijitmehta.com> wrote:
>> In all fairness Sarbjit I do not see anyone answering his query.
>>
>> In fact i see very little of RTI and more personality based
>> discussions.(ofcourse I not even a month in this group)
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Abhijit Mehta
>>
>>
>> The Best Is Yet To Come
>>
>> God Bless
>>
>> On 22-Apr-2011, at 9:18 AM, sarbajit roy wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Madhukar
>>>
>>> What kind of RTI activist are you if you dont know the answer to your
>>> question ?
>>>
>>> In any case, putting queries to our members without giving all the
>>> facts..is an abuse of this group's limited bandwidth and resources.
>>>
>>> Kindly frame your query in terms of section 20 of RTI Act and repost
>>> it to this group. We are all here to help members like you (and
>>> despite the fact you are an activist)
>>>
>>> Sarbajit
>>>
>>> On Apr 21, 9:25 pm, "punenagrikmanch ." <punenagrikma...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hello All,
>>>>
>>>> I had filled the 2nd appeal and the hearing just over, as i didnt get
>>>> the information in time, i got the information after 8 months and
>>>> which is also not correct. now as per the law, the PRO should be
>>>> punished or penalised, but i dont think so it will be done.
>>>>
>>>> what i should do further?
>>>>
>>>> regrads
>>>>
>>>> Madhukar Mazire
>>>> RTI activist
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 989, Sector 15-A, Opposite bishnoi Colony, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181
>

[HumJanenge] DON’T HURL STONES ON OTHERS GLASS

DON'T HURL STONES ON OTHERS GLASS

HOUSES IF YOU ALSO LIVE IN THAT

 

Amar Singh, former SP leader said that to catch the thieves, help of Dacoits cannot be taken (Jagran, 22.4.11).  Who are saint, thief and Dacoit would be known only after the decisions of the judiciary?  In the meantime, a list of charges and controversies against Amar Singh ji:

 

·                    Admitted of paying Rs 50 Lakh to Shanti Bhushan.  Why he paid cash instead of cheque payment?  Source of this amount.

·                    On 22 July 2008 he accused Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati of kidnapping six MPs of his party from Uttar Pradesh and holding them captive in Uttar Pradesh Bhavan, New Delhi. Later, Samajwadi Party expelled the six MPs for defying the party directive during the confidence motion voting.

·                      He also courted controversy by asking for a probe in the Jamia Nagar encounter case. First he gave 10 Lakh rupees check to the family of Mohan Chand Sharma, a police officer who died in the encounter, which bounced when checked its validity. Later he asked for a judicial enquiry into the firing incidence suggesting that the encounter may have been fake. Mohan Chand Sharma's family criticized him and returned his money.

·                    Allotment of plot to him by Lucknow Development Authority while he was General Secretary of Samajwadi Party at posh Gomtinagar area. The plot was allotted to Mr. Singh under the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) scheme. He applied for a small plot in 1993 when Mulayam Singh was Chief Minister.  Subsequently, a 35-square metre plot was allotted to him under the scheme in the Vikas Khand area by the LDA.  According to LDA rules, for the benefit under the scheme, the applicant's annual income has to be less than Rs.12,000. Later, the allotment at Vikas Khand was cancelled and a 288-square metre plot was provided to Mr. Amar Singh in the prime Vipul Khand location. Some time later, a 354-square metre plot was allotted at Vipul Khand after cancelling the earlier allotment.  The fresh allotment was made during Mr. Mulayam Singh's regime when Mr. Amar Singh was Chairman of the Uttar Pradesh Development Council. The latest status of all this is not known.

·                    His relations with ADAG Group headed by Anil Ambani and his recommendations to the UPA govt. for this corporate house.

·                    In 2006, his allegation of illegally taping of his and his case for not making them public.

·                    He himself has admitted of working as Dalal (Agent) in breaking some BSP MLAs for the survival of his leader Mulayam Singh Yadav at that time.

·                    In the vote of confidence, allegations of his hand in paying cash for vote to some MPs.  Now, the Supreme Court has decided to examine a petition by former Chief Election Commissioner JM Lyngdoh seeking direction to a special investigation team to probe the "cash-for-vote" scam during the trust vote in July 2008 for the survival of the UPA government.

