Saturday, December 4, 2010

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC


Dear Sarab,
 
Why r u feeling the punch?  The persons who were screaming loudly about transparency in appointments are very much here and what is wrong in their screaming for that?  Don't u agree that the appointments to Commissions should be transparent with competent and independent incumbents? 
To inendify the so called disruptive elements by trick, such doubtful / baseless questions should not be put on the blog as they confuse the members and send wrong message.

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sun, 5 December, 2010 12:14:05 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

Dear Abhimanyu and list

1) I do not divulge my sources

2) Sometimes group owners/moderators have to identify disruptive
elements by trick questions such as these.

3) Have you ever wondered why the RTI activist scene is so quiet now
about appointment on next CCIC and ICs. Think about it. Where are all
those people who were screaming loudly about transparency in
appointments ?

Sarbajit

On 12/4/10, Abhimanyu <who.will.file.rti@gmail.com> wrote:
> by the way who told you that thomas is being appointed as CCIC ????
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue

In my case builder's fault are flagrantly visible. As I have been cornering him for past 6 months. I have a copy of the judgement from Bangalore consumer court where in for the same builder, and apartment complex court has granted minor relief to the customer. The customer then approached the higher court and was granted full relief from the builder.

Even I have decided, to pursue this, however long it may take.

--Abhinav

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Victor Cooper <victor99cooper@yahoo.com> wrote:
Yes, the judicial system is seriously problematic for the average citizen.  As there is no audio-video recording of the proceedings, I found the judges play havoc with their  notings in the roznama and other tricks to favour this or that party. They even refuse to take applications on record! So, to partly cover for this, I have been sending through registered post, but even this fails at times!  Presently, despite vehment representations by my advocate, I am denied my right to rebuttal by the clever noting in the roznama as "for clarifications".  The new President says the clarifications are meant for him to seek, if necessary!!??

I am investigating if I could sue the "judge" and bring her to justice.  But all the lawyers are scared (so I guess one should be too?).

The other problem is that the courts are measly, to the point of being hilarious and/or bringing tears of anger, in their "awards".  What does one say to costs of Rs. 1000 or 5000 for a three or five year battle that actually cost maybe 1 lac?  Does not that actually reward the wrongdoer?  What about awards of Rs. 10,000 for mental harassment over 3 maybe five years, that ruined your and your family's life?  Even a puppy costs Rs. 1 or even 3 lacs today.

But, I hope you have obtained "expert opinion" and placed same on record?  And dont forget to cross-examine the builder.  And, if you are fighting the case yourself, you will be handicapped on account of limited knowledge of law and proccedures. Therefore, keep Order dated 9th July, 2007 by National Commission in Mrs. Veena Khanna v. Ansal Properties Ltd. (and similar otheres) as your defence line.

Regards,
Victor


--- On Sat, 12/4/10, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue
To: "Victor Cooper" <victor99cooper@yahoo.com>
Date: Saturday, December 4, 2010, 11:12 PM


I am also facing a trouble with a Bangalore based builder and soon would move to State Consumer Commission. I got to know that your success depends on the advocate you select. The advocate has some understanding with the judicial officer and gets the judgement in your favor.
--Abhinav

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Victor Cooper <victor99cooper@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hello Abhinav:

I am already before the State Consumer Commission since 3 years.  But the builder is very powerful industrialist, and not helpful.

But thank you for taking time to write to me.

Regards,
Victor


--- On Sat, 12/4/10, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue
To: victor99cooper@yahoo.com
Date: Saturday, December 4, 2010, 9:53 PM


Move to consumer forum, and pray for return of your money along with penal interest. Start the process immediately. Chances are that builder will try to settle the case outside court.
--Abhinav

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Victor Cooper <victor99cooper@yahoo.com> wrote:
I purchased a flat 3 years ago.
1.  The builder, a private ltd. company, fails-refuses to execute sale deed under this or that excuse.
The representation-sale was done by its Marketing manager, so there is a case against him. But do I have a cheating case ... against the Managing Director also?

2.  The builder was obligated to obtain NOC from navy prior to construction, but failed to do so.  Moreover, the builder made false representation in the Agreement to Sell that they had obtained such NOC.

What law covers the aviation sector and this NOC?

3.  Is is better to first file a complaint with police or directly with the court?

Thanks,
Regards,
Victor






Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue

Yes, the judicial system is seriously problematic for the average citizen.  As there is no audio-video recording of the proceedings, I found the judges play havoc with their  notings in the roznama and other tricks to favour this or that party. They even refuse to take applications on record! So, to partly cover for this, I have been sending through registered post, but even this fails at times!  Presently, despite vehment representations by my advocate, I am denied my right to rebuttal by the clever noting in the roznama as "for clarifications".  The new President says the clarifications are meant for him to seek, if necessary!!??

I am investigating if I could sue the "judge" and bring her to justice.  But all the lawyers are scared (so I guess one should be too?).

The other problem is that the courts are measly, to the point of being hilarious and/or bringing tears of anger, in their "awards".  What does one say to costs of Rs. 1000 or 5000 for a three or five year battle that actually cost maybe 1 lac?  Does not that actually reward the wrongdoer?  What about awards of Rs. 10,000 for mental harassment over 3 maybe five years, that ruined your and your family's life?  Even a puppy costs Rs. 1 or even 3 lacs today.

But, I hope you have obtained "expert opinion" and placed same on record?  And dont forget to cross-examine the builder.  And, if you are fighting the case yourself, you will be handicapped on account of limited knowledge of law and proccedures. Therefore, keep Order dated 9th July, 2007 by National Commission in Mrs. Veena Khanna v. Ansal Properties Ltd. (and similar otheres) as your defence line.

Regards,
Victor


--- On Sat, 12/4/10, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue
To: "Victor Cooper" <victor99cooper@yahoo.com>
Date: Saturday, December 4, 2010, 11:12 PM

I am also facing a trouble with a Bangalore based builder and soon would move to State Consumer Commission. I got to know that your success depends on the advocate you select. The advocate has some understanding with the judicial officer and gets the judgement in your favor.
--Abhinav

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Victor Cooper <victor99cooper@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hello Abhinav:

I am already before the State Consumer Commission since 3 years.  But the builder is very powerful industrialist, and not helpful.

But thank you for taking time to write to me.

