Hum Janenge

Saturday, May 19, 2012

[HumJanenge] Fw: [voiceofindiagroup] Madam Speaker-LSabha, first disclose your mileage points

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: jag1ts <jag1ts@yahoo.com>
To:
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 3:21 PM
Subject: [voiceofindiagroup] Madam Speaker, first disclose your mileage points

The best thing to be in our next birth is to be a president or a speaker .. You are then go around the world at public expense, no matter how poor the nation may be and no matter if they can pay us our rank pay or honour the AFT judgement , but travel we can

Â

Hello,
This link and story is sent to you by me_bidyut@yahoo. com
http://epaper. dnaindia. com/story. aspx?edorsup= Sup&ed_code= 820009&ed_ page=3&boxid= 26644778& id=15765& ed_date=04/ 29/2012

Madam Speaker, first disclose your mileage points
RTI query reveals Meira Kumar has been on 30 foreign trips
Mayank Aggarwal NEW DELHI

It would be an understatement to say that our Lok Sabha speaker is well travelled. In the 33 months since Congress leader Meira Kumar has assumed the speaker's post, she has gone on at least 30 "official" foreign trips, travelling from New York to Japan. The amount of expenditure incurred stands at Rs 2 crore at least.
An RTI application filed by DNA has revealed that between June 2009 and February 2012, Kumar travelled extensively to all corners of the world such as Mexico and Austria. She also visited Switzerland on several occasions. Though the cost of her 30 trips does not seem startling, it would only be prudent to remember that it is often the host country that foots the bill for a majority of the arrangements made. The costliest trip that the daughter of late freedom fighter Babu Jagjivan Ram made was to Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay, a trip that together cost over Rs 40 lakhs.
A quick analysis of
the information received from the Lok Sabha se
cretariat shows that on an average, Kumar was on a foreign shore every 33 days during the said time period. The data also reveals that out of the nearly 1,000-day period (June 2009 to Feb 2012) of her tenure as speaker, she was abroad for around 140 days.

Of her 30 visits, at least half were as part of the "Indian Parliamentary Delegation (IPD) under bilateral exchange" with other countries. It was with the IPD that Kumar, the union social justice minister in UPA's first government, visited Geneva on four occasions. The list of countries or cities visited by the 67-year-old speaker includes Italy, Austria, Mauritius, Mongolia, Luxembourg, Hungary, UK, Switzerland, Mexico, Vietnam, Seoul (Korea), Sweden Denmark, Japan, Iran, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, New York, Thailand, Panama, Isle of Man, Swaziland, Kenya and Tanzania.
Besides travelling to these corners with her staff, Kumar also travelled to neighbouring nations like Pakistan, Sri Lanka
and Bhutan. In Feb 2012
, she created history when she became the first Lok Sabha speaker to lead a parliamentary delegation to Pakistan.
Meanwhile, on DNA's query regarding source of her travel funds, the reply from the Lok Sabha secretariat was as follows: "The expenditure incurred in respect of salaries and allowances, including foreign travel expenses of members and officers of Parliament is borne on the budget grant of Lok Sabha, which is funded from the consolidated Fund of India, separate demand for grants in respect of Lok Sabha is also laid before both the houses of Parliament. Parliament sanctions the expenditure through the Appropriation Act every year."
Asked that whether Kumar was expected to file a report for every foreign trip she undertook, the reply said: "No, she is not expected to file a report for every trip. However, with regard to the Statutory Assemblies of Inter Parliamentary Union a report on the participation of Indian Parliamentary Delegation
is laid on the table of
the house."

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a new topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

New Members 1
New Links 1

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

__,_._,___

Friday, May 18, 2012

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: IC Sushma Singh and her strange orders...

Dear Mr Roy,
Does the ICs have power to convert a complaint to appeal? Please guide
me as to under what rule is Mrs SS doing so.