Friday, April 22, 2011

Re: [HumJanenge] Predicament of a PIO

Once supreme court has ordered that bonus and arrears are nothing but differed salary .
 
 


 
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 7:57 PM, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

Predicament of a PIO

 

An RTI applicant has asked about the pay and arrears paid to an employee during the last few years.  The applicant claims to be the wife of the employee and when the PIO asked the employee under the provision of section 11 (third party disclosure), he (employee) said that the details should not be divulged as these are personal and exempt u.s. 8 while the pay remuneration of all the employees should be disclosed u.s. 4 (suo-motu disclosure) but that section is silent on arrears paid from time to time. 

 

Now, PIO is in dilemma on the next course of action and has asked to take the expert advice from the enlightened members of this blog.  This information will also be useful to boost knowledge of the members of this group.


Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

I don't think who is corrupt or less corrupt on panel of drafting committee is important issue.

Even if most corrupt while drafting, does not favour corrupt and incorporates the needs of common citizens  to curb corruption is enough.

People who do not want "lokpal bill" as it will hurt their interests are crying foul.

S.K.Kapoor


From: Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2011 11:15 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

could u please suggest few names who do not have any allegation and are absolutely clean and perfect also have competency. It would be better in the interest of the nation if you have anything to the contents of the bill else will just frustrate the purpose of your dream of absolute corruption free nation.

On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:43 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Your statements are grossly objectionable.

1) It is EASY to find competent people who are absolutely
incorruptible and without any credible allegations against them.

2) The issue is not about the LokPak Bill's contents or the fashion
it is brought about, BUT about the NEED for it in the first place.

3) Why should we the people of India settle for "RELATIVELY
LESS CORRUPT or CONTROVERSIAL PEOPLE" ??
You should reconsider the wisdom of statements you make in a
public forum.,

Sarbajit

On Apr 22, 8:56 am, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If we start finding faults with each and every person, then only god if any
> will be eligible in your scale to the Drafting committee.At the present
> juncture we can choose relatively less corrupt or less controversial people
> but never possible to find a person who do not have any such allegation. to
> me it seems that we have to accept the best in the existing committee and
> and should judge the objective of the committee.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:14 AM, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear Satishji
>
> > For the same reason that a mongoose wants to kill a snake.
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On Apr 22, 8:27 am, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsat...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Dear Sarbajit
>
> > > Why u want to kill drafting committee?
>
> > > S.K.Kapoor
>
> > > ________________________________
> > > sense ?
>
> --
> Sankar Prasad Pani
> A-70, Sahidnagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
> India
> PIN-751007
> Cell- 9437279278http://environmentalrights-sankar.blogspot.com/



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




Re: [HumJanenge] Anna Hazare "a most corrupt individual and a hypocrite" says Suresh Jain

Why anna ji,
why him, he has been able to bring us all together from west to east north to south and even the north eastern state join the campaign... poor man he has nothing.... and still we are punching at him. May the almighty God shower him with much courage.
Bantei lyngdoh

--- On Thu, 4/7/11, Arun Rai <rai_vnit@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

From: Arun Rai <rai_vnit@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Anna Hazare "a most corrupt individual and a hypocrite" says Suresh Jain
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Thursday, April 7, 2011, 7:38 PM

Why dont we think that the final outcome of the Jan Lok Pal Bill is in greater interest  rather then an individual Mr Hazare.
 
I dont know Mr Hazare and his intention - but the intention for this Jan Lok Pal Bill if for greater good and lets not divert
 
our united energy to other issue which will confuse us.
 
Thankyou,
 
Arun Rai,

 


From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, 7 April, 2011 5:29:50 AM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Anna Hazare "a most corrupt individual and a hypocrite" says Suresh Jain

And what happened to the Rs. 75 lakhs ?

Is it not a fact that when the Co-Op banks in question demanded a copy
of the approvals from the Charity Commissioner, Hazare instead
unleashed his RTI army on them and made all sorts of allegations about
Co-Op banks / CoOp Societies , many of which he later withdrew ?