Regards,
Victor


--- On Sat, 12/4/10, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue
To: victor99cooper@yahoo.com
Date: Saturday, December 4, 2010, 9:53 PM


Move to consumer forum, and pray for return of your money along with penal interest. Start the process immediately. Chances are that builder will try to settle the case outside court.
--Abhinav

On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Victor Cooper <victor99cooper@yahoo.com> wrote:
I purchased a flat 3 years ago.
1.  The builder, a private ltd. company, fails-refuses to execute sale deed under this or that excuse.
The representation-sale was done by its Marketing manager, so there is a case against him. But do I have a cheating case ... against the Managing Director also?

2.  The builder was obligated to obtain NOC from navy prior to construction, but failed to do so.  Moreover, the builder made false representation in the Agreement to Sell that they had obtained such NOC.

What law covers the aviation sector and this NOC?

3.  Is is better to first file a complaint with police or directly with the court?

Thanks,
Regards,
Victor





Re: [HumJanenge] RTI-2005

Yes. There are ways provided the CIC/SICs cooperate. It need a broader
interpretation of the RTIAct. To be in brief we need the cooperation
of various government agencies. All they have to do is interpret
Section 2(h)(d)(i). ie., BODY CONTROLLED. Government has direct or
indirect control of every schools in one way or other. The cityzen can
seek any information available with the private school from the Public
Authority who has control over that private schools. The private
school will not be able to refuse the information when sought by the
government agency. Other formalities can be worked out.

On 05/12/2010, Afzal <mohdafzal1963@gmail.com> wrote:
> Schools and Collages off-course yes, they come under the charity
> commissioner as there must be a trust formed by them.
>
> Secondly all aided or unaided Collages and school are recognized by the Dy.
> Director of Education, so all principal are PIO's, however any info on a
> personal level invokes 3rd Party application under the RTI Act 2005.
>
> Regds - Mohammed Afzal, Mumbai
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 04-Dec-2010, at 20:58, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear Friends,
>> Is their any way in which we can use RTI-2005 on private schools,
>> colleges, builders etc. ?
>>
>> --Abhinav
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue

Dear Mr. Prabhu:

Thank you for your valuable help.
I am already before the State Consumer Commission for past 3 years. We had a couple of corrupt judges, whom we managed to get rid of through High Court, etc.  Now there is only the President and no quoram for past 6 odd months!  So the matter is stuck.  The builder is a very powerful business house and defiant, .... you understand!
As I am a Senior Citizen liable to die at anytime, I am much concerned about what would happen to my heirs without title to flat after my death.  So, after seeing a senior laywer on TV suggesting that a criminal case could bring quicker results, I am exploring that avenue.  But my lawyer advices caution as the very powerful opponent could harass and  file for defamation and malicious prosecution, in case my complaint fails.  Hence, this research and request for help from friends.

1. Could you please tell me the name of the law that covers "funnel zone" and aircraft, etc.?

2.  The actual interaction was with their Marketing Manager.  But is the Managing Director also liable?  (I have written him several letters, so he is aware of the matter, but has not resolved the issues.  It was so admitted in cross-examination also).

3.  Any other guidance please?

Thank you, once again.

Regards,
Victor





--- On Sat, 12/4/10, UdayPrabhu@Activist.com <prabhuum@gmail.com> wrote:

From: UdayPrabhu@Activist.com <prabhuum@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com, victor99cooper@yahoo.com
Cc: "acb" <acb_india@yahoogroups.com>, "Cybugle" <thecybugle@yahoogroups.com>, "eGovINDIA" <eGovINDIA@yahoogroups.com>, "IHRO" <IHRO@yahoogroups.com>, "Transparency India" <tiindia.newdelhi@gmail.com>, "Issues" <issuesonline_worldwide@yahoogroups.com>, "Karmayog" <infor@karmayog.org>, "Jago Party" <jagoparty@jago.in>, "voiceofindia" <voiceofindiagroup@yahoogroups.com>, "Voicesforfreedom" <voicesforfreedom@voicesforfreedom.org>, "Janshakti yahoogroups" <Janshakti@yahoogroups.com>, "Humanrightsactivist Yahoogroups" <humanrightsactivist@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Saturday, December 4, 2010, 8:44 PM

Dear Victor-Ji,

Please provide better & full particulars of the transaction & yourself,  if you have a genuine problem to be resolved.

Anyway,based on the information furnished by you, I believe, that subject to verification of proper documents,

1] You can file a Consumer Complaint for deficiency in services by the Builder including non-performing of acts, under the Indian Consumer Protection Act of 1986, for compliance with the statutory requirements,indemnification off losses if any sustained by you & compensation for Harassment coupled with cost of litigation etc. .

2] You could also file A Criminal Complaint with Local Police with all supporting documents & thereafter simultaneously file a private complaint in the Hon'ble Metropolitan / Session's Court also, for case of BREACH of TRUST & or CHEATING against all concerned.

3] If the Building is in the Aerodrome / Naval vicinity, then their NOC for Construction is also required in addition to CRZ-M / Local Municipal Authorities etc with their approval for Height / Search lights & other conditions/warranties.

Believe this will further assist you to take effective steps to protect your property accordingly.

BEST Of Luck!

UDAY PRABHU.
******************

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Victor Cooper <victor99cooper@yahoo.com> wrote:
I purchased a flat 3 years ago.
1.  The builder, a private ltd. company, fails-refuses to execute sale deed under this or that excuse.
The representation-sale was done by its Marketing manager, so there is a case against him. But do I have a cheating case ... against the Managing Director also?

2.  The builder was obligated to obtain NOC from navy prior to construction, but failed to do so.  Moreover, the builder made false representation in the Agreement to Sell that they had obtained such NOC.

What law covers the aviation sector and this NOC?

3.  Is is better to first file a complaint with police or directly with the court?

Thanks,
Regards,
Victor



Re: [HumJanenge] RTI-2005

builders?
There is a builder in Alpine Housing Development Corporation, Bangalore who had been fooling me, and many customers like me for a long time. Although I have tightened the grip and have already cornered him on several things, still I want to teach him a lesson. There is no govt. appointed regulator on builders in Karnataka. However, Karnataka govt. has appointed Lokayukta. As of now I don't know if Bangalore Development Authority has any jurisdiction or not.
 
Any thoughts welcome.
 
--Abhinav
Oracle India Pvt. Ltd., Noida


On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Afzal <mohdafzal1963@gmail.com> wrote:
Schools and Collages off-course yes, they come under the charity commissioner as there must be a trust formed by them.