On 5/17/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Karira
>
> In both the examples you have cited, IC(SS) demonstrates how as a
> "seasoned bureaucrat" she is PRO-CITIZEN to ensure that applicant gets
> EITHER his information (EVENTUALLY) or a "reasoned DEPARTMENTAL order
> which can be adjudicated on in appeal (either again before the CIC ..
> recall that Archana Pande case .. or in the High Court).
>
> This is a good strategy on her part to ensure that FAAs cannot get
> away with passing vague orders. She deserves to be complimented for
> this.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On May 15, 11:14 am, C K Jam <rtiwan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> IC Sushma Singh is known for her copy/paste orders (in spite of Mr
>> Sarbajit claiming that she is a seasoned bureaucrat)
>> seems to be now going overboard in her zeal to dispose matters before her
>> and reduce pendency ! Looks as if disposal is the other word fro remanding
>> back:
>>
>> (Asking FAA to decide on Penalty)
>>
>> http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2011_001982_T_8214...
>>
>> 4. Having considered the submissions of the CPIO and the appellant, the
>> Commission observes that there is a delay of 42 days in providing of
>> requisite
>> records to the appellant. The documents requested on 9.6.2011 after
>> inspection,
>> were provided only on 22.7.2011. The FAA, CESTAT is hereby directed to
>> consider the submissions of Shri Mohinder Singh, CPIO and identify the
>> person
>> responsible for the delay and recover the penalty amount from him. If both
>> are
>> responsible, the penalty should be recovered on pro-rata basis from both
>> Shri
>> Mohinder Singh, CPIO and Shri Pramod Kumar, Deemed CPIO.
>>
>> 5. Penalty of Rs. 10,500/- (Rupees ten thousand five hundred only) for the
>> delay of 42 days @ Rs. 250/- per day is imposed u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act,
>> 2005,
>> which shall be recovered in 5 monthly instalments of Rs. 2,100/- (Rupees
>> two
>> thousand one hundred only) either from both Shri Mohinder Singh, CPIO and
>> Shri Pramod Kumar, deemed CPIO on pro-rata basis or from any one of them,
>> identified responsible for the delay, by the FAA, from their pay and
>> allowances
>> from the month starting June, 2012 to October, 2012.
>>
>> ===================
>>
>> (Remanding back even when FAA has passed an order)
>>
>> http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2012_000243_M_8265...
>>
>> 4. In his second appeal filed before the Commission, it is the contention
>> of
>> the appellant thateven after passing of the order by the FAA dated
>> 5.7.2011,
>> directing the CPIO to provide the information sought by the appellant in
>> respect
>> of Point 3(b)(iii), 3(b)(iv), 3(b)(v) and 3(b)(vi), complete and correct
>> information
>> has not been provided to him by the CPIO in his letter dated 12.8.2011.
>> The
>> CPIO on the other hand submits that he had complied with the directions of
>> the
>> FAA.
>> 5. In view of the dissatisfaction expressed by the appellant with the
>> replies
>> provided to him by the CPIO, the matter is remitted back to the FAAwith
>> the
>> direction to provide information by passing a speaking order in respect of
>> Point
>> 3(b)(iii), 3(b)(iv), 3(b)(v) and 3(b)(vi), by treating the second appeal
>> filed before
>> the Commission as first appeal, within three weeks of receipt of this
>> order.
>>
>> Can someone clarify whether she is "Information Commissioner" or
>> "Remanding Commissioner" ?
>>
>> RTIwanted

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

Re: [rti4empowerment] ANTI CORRUPTION MOVEMENT IN KARNATAKA

I Watched it. If the Ex MLA has been treated like that then think
about the People coming from long distance to meet their
representatives.

On 5/2/12, SHASHI KUMAR.A.R. <rudreshtechnology@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please watch the Videos
>
> http://www.youtube.com/user/arehallyskumar?feature=guide
>
--
Anand S.
Coordinator, Anti Corruption Forum
Bangalore 560 085.
Cell No. +91-87928-91066

[HumJanenge] EXPOSE !!! - "STENCH OF AIRCEL - MAXIS SLEAZE" - DR. SWAMY

Subject: 22aug76comrades Fwd: FW: EXPOSE !!! - "STENCH OF AIRCEL - MAXIS SLEAZE" - DR. SWAMY

http://organiser.org//Encyc/2012/5/12/EXPOSE.aspx?NB=&lang=4&m1=&m2=&p1=&p2=&p3=&p4=

EXPOSE

5/12/2012

Swamy Exposes Chidambaram Scam

Stench of the Aircel-Maxis sleaze

Chidambaram's response unconvincing

BJP demands probe, his resignation

Dr Subramanian Swamy

Aircel is a telecom company providing mobile phone wireless services using 2G and 3G spectrum. Before 2006 it was wholly owned by a Tamil Nadu based capitalist called Sivasankaran, but by January 2006 it came to be owned by a Malaysia born citizen called T Anantha Krishnan, popularly called TAK. He is the son of a Sri Lankan Tamil immigrant, who arrived as indentured plantation worker.