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Diwan Singh <diwans2007@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you want to do social work with real zeal, its not possible to do so much
> reporting. No wonder, so many NGOs that start with good objectives land up
> doing paper work. Anna openly told the donors that he can not send so many
> reports whether they give donations in future or not. Its a reality that we
> have to understand and not measure an individuals on lack of innocuous paper
> work. His work talks much more than any paper work would do.
> These paper works also ensure that only 15% of Govt.'s funds reach the true
> beneficiary in villages. Why we want to blame Anna for the ills that should
> be done away with. He has dared to fight those ills. Kudos to him.
>
> Diwan
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 12:25 PM, S.D. Sharma <anonsharma@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> Anna Hazare is "a most corrupt individual and a hypocrite" said Suresh
>> Jain, a former NCP minister of Maharashtra who is engaged in cross
>> defamation criminal complaints with Hazare since 2003. The focus of Mr
>> Sureshdada Jain's complaint revolves around certain charitable trusts set up
>> by Hazare with foreign funds received as awards like Magsaay award and
>> counter bank loans taken but not reported to Charity Commissioner which Anna
>> later admitted to.
>
>

[HumJanenge] CHARGES AGAINST MEMBERS OF CIVIL SOCIETY WOULD NOT AFFECT LOK PAL BILL DRAFTING COMMITTEE

CHARGES AGAINST MEMBERS OF CIVIL SOCIETY WOULD NOT AFFECT LOK PAL BILL DRAFTING COMMITTEE

 

M K Gupta, Free Lancer

 

Senior Minister Pranab Mukherjee says that controversies on the members of drafting committee for Lokpal Bill would not affect the panel and the Congress Party has directed its members to take the official line only and not express personal views while interacting with the media.  Justice Santosh Hedge, Lok Ayukt of Karnatka has decided to continue as member of the Drafting Committee of Lok Pal Bill in the face of charges of by Digvijay Singh about his failure to curb corruption in Karnataka and raising question of the effectiveness of Lok Ayukt. In fact, such charges were proving counter-productive and raising the hackles in the public.  Now, Madhya Pradesh HC orders charge sheet against Diggy in the matter of allotting residential land for a Mall in an appropriate manner.   Swami Agnivesh says that Digvijay Singh is creating hurdles in the way of an effective Lokpal as he is afraid of it. In the meantime, Former Prime Minister H D Devegowda has appealed Justice Santosh Hegde to continue.  Digvijay Singh extends his support the demand of reservation of Dalit in the penal made by Mayawati, Chief Minister, U.P. 

 

Timing of finding fault with the members of the Lokpal drafting Committee tells us all.  The charges raised against Bhushans were very old but they were never raised earlier.  This cast aspiration about the motive of these charges and the truth will come only after the inquiry and Court verdict before the Court. 

Delhli Lokayukta Justice Manmohan Sarin recently said that Lokayukta should be given powers of search and seizure and conduct probe against bureaucrats besides granting financial and administrative autonomy for its effective functioning.  This was in the backdrop of his recommendations to the President against Raj Kumar Chauhan, Urban Development Minister, Delhi Govt. His recommendations are pending for about a month.

Like the Lok Ayukts in some states, Central Vigilance Commission has only recommendatory powers only.  Charges are often levelled against the CBI that in political senstive cases, it acts according to the direction of the winds.

Giving more powers to the institution of Lokpal and Ayukt is therefore necessary due to their failures as rightly pointed out by Digvijay Singh. The solution does not lie in derailing the process of drafting of an appropriate Lokpal Bill but the Lok Ayukts should be given more powers.  Same is true about the proposed Lokpal Bill for the Centre that the proposed legislation should give appropriate powers so that this does not reamin a toothless tiger.

********

 

[HumJanenge] Bhushan & Bhushan

Dear All,
It is a very interesting point for discussion on the Internet.
First of all - every body wants to get rid of CORRUPTION.
But how ?
Think ....... only LOKPAL Bill will serve the purpose ?
No...... because none of us are clean. So implementation
will be very difficult.
What I feel - the first step (Drafting of the Bill) should be done
by the clean image persons having good knowledge of law and
expertise in drafting such kind of stringent Rules & Regulation.
Neither I am in favour of Bhushan nor Amar Singh - I think we
all want a good clean image person in drafting committee.
Regards,
Subrato Paul
Vaishali, Ghaziabad

--- On Thu, 4/21/11, Amit Arora <amitscorpio@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Amit Arora <amitscorpio@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Bhushan & Bhushan
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Thursday, April 21, 2011, 5:21 AM

Dear Mr. Roy,

So in your opinion, we should trust Amar Singh instead of the group behind India Against Corruption? I wonder if Amar Singh is such a saint!!