Secondly all aided or unaided Collages and school are recognized by the Dy. Director of Education, so all principal are PIO's, however any info on a personal level invokes 3rd Party application under the RTI Act 2005.

Regds - Mohammed Afzal, Mumbai

Sent from my iPhone

On 04-Dec-2010, at 20:58, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Friends,
> Is their any way in which we can use RTI-2005 on private schools, colleges, builders etc. ?
>
> --Abhinav

Re: [HumJanenge] RTI-2005

Schools and Collages off-course yes, they come under the charity commissioner as there must be a trust formed by them.

Secondly all aided or unaided Collages and school are recognized by the Dy. Director of Education, so all principal are PIO's, however any info on a personal level invokes 3rd Party application under the RTI Act 2005.

Regds - Mohammed Afzal, Mumbai

Sent from my iPhone

On 04-Dec-2010, at 20:58, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Friends,
> Is their any way in which we can use RTI-2005 on private schools, colleges, builders etc. ?
>
> --Abhinav

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

Dear Abhimanyu and list

1) I do not divulge my sources

2) Sometimes group owners/moderators have to identify disruptive
elements by trick questions such as these.

3) Have you ever wondered why the RTI activist scene is so quiet now
about appointment on next CCIC and ICs. Think about it. Where are all
those people who were screaming loudly about transparency in
appointments ?

Sarbajit

On 12/4/10, Abhimanyu <who.will.file.rti@gmail.com> wrote:
> by the way who told you that thomas is being appointed as CCIC ????
>

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

APPOINTMENT OF NEW CCIC

 

The Central Information Commission is not a dumping yard for the tainted or officers loyal to any particular leader or Minister. In the past, Ms. Omita Pal joined the CIC just before the 2004 Lok Sabha elections and after the win of UPA; she re-joined back the Shri Pranab Mukherjee's staff after few days of her joining the Commission.  Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Mrs. Sushma Swaraj had opposed the appointment of Shri P J Thomas as the head of the CVC because of alleged Palm Oil scam.  Now, he is facing charges in one more scam i.e. 2-G spectrum.  Leader of the Opposition is a member of the Selection Committee for the of CCIC and CIC's and though, it can be presumed that she will not agree for the tainted bureaucrat as CCIC but she should also be sounded in advance by meeting her personally or / and through emails by the stake holders in this matter as the term of present CCIC is expiring with the end of this year.  But before that, if possible, we should also be convinced about the veracity of this news the Thomas' name is being considered for the post of CCIC.

 

According to today's Dainik Jagran now, name of Mr. Thomas is missing from the list of tainted officers handed over to the Supreme Court though the permission from the govt. to file charge sheet against him was solicited in 2000.  His name also does not appear in such lists on the website of CVC or CBI.




From: Abhimanyu <who.will.file.rti@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, 4 December, 2010 10:14:19 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

by the way who told you that thomas is being appointed as CCIC ????

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:50 PM, RTI Movement <rim.chennai@gmail.com> wrote:
The abbreviation CVC means - Cover Virtually the Corrupt.
 


Re: [HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue

Dear Victor-Ji,

Please provide better & full particulars of the transaction & yourself,  if you have a genuine problem to be resolved.

Anyway,based on the information furnished by you, I believe, that subject to verification of proper documents,

1] You can file a Consumer Complaint for deficiency in services by the Builder including non-performing of acts, under the Indian Consumer Protection Act of 1986, for compliance with the statutory requirements,indemnification off losses if any sustained by you & compensation for Harassment coupled with cost of litigation etc. .

2] You could also file A Criminal Complaint with Local Police with all supporting documents & thereafter simultaneously file a private complaint in the Hon'ble Metropolitan / Session's Court also, for case of BREACH of TRUST & or CHEATING against all concerned.

3] If the Building is in the Aerodrome / Naval vicinity, then their NOC for Construction is also required in addition to CRZ-M / Local Municipal Authorities etc with their approval for Height / Search lights & other conditions/warranties.

Believe this will further assist you to take effective steps to protect your property accordingly.

BEST Of Luck!

UDAY PRABHU.
******************

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Victor Cooper <victor99cooper@yahoo.com> wrote:
I purchased a flat 3 years ago.
1.  The builder, a private ltd. company, fails-refuses to execute sale deed under this or that excuse.
The representation-sale was done by its Marketing manager, so there is a case against him. But do I have a cheating case ... against the Managing Director also?

2.  The builder was obligated to obtain NOC from navy prior to construction, but failed to do so.  Moreover, the builder made false representation in the Agreement to Sell that they had obtained such NOC.

What law covers the aviation sector and this NOC?

3.  Is is better to first file a complaint with police or directly with the court?

Thanks,
Regards,
Victor


Re: [HumJanenge] RTI-2005

Directly ? No way.

Indirectly, Yes. You can seek information from other Public Authorities that have any bearings over these schools.

On 4 December 2010 17:28, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Friends,
Is their any way in which we can use RTI-2005 on private schools, colleges, builders etc. ?

--Abhinav

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

CIC Management Regulation has been rendered invalid by the Delhi High Court.

Sidharth


On 4 December 2010 17:32, Anil Agrawal <aadit3@gmail.com> wrote:
Rule 15 of the the Central Information Commission
(Management) Regulations, 2007 says
The appellant or the complainant, as the case may be, may seek
the assistance of any person while presenting his case before the
Commission and the person representing him may not be a legal
practitioner.
(v) If an appellant or complainant at his discretion decides not to be
present either personally or through his duly authorized
representative during the hearing of an appeal or complaint before
the Commission, the Commission may pronounce its decision or
order in the matter ex parte
There is no rule about first appellate authority separately.
Anil

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi
This question was raised to Mr. Subramanyam on DD News programme "Jaanne ka haq" this morning at 10:30 am

applicant can be accompanied by an advocate  before the CIC - Yes
                                                                     before First App. Authority - Not sure

Thanks
Abhinav Agrwal
Oracle India
Noida

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Rakesh Chitkara <rakesh.chitkara@yahoo.com> wrote:
Whether the applicant can be accompanied by an Advocate before the First Appellate Authority or the CIC ?

Can I please be guided on this point ? 

Kind Regards,
Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate
Delhi High Court
9891678009




[HumJanenge] Request to for guidance in legal issue

I purchased a flat 3 years ago.
1.  The builder, a private ltd. company, fails-refuses to execute sale deed under this or that excuse.
The representation-sale was done by its Marketing manager, so there is a case against him. But do I have a cheating case ... against the Managing Director also?