T Anantha Krishnan's second wife is Latchoumie (Lakshmi?) Marie Helene (LMH) born to a white French father who belongs the Le Chateau Briand family, and Tamil mother. She is popularly known as Mme 'TAK'.

TAK made his fortune first in gambling casinos and laundering LTTE drug and extortion loot garnered by the terrorist organisation treasurer K Padmanabhan (now Sri Lanka custody), and then branched into construction etc., to become a powerfully influential person in Malaysia, and had helped Quatrrocchi grease the system in that country and escape the law because of the CBI's deliberately chosen counsel.

Mme TAK, according to my usually reliable sources in Paris, is the owner of a very big art gallery, La Fantaisie, which can be described as the Christie's in France! Carla Bruni, the Italian wife of former French President Sarkozy, is a partner in this venture since two years!

Smt TAK is also owner of a sophisticated Music Recording House in Paris. Carla, who is also a pop singer, uses Smt TAK's studios for registering and issue of her albums!

Sonia, her son Rahul, and her sisters are frequent visitors. Whenever Rahul goes to France, he stays with Smt TAK. He had been there a month and half back.

Smt TAK is also owner of vine yards in northern Colombia with joint ownership with the Colombian rich families Bettancourt and Katalli. Rahul Gandhi's former live in friend Veronique is connected to the Kattalli cartel.

Smt Tak is also one of the major shareholders in the French aeronautical company Dassault whose worldwide rejected fighter aircraft Rafaele was bought by India's Defence Ministry for a hefty 20 per cent bribe.

But the TAKs are smart. This time in the French election they backed Hollande, who won the Presidency.

It is in this context we have to see the Aircel-Maxis deal since it impinges on India's national security as did Swan-Etisalat and Unitech-Telenor deals. Telecom towers and equipment can do cyber warfare, snoop on closed door conversations and read email.

The Indian owner of Aircel, Sivasankaran is a financial buccaneer, working always on the edge. In 2005 after getting a spectrum licence, and short of funds, he put it out that he was looking for foreign direct investment. Maxis approached him incognito through the Standard Chartered Bank. It is now alleged in an FIR of the CBI, that at that stage the then Telecom Minister Dayanidhi Maran entered the scene. According to Justice Shivraj Patil Report (available on the DoT website), Maran misused his office to arm twist Sivasankaran to sell all his shares in Aircel to Maxis in January 2006. Whether that was a drama by Maran and Sivasankaran or real, only the Supreme Court inquiry will reveal. Sivasankaran however became ready to sell.

But there was a problem. FDI Rules require an Indian partner to hold at least 26 per cent of the equity for the deal to be okayed by the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB). Three months earlier till January 2006, it was at least 51 per cent, i.e., Indian to be majority partner. Maran got that changed to just 26 per cent and the Indian partner to be in minority. But Maxis owner TAK would have none of that. He wanted Aircel to be a wholly owned company of his. That was against the FDI rules. So Maran was in a fix. His brother and owner of Sun TV Kalanidhi was promised Rs 800 crores bounty for his media venture by TAK, and he was salivating furiously.

Enter P Chidambaran, the Dawood Ibrahim of Indian Finance, and Jesus Christ in Lok Sabha. He was then as Finance Minister which meant the ex-officio Chairman of the FIPB. As with Raja in the January 2008 Chidambaram advising him on "share dilution" which landed Raja in Tihar, Chidambaram advised Maran to devise a trick: Form a Joint Venture with a young ambitious entrepreneur, all expenses paid. Thus they found Sunita Reddy, part owner of Apollo Hospital.

Thus Deccan Ventures came into being, but it was joint only in name. By using a financial derivative, Maxis owned all of it. With the money thus put it, Deccan purchased 26 per cent of Aircel. TAK declared proudly to Malaysian Stock Exchange and to his company shareholders' meeting that he had bought 99.3 per cent of Aircel equity (0.7 per cent still left with sivasankaran) and thus dejure Aircel became a wholly owned company of Maxis.