Thanx & Regards

Amit Arora


On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 12:07 AM, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Mr Bhattacharya

Mr Amar Singh (and they are all Honorable men being members of RS) has
again exposed the Bjhushan family business

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Bhushans--PIL-sniffers---Amar-Singh/778980/

excerpts

"It is in public (domain) that the father-son duo are PIL specialists.
One creates a PIL, the other comes to the rescue. No wonder then that
Shanti Bhushan got a farmhouse worth about Rs 10 crore for just Rs 35
lakh after the thorn of Noida Park reached courts," he said at a press
conference on Wednesday.

"What I have gathered is that Shanti Bhushan has acknowledged that the
plot allotments were done through a wrong process. If it is so, I
wonder whether he would return that plot," he said."
:
:
"Amar Singh also rebutted Bhushans' charge that they had never
interacted with him. "Shanti Bhushan claimed that he never spoke with
Mulayam Singh Yadav and Amar Singh. But the fact is that he appeared
for us in a case pertaining to disqualification of some MLAs who had
crossed over to SP. He appeared once in the Allahabad High Court on
February 28, 2006. In fact, he flew to Lucknow in a chartered plane
arranged by me. He appeared twice," he claimed, for which fees were
paid to the lawyer in cash."


On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:21 AM, AK Bhattacharyya
<ajitkbhattacharyya@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Moderator
> So none of them can be trusted and have to be monitored/exposed on their
> business of amassing wealth by well meaning public..
> What do you expect on one Jan Lokpal bill being drafted by such adroit
> liers.Remember always Mahatma Gandhi's opinion on the money making
> shameless professionals.
>
> With kind regards
>
>
>
> A.K.BHATTACHARYYA
>
> F.I.StructE (UK), FIE (India), FIBE, FIRT
> H-2A, Hauzkhas, New Delhi -16, Ph:011-26854127
>
> ________________________________
> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> To: HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005
> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Tue, April 19, 2011 7:14:09 AM
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Bhushan & Bhushan
>
> http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/amar-singh-asks-anna-hazare-to-drop-bhushans/articleshow/8022726.cms
>
> NEW DELHI: Unfazed over former Shanti Bhushan's decision to sue him
> over his alleged role in the 'doctored' CD episode, Amar Singh on
> Monday brought the judiciary and anti-graft crusader Anna Hazare in
> his firing-line.
>
> In a press conference here on Monday evening, Singh dared Hazare to
> drop Shanti Bhushan and Prashant Bhushans from the Lokpal Bill
> drafting panel . "The CD may be unauthorised and illegal, but even
> Shanti Bhushan admits that it contains his voice. He is heard saying
> that the then law minister Hansraj Bhardwaj was corrupt, that the then
> Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan takes bribe to appoint judges,
> that his son Prashant, who files PILs, manages well, and that he has
> very good relations with Justice GS Singhvi, who was then the Chief
> Justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. How can such people be
> drafted in the anti-corruption crusade," Singh wondered.
>
> The expelled SP leader repeatedly took Justice Singhvi's name. He has
> been presiding over the apex court bench hearing the 2G spectrum scam.
> "Shanti Bhushan is heard boasting about his son Prashant's equations
> with Justice Singhvi, claiming at one point that when the latter was
> the Chief Justice of the AP High Court, he could get anything done in
> his court. Justice Singhvi has now reserved his judgement on the
> petition filed by Prashant Bhushan seeking the lifting of the stay of
> the ban on the telecast of the tapes featuring me."
>
> "I want to ask Singhviji how could he entertain a petition from a
> person who habitually talks ill about the judiciary, who said things
> against the present Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia, forcing him to
> initiate contempt proceedings. How could he make him an amicus," Singh
> asked.
>
> The expelled SP leader said, at the same time, that he did not want to
> say anything against the judiciary, but only wanted to bring certain
> things before its notice. "I don't want to comment on the judiciary
> because everyone is afraid of it. I am also afraid of it. Even Prime
> Minister Manmohan Singh had to bow before it,'' Amar Singh said.
>
> He said that he too was filing a case in the Delhi Police on the
> distribution of CDs. "I will also file a case of contempt against the
> Bhushans in the Supreme Court," he asserted.
>