2.  The builder was obligated to obtain NOC from navy prior to construction, but failed to do so.  Moreover, the builder made false representation in the Agreement to Sell that they had obtained such NOC.

What law covers the aviation sector and this NOC?

3.  Is is better to first file a complaint with police or directly with the court?

Thanks,
Regards,
Victor

Re: [HumJanenge] The rot in CIC registry: Enquiry report scandals - Part 1

ek hi mail bar bar bhej na band karin

NISAR AHMAD KHAN
Azad Shiksha Kendra
Mohalla Sipah P.O. Sadar
Distt Jaunpur Uttar Pardes
INDIA 222001

--- On Sat, 4/12/10, yarap rao <yrprao@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

From: yarap rao <yrprao@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] The rot in CIC registry: Enquiry report scandals - Part 1
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 10:55 AM

 
 
I have my own experience with CIC. i attend UPSC civils mains examination in 2004.
Results were out. But my name was not there in qualified list and not also in non-qualified list. I have written many letters to UPSC but no reply.During 2006 I asked reply from UPSC under RTI act. Initially they refused to give any reply. I appealed then they given reply saying that i was disqualified in general English paper and refused to give my marks and qualifying marks.I appealed to CIC.
 
                        CIC not registered my case and sent back saying that'' you have to send it in proper format'' . Again i have sent in proper format as they suggested.But no response for 4 months. I have sent reminder letter.
 
                              This time they(CIC) asked duplicate copy of my first request letter to UPSC.That I did not have .But I sent PIO reply letter and appealing authority letter .Still they have  not registered  my case.
 
                              Once again I requested UPSC under RTI act to give duplicate copy of my initial request letter.I got reply that '' your letter was weeded out not available in this office''
There ends my story.
 
       I totally disillusioned I stopped preparing civil services.Later  came to know that during initial days there was nexus between CIC and UPSC in suppressing the information and not  registering any complaints against UPSC.Of course now things might have changed litter better.
               
 
                
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


--- On Thu, 2/12/10, sroy 1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com> wrote:

From: sroy 1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com>
Subject: [HumJanenge] The rot in CIC registry: Enquiry report scandals - Part 1
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Thursday, 2 December, 2010, 12:16 PM

As many of you know, the CIC has had to file an SLP in the SC
after Mr Habibullah took that corrupt decision to set up an enquiry
committee to go into all aspects of RTI servicing in the DDA.

To make sure that he got his cut, he even appointed his private
bagman to the Committee to ensure that the kickbacks
would reach him,

To expose how Mr Habibullah's little registry scam works, here
(attached) is an enquiry report conducted by Mr Tarun Kumar.

It clearly exposes how Delhi Police suppressed and destroyed
papers which had been sought for in RTI and had been ordered
to be given to the applicant. Since, this enquiry report has never
seen the light of day.I shall leave it to you gentle readers to
estimate how much money was received and by whom to
suppress it.

Perhaps Mr Habibullah can explain why enquiry reports like this
were never published on CIC website, or should we also ask
Tiwariji ?

Sarbajit


Re: [HumJanenge] The rot in CIC registry: Enquiry report scandals - Part 1

 
 
I have my own experience with CIC. i attend UPSC civils mains examination in 2004.
Results were out. But my name was not there in qualified list and not also in non-qualified list. I have written many letters to UPSC but no reply.During 2006 I asked reply from UPSC under RTI act. Initially they refused to give any reply. I appealed then they given reply saying that i was disqualified in general English paper and refused to give my marks and qualifying marks.I appealed to CIC.
 
                        CIC not registered my case and sent back saying that'' you have to send it in proper format'' . Again i have sent in proper format as they suggested.But no response for 4 months. I have sent reminder letter.
 
                              This time they(CIC) asked duplicate copy of my first request letter to UPSC.That I did not have .But I sent PIO reply letter and appealing authority letter .Still they have  not registered  my case.
 
                              Once again I requested UPSC under RTI act to give duplicate copy of my initial request letter.I got reply that '' your letter was weeded out not available in this office''
There ends my story.
 
       I totally disillusioned I stopped preparing civil services.Later  came to know that during initial days there was nexus between CIC and UPSC in suppressing the information and not  registering any complaints against UPSC.Of course now things might have changed litter better.
               
 
                
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


--- On Thu, 2/12/10, sroy 1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com> wrote:

From: sroy 1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com>
Subject: [HumJanenge] The rot in CIC registry: Enquiry report scandals - Part 1
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Thursday, 2 December, 2010, 12:16 PM

As many of you know, the CIC has had to file an SLP in the SC
after Mr Habibullah took that corrupt decision to set up an enquiry
committee to go into all aspects of RTI servicing in the DDA.

To make sure that he got his cut, he even appointed his private
bagman to the Committee to ensure that the kickbacks
would reach him,

To expose how Mr Habibullah's little registry scam works, here
(attached) is an enquiry report conducted by Mr Tarun Kumar.

It clearly exposes how Delhi Police suppressed and destroyed
papers which had been sought for in RTI and had been ordered
to be given to the applicant. Since, this enquiry report has never
seen the light of day.I shall leave it to you gentle readers to
estimate how much money was received and by whom to
suppress it.

Perhaps Mr Habibullah can explain why enquiry reports like this
were never published on CIC website, or should we also ask
Tiwariji ?

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

by the way who told you that thomas is being appointed as CCIC ????

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:50 PM, RTI Movement <rim.chennai@gmail.com> wrote:
The abbreviation CVC means - Cover Virtually the Corrupt.
 

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

How it can be concluded that I am circulating number?  I have not given my number to all the members but to Shri Rakesh Chitkara, advocate who has raised some query for saving the time of both to discuss the matter on phone rather than receiving the mail and reply and than supplementary query and again reply but perhaps that has gone to other members also.   As the column of 'to' was blank in the mail I received,  I presumed that he has sent the mail to me directly. Now, I am recollecting the rule that we cann't give our phone numbers in mails. 


From: PMK1504 <humjanenge.owner@gmail.com>
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sat, 4 December, 2010 8:49:23 PM
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

Dear Sh Gupta

1 of your emails IDs has been banned. Now you are circulating your
contact details like mobile number using your other ID

PMK.