But TAK filed for permission with FIPB as a 74 per cent owner and got it cleared in March 2006. But there was a catch. Chidambaram did not like it that Maran had de-camped with the bribe loot. So the March 2006 FIPB clearance was not made in the name of Global Communications, a wholly owned company of Maxis, but in the name of some US company. Then Chidambaram sat on the file while TAK sweated with the thought of being so near yet so far.

Enter son Karti, fixer, ambulance chaser, money launderer, small arms dealer etc., and through a maze of cross holdings acquires at least 5 per cent of the Aircel shares before father PC re-convenes the FIPB in October 2006, and delete the name of the US company and put TAK company as the 74 per cent owner of Aircel equity. Karti's wife Dr Srinidhi starts working as a consulting doctor with Apollo Hospital. All are happy now.

So what is criminal offence? The biggest is the bogus FIPB clearance. P Chidambaram has committed offence of criminal misconduct under Section 13(1)(d)(iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act which entails a seven year jail term for Maran, Karti, and may be Sivasankaran too under sub-Section (ii) read with IPC 120A&B. The Supreme Court has been apprised by me on May 10 last, and the matter will be heard after the vacations on July 17. If Manmohan Singh does not want to testify in court, he must get rid of Chidambaram from the Cabinet. This is what all Congress leaders except one want.

In the meantime the Indonesian Police has issued an arrest warrant against Maxis CEO Roy Marshall for fraud, cheating and money laundering in another connected company Astro. Its money trail leads to a favourite English news TV channel. Marshall is also a Sri Lankan Tamil, and has played host to Chidambaram's wife Nalini when the deal was being brokered.

The corruption pimple under UPA rule has defiled Bharat Mata but now it seems about to burst. Cure lies in operating vishkanya poison from our body politic.

Different business interests of Karti Chidambaram

The allegation was first raised by Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy, who accused P Chidambaram, then Finance Minister, of delaying clearance to the Aircel-Maxis deal in 2006, to benefit his son. Swamy contends that Karti received a 5 per cent stake in Aircel, a charge the latter denies.

Companies owned by Karti or his known associates (this includes companies that are or were at some point owned by Karti or family members):

*    Ausbridge Holdings and Investments Pvt Ltd
*    Advantage Strategic Consulting Pvt Ltd
*    Chess Management Services Pvt Ltd
*    Chess Health Care Pvt Ltd
*    Halidon Marketing Pvt Ltd
*    Kriya FMCG Distributors Pvt Ltd
*    Kaiser Luxury Hotels Pvt Ltd
*    Kaiser Surya Samudra Resorts Pvt Ltd

Known associates and directors of companies owned by Karti: CBN Reddy, S Sundar, Mohanan Rajesh.

Swamy's allegation

Advantage Strategic Consulting (ASC), a company owned by Karti, paid Rs 26 lakh to Aircel Televentures. He received a 5 per cent stake in return.

ASC's 2006-07 balancesheet, under the head 'loans and advances', a payment of Rs 26 lakh is shown as having been made to Aircel Televenture Ltd. At this point, however, Karti had no equity stake in Advantage Strategic.

It was solely owned by Ravi Viswanathan and Padma Viswanathan. The company had business relations with other companies owned by Karti.

Alongside the payment to Aircel Televentures, payments made to Karti-owned companies such as Chess Management Services, Chess Health Care Solutions and Halidon Marketing Pvt Ltd have also been listed under the same head.

There is no entry to show that ASC held any stake in Aircel Televentures (the company later became Siva Ventures, named after billionaire owner C Sivasankaran) in either company's balance sheet.

Siva Ventures, being a large company, does not list individual transactions on its balance-sheet schedules. Records of Siva Ventures prior to 2006 are unavailable.

In a legal notice served to Subramanian Swamy, lawyers for Advantage Strategic have said that the Rs 26 lakh payment was from Aircel for consultancy services rendered by Advantage. It is unclear whether entries against Chess Management and Halidon are also similarly amounts paid by them to Advantage for consultancy services.