[HumJanenge] Predicament of a PIO

Predicament of a PIO

 

An RTI applicant has asked about the pay and arrears paid to an employee during the last few years.  The applicant claims to be the wife of the employee and when the PIO asked the employee under the provision of section 11 (third party disclosure), he (employee) said that the details should not be divulged as these are personal and exempt u.s. 8 while the pay remuneration of all the employees should be disclosed u.s. 4 (suo-motu disclosure) but that section is silent on arrears paid from time to time. 

 

Now, PIO is in dilemma on the next course of action and has asked to take the expert advice from the enlightened members of this blog.  This information will also be useful to boost knowledge of the members of this group.

Re: 05 - Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!

Hegde must not Quit... Think of the Govt Panel...

--- On Thu, 21/4/11, Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Sankar Pani <sankarprasadpani@gmail.com>
Subject: 05 - Re: [HumJanenge] Re: Why Santosh Hegde MUST quit !!!
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Thursday, 21 April, 2011, 11:39 PM

Boxbe humjanenge@googlegroups.com is not on your Guest List | Approve sender | Approve domain

Re: [HumJanenge] Anna has not lied. Pl do not spread this wrong info. Grateful to u if u appreciate this.

Democracy essentially is Government of the people, by the people and for the people. However , for limitations of Communications and Information , concept of Representatives had to be adopted. Unfortunately because of lack of morals and ethics amongst the representatives, the Democracy has degenerated to be the Government of the Representatives, by the Representatives and for the Representatives so much so that the authority of electorate who elected the representatives on the promise of good services has been negated totally and the servants of Society have become masters.  
It is being argued that the Parliament is the only authorized institution to  legislate totally ignoring the voice of Society. One must not forget that the ultimate authority lies with people only and the representatives draw their powers through  the people. They are not supposed to give their verdicts but represent the verdict of the people. Fortunately the developments in Communication and Information  has made it much easier to obtain the opinion of people which being authentic must be adopted in toto. 
The massive support to the Jan Lok Pal bill needs to be  taken in to account and bickering politicians need to go back to their constituency to assess the mood of the people and adopt the same. however if they are not satisfied with the will of the people they should no longer remain the Representative.
As  stated by Anna and others ,the Lok Pal Bill is  not the panacea for the wide spread corruption but this  definitely is the first step towards eradication of the evils prevailing in Governance and must be pursued with all the vigor ignoring efforts by some of the politicians to derail the movement by diverting attention to petty issues.
 If the matters are not amicably  resolved  in the Joint Committee, it may be worth going in for a referendum before taking the issue to Parliament.

Avinash Chawla 
9990924123    

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:45 AM, <kiranbedi2005@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Anna has not lied.
Please.
The award is an announcement only.
And not received.
Let us please allow honest change in our country!
Its for the good of all of us. And our children.
With gratitude. Kiran.
Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel

-----Original Message-----
From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
Sender: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 20:09:27
To: HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005<HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: [HumJanenge] "Anna" lies again

http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/16/stories/2011041662461600.htm

Dear Mr Anna Hazare.

It seems that you have many names.

What happened to the Rs. 110,00,000 (Rs 1.1 crore) that you received
for the IIPM-Rabindranath Tagore award 2011 - or is that just another
device to launder white money into black ?

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: about 2nd appeal hearing

As per my opinion, you have to send a complaint to the CIC for
violation of its orders. after some time ask cic under rti about the
course of action on your complaint.