On 12/4/10, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Yes, why not, but in the garb of his Authorsed Representative. (AR). He can
> also
> appear before the CIC.
> For more queries, u may contact me on 9810550172.

Re: [HumJanenge] Impede Investigations / Prosecution - Case Laws Needed Against - 8(1)(h)

What happens if the third party is in possession of anti-national subversive information?
Anil

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:55 PM, PMK1504 <humjanenge.owner@gmail.com> wrote:
FYI,

Many High Courts like Mumbai, Delhi etc have settled that the proviso to
ss 8(1)(j) you are referring to (Parliamentary denial) is applicable exclusively
to subsection 8(1)(j) and not to the other exempted categories of information.

PMK

On 12/4/10, RTI Movement <rim.chennai@gmail.com> wrote:
> Unless you disclose the facts, it may not be possible to guide you under
> what section you can claim information even though it might be a third party
> one.
>
> In case you are no able to open up, all that we could say is that whatever
> information could be placed before the Parliament should be given to a
> citizen under the RTI Act.
> RIM
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

Rule 15 of the the Central Information Commission
(Management) Regulations, 2007 says
The appellant or the complainant, as the case may be, may seek
the assistance of any person while presenting his case before the
Commission and the person representing him may not be a legal
practitioner.
(v) If an appellant or complainant at his discretion decides not to be
present either personally or through his duly authorized
representative during the hearing of an appeal or complaint before
the Commission, the Commission may pronounce its decision or
order in the matter ex parte
There is no rule about first appellate authority separately.
Anil

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Abhinav <a.h.agarwal@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi
This question was raised to Mr. Subramanyam on DD News programme "Jaanne ka haq" this morning at 10:30 am

applicant can be accompanied by an advocate  before the CIC - Yes
                                                                     before First App. Authority - Not sure

Thanks
Abhinav Agrwal
Oracle India
Noida

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Rakesh Chitkara <rakesh.chitkara@yahoo.com> wrote:
Whether the applicant can be accompanied by an Advocate before the First Appellate Authority or the CIC ?

Can I please be guided on this point ? 

Kind Regards,
Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate
Delhi High Court
9891678009



[HumJanenge] RTI-2005

Dear Friends,
Is their any way in which we can use RTI-2005 on private schools, colleges, builders etc. ?

--Abhinav

Re: [HumJanenge] Impede Investigations / Prosecution - Case Laws Needed Against - 8(1)(h)

FYI,

Many High Courts like Mumbai, Delhi etc have settled that the proviso to
ss 8(1)(j) you are referring to (Parliamentary denial) is applicable exclusively
to subsection 8(1)(j) and not to the other exempted categories of information.

PMK

On 12/4/10, RTI Movement <rim.chennai@gmail.com> wrote:
> Unless you disclose the facts, it may not be possible to guide you under
> what section you can claim information even though it might be a third party
> one.
>
> In case you are no able to open up, all that we could say is that whatever
> information could be placed before the Parliament should be given to a
> citizen under the RTI Act.
> RIM
>

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

Hi
This question was raised to Mr. Subramanyam on DD News programme "Jaanne ka haq" this morning at 10:30 am

applicant can be accompanied by an advocate  before the CIC - Yes
                                                                     before First App. Authority - Not sure

Thanks
Abhinav Agrwal
Oracle India
Noida

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Rakesh Chitkara <rakesh.chitkara@yahoo.com> wrote:
Whether the applicant can be accompanied by an Advocate before the First Appellate Authority or the CIC ?

Can I please be guided on this point ? 

Kind Regards,
Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate
Delhi High Court
9891678009


Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

The abbreviation CVC means - Cover Virtually the Corrupt.
 

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

Dear Sh Gupta

1 of your emails IDs has been banned. Now you are circulating your
contact details like mobile number using your other ID

PMK.

On 12/4/10, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Yes, why not, but in the garb of his Authorsed Representative. (AR). He can
> also
> appear before the CIC.
> For more queries, u may contact me on 9810550172.

Re: [HumJanenge] Impede Investigations / Prosecution - Case Laws Needed Against - 8(1)(h)

Unless you disclose the facts, it may not be possible to guide you under what section you can claim information even though it might be a third party one.
 
In case you are no able to open up, all that we could say is that whatever information could be placed before the Parliament should be given to a citizen under the RTI Act.
RIM

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

An advocate not allowed unless prior permission sought.
 
RIM

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

RTI CIC Appeal Procedure Rules 2005. Advocates are not allowed to
accompany appellants during appeals there.

The Appellant may be assisted by any person during the process of
appeal or while presenting his points, but the assistant may not be a
legal practitioner.

On 12/4/10, Rakesh Chitkara <rakesh.chitkara@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Whether the applicant can be accompanied by an Advocate before the First
> Appellate Authority or the CIC ?
> Can I please be guided on this point ?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Rakesh Chitkara, AdvocateDelhi High Court9891678009

Re: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

Yes, why not, but in the garb of his Authorsed Representative. (AR). He can also appear before the CIC.
For more queries, u may contact me on 9810550172.


From: Rakesh Chitkara <rakesh.chitkara@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sat, 4 December, 2010 8:41:38 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

Whether the applicant can be accompanied by an Advocate before the First Appellate Authority or the CIC ?

Can I please be guided on this point ? 

Kind Regards,
Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate
Delhi High Court
9891678009


Re: [HumJanenge] Impede Investigations / Prosecution - Case Laws Needed Against - 8(1)(h)

Pl. see the judgment of Delhi High Court in the Bhagat Singh case.


From: Rakesh Chitkara <rakesh.chitkara@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sat, 4 December, 2010 8:34:43 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Impede Investigations / Prosecution - Case Laws Needed Against - 8(1)(h)


Dear Friends,

To file an appeal before CIC where the PIO & FAA have upheld resort to exemption clause 8(1)(h), I need case-laws where CIC & High Courts have ruled that this clause can not be mechanically invoked.

I am at the moment, not at liberty to disclose the facts of the case.

Yet I would request the esteemed members to please provide me with case-laws that they are aware of.

As for the link of CIC, it is a good beginning definitely but quite time consuming. Therefore, the  request to save upon time.

Kind Regards,
Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate
Delhi High Court
9891678009


Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

Sir

You have stated that CVC is an accused in telecom scam and trial
has been stayed.

Could you kindly enlighten us about the specific telecom scam / trial
whereby CVC Thomas was an accused.

