iS IT A "CURABLE DEFECT" ? IF SO AT WHAT STAGE ?
iN KARNATAKA THE IPOs is to be made in favour of IPOs
N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.
--- On Wed, 4/7/12, sarbajit roy <firstname.lastname@example.org
> From: sarbajit roy <email@example.com
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: UNJUST REJECTION OF RTI APPLICATION !
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, 4 July, 2012, 6:21 PM
> Derar Sandeep
> I am not siding with teh PIO, I am siding with the RTI Act
> 1) If 3 (or even 3,000) P/As do not accept IPOs made
> out to Pay &
> Accounts Officer, then that does not mean the Rules are
> wrong, it
> means the PIOs are wrong and it is grounds for a complaint
> u/s 18.
> This is exactly one of those specific cases where section 18
> into play.
> 2) If a State Govt P/A does not accept IPO made out to
> P&A officer,
> you will have to check the concerned State Govt's RTI Rules.
> These may
> differ from Central Rules which do not extend to State
> Furthermore, If a Central Govt Officer (like your 3
> cases) does not
> follow Rules, he is liable for disciplinary action under his
> Rules. What I really want to know is what action the PIOs
> took when
> you informed them about the Rule specifying that IPOs / DDs
> etc are to
> be made to "P&A" Officer.
> On Jul 4, 9:41 am, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com
> > Sarbajit Sir,
> > You are unnecessarily and illogically siding with the
> > 1. Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board does not
> accept IPO drawn
> > in favour of Pay and Accounts officer of the P/O. The
> PIO will reject
> > the application saying that the application fee should
> be drawn in
> > favour of Secretary. From where the hell will the
> applicant know (if
> > it is not published) the details of the payee name?
> > 2. CBDT does not accept application fee in favour of
> accounts officer
> > or Pay and Accounts officer. YOu have to pay to Zonal
> > officer.
> > 3. My application to bsnl mumbai were rejected adding
> that payment is
> > to be made to Accounts officer, civil division.
> > 4. In the state governments (at least in punjab), there
> is no post as
> > pay and accounts officer or accounts officer. thus rti
> application are
> > not accepted in case payment is made towards these
> > On 7/4/12, sarbajit roy <sroy...@gmail.com
> > > The PIO's rejection is technically correct.
> > > 1) The prescribed application fee is Rs. 10. Had
> the applicant not
> > > mentioned it was to cover (partially or otherwise)
> the further fees
> > > also, a case could have been made out that since
> Rs.10 IPO was not
> > > available Rs.20 was sent in its place (applicant
> shot himself in the
> > > foot).
> > > 2) The IPO cannot be left blank. It is to be made
> out to the Pay &
> > > Accounts officer of the P/A. The PIO cannot be
> expected to fill it in.
> > > If some mistake is made by the PIO in filling in
> the payees name who
> > > takes responsibility ??
> > > Sarbajit
> > > On Jul 3, 7:01 am, "M.K. Gupta" <mkgupta...@yahoo.co.in
> > >> UNJUST
> > >> REJECTION OF RTI APPLICATION!
> > >> An Appellant sent an RTI application to Deptt.
> of Excise, Delhi Govt.
> > >> enclosing the postal order of Rs. 20/-
> > >> instead of Rs. 10/- without filling the payee
> column. Postal order of
> > >> higher value was sent to
> > >> cover the cost of photocopies of documents, if
> any, and this fact was
> > >> mentined
> > >> in the RTI application also.
> > >> The PIO has rejected the application on the
> > >> grounds of postal order of higher demonition
> and for leaving the payee
> > >> column
> > >> blank.
> > >> Though a fresh RTI has been sent removing the
> aforesaid objections but I
> > >> want to know if any
> > >> appeal can be sent to FAA or CIC for rejecting
> the appln on the above
> > >> grounds.
> > --
> > Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> > 1722, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> > Phone: 91-99929-31181