On 4/22/11, Abhijit Mehta <abhijit@abhijitmehta.com> wrote:
> In all fairness Sarbjit I do not see anyone answering his query.
>
> In fact i see very little of RTI and more personality based
> discussions.(ofcourse I not even a month in this group)
>
> Regards
>
> Abhijit Mehta
>
>
> The Best Is Yet To Come
>
> God Bless
>
> On 22-Apr-2011, at 9:18 AM, sarbajit roy wrote:
>
>> Dear Madhukar
>>
>> What kind of RTI activist are you if you dont know the answer to your
>> question ?
>>
>> In any case, putting queries to our members without giving all the
>> facts..is an abuse of this group's limited bandwidth and resources.
>>
>> Kindly frame your query in terms of section 20 of RTI Act and repost
>> it to this group. We are all here to help members like you (and
>> despite the fact you are an activist)
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> On Apr 21, 9:25 pm, "punenagrikmanch ." <punenagrikma...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>> I had filled the 2nd appeal and the hearing just over, as i didnt get
>>> the information in time, i got the information after 8 months and
>>> which is also not correct. now as per the law, the PRO should be
>>> punished or penalised, but i dont think so it will be done.
>>>
>>> what i should do further?
>>>
>>> regrads
>>>
>>> Madhukar Mazire
>>> RTI activist
>
>


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

[HumJanenge] TOI - IN ANNA MODE, RTI ACTIVISTS SMS THEIR POINT HOME

Advocate H.C. Arora.jpg

TIMES OF INDIA

IN ANNA MODE, RTI ACTIVISTS SMS THEIR POINT HOME

 

CHANDIGARH - APR 22, 2011, 07.41AM IST SANJAY SHARMA, PTI

Every time their cellphones beep, 29 officers said to be close to chief minister Parkash Singh Badal and deputy chief minister Sukhbir Badal wonder if it's another text from RTI activists.


Through their SMS drive, the RTI activist are demanding that at least 50% posts of state information commissioners be given to activists and retired judges, to correct, what they call, ''atrocious judgments being passed by Punjab State Information Commission (PSIC)''.

These are being stayed in the high court apparently because of lack of understanding of the Information Act and poor drafting of orders, Punjab RTI Activists Federation president HC Arora told TOI. The SMS campaign was launched on April 13 immediately after the federation released a book of 100 "poor" judgments.


After receiving 600-700 such SMSs, these officers are now getting "irritated". "Please impress upon the CM/Dy CM to appoint at least 50% of the information commissioners from amongst RTI activists," the SMS appeal reads. According to Arora, in response to an SMS appeal on April 13, one person received a text from mobile no. 98725-47247 (Sukhbir Singh Sandhu, special principal secretary to CM Punjab), saying, "Stop this". On Sunday, D S Virdi, an executive member of the federation at Moga, got one asking him to "stop this nonsense".


Fed up, N S Dhanoa, OSD to deputy chief minister, called Virdi and told him, "I am receiving numerous SMSs from across the state. I get disturbed when I get one during a meeting. Your issue concerns the state government. I can't do anything." In reply, Virdi requested Dhanoa to inform the CM or deputy CM of his demand. On Monday, Arora sent an SMS to all 29 officers, saying, "We are sorry that our members are bothering you. We shall be grateful if you apprise CM/ deputy CM of our sentiments." Quick came a reply text from Malwinder Singh Mali, PRO, media adviser to CM, saying, "I am totally with you. But it is better if you directly fax, email or meet the chief minister as a delegation."



--
DISCLAIMER: You have received this email because you any one time contacted me through mail or otherwise gave your mail-id. This e-mail is intended to be sent to the persons on my regular mail-list. In case you think this mail infringes your privacy or otherwise you do not want to receive this mail anymore, please reply with the word 'UNSUBSCRIBE" in the body of the mail. Please donot disturb the Subject lime. I am sorry to see you go. But please mention the reason why you want to go. It will help me improve my services in future. Thanks



Warm Regards


Surendera M. Bhanot

- President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh
- Youth for Human Rights International YHRI - South Asia
- CEO, Avis Software, Chandigarh 
- Convener & Life Member, Consumers Association Chandigarh
- Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
- Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Cgandigarh
- Member, RTI Activist Federation, Punjab, Chandigarh

No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
Mob: 919-888-810-811
PHONE: 91-172-3013240
FAX: 0871 266 8523 

Mail Me