PMK

On 12/4/10, rajeev kumar <yadavrajeev_2005@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
> If that happens then Adhikaar the rights path would approach Supreme Court,
> at the present we are thinking of getting the stay vacated on the trail in
> the telecom scam in which CVC is an accused.
> Regards,Rajeev Yadav,National President,Adhikaar the rights
> path,+919811242471
>

[HumJanenge] Presence of Advocate Before FAA or CIC - whether permissible

Whether the applicant can be accompanied by an Advocate before the First Appellate Authority or the CIC ?

Can I please be guided on this point ? 

Kind Regards,
Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate
Delhi High Court
9891678009

[HumJanenge] Impede Investigations / Prosecution - Case Laws Needed Against - 8(1)(h)


Dear Friends,

To file an appeal before CIC where the PIO & FAA have upheld resort to exemption clause 8(1)(h), I need case-laws where CIC & High Courts have ruled that this clause can not be mechanically invoked.

I am at the moment, not at liberty to disclose the facts of the case.

Yet I would request the esteemed members to please provide me with case-laws that they are aware of.

As for the link of CIC, it is a good beginning definitely but quite time consuming. Therefore, the  request to save upon time.

Kind Regards,
Rakesh Chitkara, Advocate
Delhi High Court
9891678009

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

DEAR BIMAL & ALL
YOU ARE CORRECT
DR JN SHARMA

On 12/4/10, bimal khemani <bimal.khemani@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> I support Rajeev
> We all must collectively fight it
>
>
> Bimal Khemani
> RTI activist
> ALIGARH-202001
> INDIA
> Mob:935-972-4625
>
> --- On Sat, 4/12/10, rajeev kumar <yadavrajeev_2005@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>
>
> From: rajeev kumar <yadavrajeev_2005@yahoo.co.in>
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 1:40 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Friends,
>
>
> If that happens then Adhikaar the rights path would approach Supreme Court,
> at the present we are thinking of getting the stay vacated on the trail in
> the telecom scam in which CVC is an accused.
>
>
> Regards,
> Rajeev Yadav,
> National President,
> Adhikaar the rights path,
> +919811242471
>
> --- On Sat, 4/12/10, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 12:56 PM
>
>
>
> Block reason: This message is above your Auto Block threshold | Approve
> sender | Approve domain |
>
>
>
>

[HumJanenge] Re: UNITY and Unification in RTI movement

You are too correct sir. all problems of RTI start from this seed.
BabyJohn Varkey

On Dec 4, 6:13 pm, sroy 1947 <sroy1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> To all members
>
> I am grateful to this group's owner "PMK" for taking swift action
> against disruptive members. I hope he continues without need for
> further reminders / complaints.
>
> The need of the hour is unity among active concerned citizens.
> Constantly focusing on personality based issues cannot lead to
> anything meaningful or constructive. At the same time it is also
> necessary to send a powerful message that people of India are not
> fools and wont tolerate inefficiency, corruption and deceit by public
> servants.
>
> We must strictly focus on the root causes of the problems that ail RTI
> movement..Let me list  the one I see as the biggest problem, (members
> are urged to contribute their own to this list).
>
> 1) The prime problem is that RTI movement is riddled with Mir Jafars
> (or traitors to RTI cause). These quislings who masquerade as
> saints/leaders of RTI are exclusively former govt servants with dodgy
> records/facing corruption charges who resigned or were forced out of
> service. The list of these people is so long, and their command of
> English language and misuse of RTI groups and media so good, that CIC
> A.N.Tiwariji identified this group of 'haramis' as the biggest threat
> to the RTI movement.
>
> Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] Re: CIC minutes of meeting

Hardly see the logic of your argument. But let it go.

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 4:44 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com> wrote:
Sir
"Commission accepted the recommendations and directed that CR section
be provided with all basic infrastructures .. and a first class
inverter be provided ..."

Obviously the present Commission feels that CR section had been
neglected in your tenure - been denied even BASIC infrastructure such
as a FIRST CLASS inverter etc..

On another note, now that you have received an invitation to appear on
Baba Ramdev's channel (in another post), could you also consider
"chatting" online with this group's members (at a time / date
convenient to you) who would like to seek the benefit of your sage
counsel.

Sarbajit

On Dec 2, 6:31 pm, wajahat habibullah <whabibul...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Really Sarbajit! 3rd rate inverters?
> Never mind. Continue jesting
> Wajahat
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:48 PM, sroy 1947 <sroy1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes23112010.pdf
>
> > I haven't annexed it inline. Some interesting points
>

[HumJanenge] Another Corrupt decision from IC(SG)

Here is how one of the (many) scams in IC(SG)'s Registry works.

If you are an underprivileged person from a Maoist dominated slum of
Delhi where IC(SG)'s NCPRI affiliated NGOs operate, IC(SG) invariably
directs the MCD to register an FIR with the Police for loss of
records.

If on the other hand you are a retired Defence officer who resides in
a "posh" area of Delhi then IC(SG)s Registry lets the MCD off the hook
for a not inconsiderable bribe.

http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SG_A_2010_002764_10200_M_46470.pdf

[HumJanenge] UNITY and Unification in RTI movement

To all members

I am grateful to this group's owner "PMK" for taking swift action
against disruptive members. I hope he continues without need for
further reminders / complaints.

The need of the hour is unity among active concerned citizens.
Constantly focusing on personality based issues cannot lead to
anything meaningful or constructive. At the same time it is also
necessary to send a powerful message that people of India are not
fools and wont tolerate inefficiency, corruption and deceit by public
servants.

We must strictly focus on the root causes of the problems that ail RTI
movement..Let me list the one I see as the biggest problem, (members
are urged to contribute their own to this list).

1) The prime problem is that RTI movement is riddled with Mir Jafars
(or traitors to RTI cause). These quislings who masquerade as
saints/leaders of RTI are exclusively former govt servants with dodgy
records/facing corruption charges who resigned or were forced out of
service. The list of these people is so long, and their command of
English language and misuse of RTI groups and media so good, that CIC
A.N.Tiwariji identified this group of 'haramis' as the biggest threat
to the RTI movement.

Sarbajit

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

I support Rajeev
We all must collectively fight it

Bimal Khemani
RTI activist
ALIGARH-202001
INDIA
Mob:935-972-4625


--- On Sat, 4/12/10, rajeev kumar <yadavrajeev_2005@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

From: rajeev kumar <yadavrajeev_2005@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 1:40 PM

Dear Friends,

If that happens then Adhikaar the rights path would approach Supreme Court, at the present we are thinking of getting the stay vacated on the trail in the telecom scam in which CVC is an accused.