Litany of untruths

o Govt claimed no delay on part of Chidambaram in approving the Aircel-Maxis deal. It said the March 7, 2006 meeting of FIPB cleared the Maxis investment of around Rs. 4,000 crore in Aircel.

o But an October 17, 2006 Press release of FIPB shows Chidambaram cleared the deal only in the October 3, 2006 meeting of FIPB.

o The vital information that the Govt concealed is that at the March 7, 2006 meeting of the FIPB, clearances were given to another company with similar name – BT Global Communication (Mauritius) Ltd.

o The FIPB also did not show the amount of foreign investment and kept the concerned column blank. Normally all FIPB clearances would specify the value of foreign investment.

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

Leaking treasonous story of army movements, campaign of calumny against Indian army - Commission of Inquiry by SC judge demanded

May 14, 2012.

Statement of Dr. Subramanian Swamy,
President of the Janata Party.

I demand a Commission of Inquiry under a sitting Judge of the Supreme Court to go into two connected questions of national security:

first, the bogus and planted Indian Express story about the attempted coup by alleged illegal movement of armoured vehicles near Delhi,

and

second, the leak of the letter written to the Prime Minister by the Commander in Chief of the Indian Army, Gen V.K. Singh, pointing out the shortages in the Indian army which makes India's preparedness less than complete. The letter leak was, according to a respected newswire service, the PTI, an official of the Cabinet Secretariat belonging to the Indian Economic Service had leaked the said letter.

The fact of the matter is that such news leaks and publications cannot be effected unless there is a high level patronage promising a cover up, if and when necessary. In the case of letter leak question, it is well known that the present RAW Chief and the Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister are part of the personal entourage of Ms. Sonia Gandhi and have frequently performed personal tasks and chores for her abroad.

It is also well known that a clique of the Indian army with full backing of Sonia Gandhi had targeted one of India's most honest Army Chief viz., Gen V.K. Singh, and hence it is time to get to the bottom of this campaign of calumny, to demoralize the Indian army to the extent that they surrender to the corrupt.

Hence an Inquiry conducted by an impeccable authority, which today would be a Judge of the Supreme Court, is absolutely necessary to restore credibility and integrity to our democratic system.

( SUBRAMANIAN SWAMY )

__,_._,_

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a new topic

Messages in this topic (1)

Recent Activity:

New Members 1

Visit Your Group

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

__,_._,___

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

RE: [HumJanenge] We are Doomed with Selfish and Shameless Political Decision Making - Air India

Dear Friends,

There has been a public out cry in the media since long to privatise Air India. This has been a big drain on the nation's resources. The money saved can be better utilised to eliminate poverty.

It is high time that this esteemed "Maharaja" is given a farewell & let the corporates run the Airlines.

Col Khera's concern & deep anger are justified.

Regards

Prem Gaba

Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 03:45:02 -0700
From: mkkhera@yahoo.com
Subject: [HumJanenge] We are Doomed with Selfish and Shameless Political Decision Making - Air India
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com

Dear Friends,

We are the only country in the world which has a national carrier fully owned and operated by the government. Air India has already bled us, the citizens of 100,000 Cr tax payer money and our BPL figure is 32/-. Is any one answerable ? Does any one ask also about why selfish and shameless political decision continues for Air India ? All politicians have sealed their lips.

Look at the Army. One case of disobedience of orders and in less than 24 hours, decision is taken to sack the commanding officer and disband the unit. Kudos to the Army for living up to its highest standard of discipline.

Air India has eaten away 100,000 Cr of citizens money and Parliament has all the time to waste on frivolous discussion on democracy of 60 years. If Minister of Civil Aviation has any self respect, he would have forced the PM to call for an emergency meeting and proposed the sell off of Air India. If PM has any self respect, he would call for a cabinet meeting to prepare a resolution and then discuss it in Parliament, get the approval and have it endorsed by the President. All this in 48 hours. Above all, what is Mme Sonia Gandhi doing as UPA II Chairperson ?

Brilliant RTI minds and excellent lawyers in the esteemed HJ group, request save the nation through what ever is possible, RTIs/PILs/court case etc etc. I have no idea. May God save us.

Jai Hind.

With warm regards,

Col Mahesh Khera

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: IC Sushma Singh and her strange orders...