Regards,
Rajeev Yadav,
National President,
Adhikaar the rights path,
+919811242471

--- On Sat, 4/12/10, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:

From: sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 12:56 PM

Block reason: This message is above your Auto Block threshold | Approve sender | Approve domain | Boxbe


RE: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

My personal experience is CVC is useless for common citizens.

 

Regards,

Banda Singh

 

From: humjanenge@googlegroups.com [mailto:humjanenge@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of rajeev kumar
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 1:40 PM
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

 

Dear Friends,

 

If that happens then Adhikaar the rights path would approach Supreme Court, at the present we are thinking of getting the stay vacated on the trail in the telecom scam in which CVC is an accused.

 

Regards,

Rajeev Yadav,

National President,

Adhikaar the rights path,

+919811242471

--- On Sat, 4/12/10, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:


From: sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 12:56 PM

Block reason: This message is above your Auto Block threshold | Approve sender | Approve domain | Boxbe

 

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

Dear Friends,

If that happens then Adhikaar the rights path would approach Supreme Court, at the present we are thinking of getting the stay vacated on the trail in the telecom scam in which CVC is an accused.

Regards,
Rajeev Yadav,
National President,
Adhikaar the rights path,
+919811242471

--- On Sat, 4/12/10, sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com> wrote:

From: sandeep kumar <drsandgupta@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC
To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 12:56 PM

Block reason: This message is above your Auto Block threshold | Approve sender | Approve domain | Boxbe

Friday, December 3, 2010

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

Let us immediately draft a letter and write to leaders of various
parties, specifically the leader of opposition to not allow such a
mockery.

On 12/4/10, Col NR Kurup <colnrkurup@gmail.com> wrote:
> One can expect such mockery of democracy in general and Right to
> Information Act in particular only from a government flooded with
> scams like CWG scam, Adarsh scam and Spectrum scam who does not give
> any value to the opinions of those who are not part of the government
> and party
>
> On 04/12/2010, sroy1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The present CVC who is expected to resign very soon is likely to be
>> considered for appointment as India's next Chief Information
>> Commissioner.
>>
>> Comments invited.
>


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

RE: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

They have to be parked some where(After retirement). It is their birth right.
Col Dharma

> Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 19:30:57 -0800
> Subject: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC
> From: sroy1947@gmail.com
> To: HumJanenge@googlegroups.com
>
> The present CVC who is expected to resign very soon is likely to be
> considered for appointment as India's next Chief Information
> Commissioner.
>
> Comments invited.

Re: Reply II: [rti4empowerment] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle Syndrome" in the High Courts

Thank you,Dr Sharma

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Dr. Jagnarain Sharma" <dr.jagnarainsharma@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2010 8:06 AM
To: <rti4empowerment@googlegroups.com>
Cc: <usukulsingh@hotmail.com>; <virender.johar@gmail.com>;
<wilevades@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Reply II: [rti4empowerment] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle
Syndrome" in the High Courts

> Dear All
> I endorse what Urvi has stated in the message.
> We have to be careful in our behaviour and dealings with
> other members of the group
> Dr JN Sharma
> ADVOCATE/ HUMANRIGHTS ACTIVIST
>
> On 12/3/10, DSouza Wilberious Evanglist <wilevades@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Dear All,
>>
>> Despite, all of us claiming ourselves as self proclaimed, self styled RTI
>> Activists, be it High-end, Mid-end, Low-end or Hard Core, Medium Core or
>> Soft
>> Core activism, we, neither together by solidarity, nor by individual
>> excellence,
>> have been able to ensure that every public authority fulfills their
>> obligation
>> under section 4 of RTI act 2005, which should have been with 120 days
>> after
>> enactment of that Act, even after about 5 & 1/2 years after enctment of
>> that
>> Act.
>>
>> We have, just as in any movement it occurs, derelicted in our duty that
>> we
>> enjoined ourselves, by an act of volition & not by compulsion to
>> reaffirm
>> our(every citizen's in any democracy) right to information that is by
>> axiom
>> is
>> inherent , human & fundamental right of every citizen in any democracy,
>> reaffirmed by the Apex Court of India in Raj Narain vs State of U.P> &
>> Peoples
>> Union for Civil Liberties vs Union of India & the Unbiversal declaration
>> of
>> Human Rights by the UN.
>>
>> Instead we stray & quarrel over issues that should well be ignored just
>> as a
>> blinkered horse does, in its stride.
>>
>> Unless we ensure that every public authority discloses chirefly the
>> following,
>> RTI will remain elusive as it is today.
>>
>> A. As per section 4(ii) of RTI Act 2005, please inform the powers,
>> duties
>> &
>> responsibilities of the persons working as functionaries of Public
>> Authority.
>>
>>
>> B. As per section 4(iii) of RTI Act 2005, please inform the procedure
>> to
>> be
>> followed by the persons working as functionaries of Public Authority in
>> decision
>> making process, channels of supervision for them in discharge of their
>> duties &
>> decisions by them in that process, their accountability for acts &
>> omissions
>> by
>> them in discharge of their duty as functionaries of Public Authorities.
>>
>> C. In the information about their accountability for acts & omissions
>> by
>> them
>> in discharge of their duties as functionaries of Public Authority, should
>> contain the following information too which is concomitant of the term
>> accountability :
>>
>> 1. The hierarchical functionary/ies who is/are empowered to initiate
>> disciplinary action as per the departmental disciplinary procedure, in
>> case
>> of
>> these functionaries are accused of,
>>
>> a. Violating the Fundamental & Human Rights of Citizens of India e.g.
>> showing disrespect to, use of abusive language, signs of disrespect,
>> discourteous behavior, use of physical force, derision, mockery,
>> innuendos
>> behaving in an accentuated manner e.g. show of anger, contempt, speaking
>> in
>> an
>> inflected voice, demeaning, snide remarks etc.
>>
>>
>> b. Acting ultra vires (beyond allowed empowerment limits) in
>> discharge
>> of
>> their functions & exercise of powers vested with them.
>>
>> c. For selective application of rule, exception in application of
>> rules,
>> disparate application of rules, abuse of authority to favour one to the
>> detriment of another, transgression of authority, trespassing the powers
>> vested
>> with a hierarchical functionary, failure to implement laws rules,
>> favouritism,
>> nepotism in application of laws etc.,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> WEDS
>>
>> Mr Roy,
>> If you are considered a high-end RTI activist,then I will gladly bid
>> goodbye to
>> the RTI groups.BTW,before you pass judgement,I would suggest you ask the
>> people
>> who are on the Group (and VERY REAL people,believe me,L because I have
>> met
>> or
>> spoken telephonically to many of them) as to whether I contribute
>> positively
>> or
>> not.
>> Hardcore doesn't imply licence to kill(with rude words) it implies a deep
>> commitment ,and I think we will have to put to the vote whether your
>> commitment
>> is deeper than that of the the next man/woman.
>> I have witnessed your personal attacks on this Group on people,with
>> specific
>> reference to Mr Rejimon.For a long period in the middle ,I did not come
>> across
>> your posts.You have,however,returned,and you are spewing venom most of
>> the
>> time,
>> I request the moderators of the Groups on which Mr Roy is a member,to
>> take
>> me
>> off those Groups if I also figure in those lists.All except
>> rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.com The rest of you,please carry on with your
>> Group
>> of high-enders!
>> Best of luck.
>> Urvi Sukul Singh
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "sroy1947" <sroy1947@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 2:59 PM
>> To: "HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005"
>> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle Syndrome" in the High Courts
>>
>>> Dear Ms Singh
>>>
>>> This is a group for hard=core RTI activists. Quite obviously ladies
>>> with weak constitutions are not up to digesting alot of what is posted
>>> to this group and most of which is quite frankly nausea inducing
>>> concerning the rampant corruption in the Info Commissions and the
>>> judiciary..
>>>
>>> I concur that a group like rti4empowerment@yahoogroups is the only
>>> group which will suit your delicate temperament. The moderator there
>>> is really scraping the bottom of the barrel if he permits posts from
>>> you and RSingh631 etc to his members (somebody else has already shown
>>> that half the member list over there is fake).
>>>
>>> PS: If you read the first post in this thread, you will find that it
>>> was not I who raised this issue/attack but the Law Commission of
>>> India.
>>>
>>> Sarbajit
>>>
>>> Urvi Sukul Singh wrote:
>>>> Mr Roy,
>>>> You suggest action against people making suggestions yet your language
>>>> and
>>>> the tenor of you mails is absolutely unbearable at times.Time someone
>>>> took
>>>> action against you.Most of what one has read over the last few weeks is
>>>> a
>>>> load of rubbish,with you a regular participant.
>>>> I have requested being taken off all groups other than
>>>> rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.Kindly comply.Otherwise,till I get the
>>>> mails,if
>>>> I feel the need I will reply.
>>>> Urvi Sukul Singh
>>>> PS I find this attack on the judiciary very unseemly.
>>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Urvi Sukul Singh <usukulsingh@hotmail.com>
>> To: HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005
>> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>; humjanenge@googlegroups.com;
>> humjanenge@yahoogroups.co.in; rti4empowerment@googlegroups.com; rti4emp
>> yahoo
>> <rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Thu, 2 December, 2010 15:24:00
>> Subject: [rti4empowerment] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle Syndrome" in
>> the
>> High Courts
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