Mr Sarbajit,

Under which clause of the RTI Act does the IC have the power to remand back to the FAA, even after the FAA has passed an order ?

She is just delegating her powers (read "passing the buck") - which is in direct contravention of the Delhi HC order in your own case (DDA matter).

Instead of complimenting her, you should be filing a contempt of court petition.

RTIwanted

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 8:11 AM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: IC Sushma Singh and her strange orders...

Dear Karira

In both the examples you have cited, IC(SS) demonstrates how as a
"seasoned bureaucrat" she is PRO-CITIZEN to ensure that applicant gets
EITHER his information (EVENTUALLY) or a "reasoned DEPARTMENTAL order
which can be adjudicated on in appeal (either again before the CIC ..
recall that Archana Pande case .. or in the High Court).

This is a good strategy on her part to ensure that FAAs cannot get
away with passing vague orders. She deserves to be complimented for
this.

Sarbajit

On May 15, 11:14 am, C K Jam <rtiwan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> IC Sushma Singh is known for her copy/paste orders (in spite of Mr Sarbajit claiming that she is a seasoned bureaucrat)
> seems to be now going overboard in her zeal to dispose matters before her and reduce pendency ! Looks as if disposal is the other word fro remanding back:
>
> (Asking FAA to decide on Penalty)
>
> http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2011_001982_T_8214...
>
> 4. Having considered the submissions of the CPIO and the appellant, the
> Commission observes that there is a delay of 42 days in providing of requisite
> records to the appellant. The documents requested on 9.6.2011 after inspection,
> were provided only on 22.7.2011. The FAA, CESTAT is hereby directed to
> consider the submissions of Shri Mohinder Singh, CPIO and identify the person
> responsible for the delay and recover the penalty amount from him. If both are
> responsible, the penalty should be recovered on pro-rata basis from both Shri
> Mohinder Singh, CPIO and Shri Pramod Kumar, Deemed CPIO.
>
> 5. Penalty of Rs. 10,500/- (Rupees ten thousand five hundred only) for the
> delay of 42 days @ Rs. 250/- per day is imposed u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005,
> which shall be recovered in 5 monthly instalments of Rs. 2,100/- (Rupees two
> thousand one hundred only) either from both Shri Mohinder Singh, CPIO and
> Shri Pramod Kumar, deemed CPIO on pro-rata basis or from any one of them,
> identified responsible for the delay, by the FAA, from their pay and allowances
> from the month starting June, 2012 to October, 2012.
>
> ===================
>
> (Remanding back even when FAA has passed an order)
>
> http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2012_000243_M_8265...
>
> 4. In his second appeal filed before the Commission, it is the contention of
> the appellant thateven after passing of the order by the FAA dated 5.7.2011,
> directing the CPIO to provide the information sought by the appellant in respect
> of Point 3(b)(iii), 3(b)(iv), 3(b)(v) and 3(b)(vi), complete and correct information
> has not been provided to him by the CPIO in his letter dated 12.8.2011. The
> CPIO on the other hand submits that he had complied with the directions of the
> FAA.
> 5. In view of the dissatisfaction expressed by the appellant with the replies
> provided to him by the CPIO, the matter is remitted back to the FAAwith the
> direction to provide information by passing a speaking order in respect of Point
> 3(b)(iii), 3(b)(iv), 3(b)(v) and 3(b)(vi), by treating the second appeal filed before
> the Commission as first appeal, within three weeks of receipt of this order.
>
> Can someone clarify whether she is "Information Commissioner" or "Remanding Commissioner" ?
>
> RTIwanted

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: IC Sushma Singh and her strange orders...

I do not agree with my colleague Shri Sarabjit Roy.

In my two appeals against the Delhi Police for providing the lab reports on the DDA software used in the DDA's Housing Scheme, Mrs. Sushma Singh reverted back my appeals to the Delhi Police again for reconsideration. Even after the reply from Delhi Police to CIC, I was not satisfied with the reply and both the matters are pending before the CIC for over last three months, not received date of hearing till now. Now, I have to file RTI to CIC for knowing their status. Now, instead of taking up matter with Delhi Police, I have to pursue the case with SS, IC, CIC.

From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 17 May 2012 8:11 AM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: IC Sushma Singh and her strange orders...