One can expect such mockery of democracy in general and Right to
Information Act in particular only from a government flooded with
scams like CWG scam, Adarsh scam and Spectrum scam who does not give
any value to the opinions of those who are not part of the government
and party

On 04/12/2010, sroy1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com> wrote:
> The present CVC who is expected to resign very soon is likely to be
> considered for appointment as India's next Chief Information
> Commissioner.
>
> Comments invited.

[HumJanenge] CVC to resign and be appointed as CIC

The present CVC who is expected to resign very soon is likely to be
considered for appointment as India's next Chief Information
Commissioner.

Comments invited.

[HumJanenge] Re: Disappearing decisions on CIC website

Dear Gupta sahab

As Wajahat Sahab has specified on many occasion to this groups, this
world
is but a stage and we are all merely jesters on it.

Jesters, often being close to the subject, serve a vital 2 way
purpose, to
communicate unpalatable truths in a foolish way to a despot who would
otherwise lop one head off.

As head of the CIC, Mr Habibullah is ultimately responsible for all
purchases.
The real question is, what will the "first rate" inverter turn out to
be ?

If anyone thinks that I / this group shall leave Mr Habibullah's
successors
when they demit office for their sins they are sadly mistaken.

The topic of next ICs / CIC deserves a fresh thread.

Sarbajit

On Dec 3, 8:15 pm, "M.K. Gupta" <mkgupta...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Should v be so blunt to call an elderly gentleman by his bare name without
> prefixing some respectable word like Shri. I have many times listen Wajahat ji
> who is very courteous, cool and have patience with thecourtesy of Lucknowwalas
> like "Pahle Aap. This is really not our culture to tarnish the image of anybody
> without giving any proof of purported corruption. Can we call our father or
> other elder family members like this.
>
> I think Veeresh will not be elder than Shri Habibullah who has retired at the
> age of 65 after serving on responsible senior posts. R some person testing his
> patience before he send some defamation notice for the derogratory, contemptuous
> and defamatory remarks without even prima facie proof?
>
> WE ARE NOT REALLY SERVING THE CAUSE OF RTI BUT R INDLUGING IN THE GAME OF MUD
> SLINGING ON SOME PRE-DETERMINED TARGETS BUT AND SOME BODY IS BEHIND THIS GAME TO
> FURTHER HIS VESTED INTEREST OR TO SETTLE PAST SCORE. WHO IS GIVING FEED-BACK TO
> MR. SARABJIT ABOUT THE PAST HAPPENING AT THE CIC. WHETHER SOMEBODY FROM THE
> REGISTRY OF CIC HAVE EVER COMPLAINT OF INFERIOR INVERTORS AND WHETHER MR
> HABIBULLAH WAS PURCHASE OFFICER OR ORDERED FOR THE PURCHASE IF THE CHARGES ARE
> RELLAY TRUE.
> PL. REFRAIN FROM THIS GAIN AS LOT IS REQUIRED 2 B DONE IN THE FIELD OF RTI.
> WHISTLE BLOWER BILL, FRESH APPTT. OF ICs R PENDING. FRESH ICs SHOULD BE
> OF IMPEACABLE RECORD AND NOT LIKE THE PRESENT CHIEF OF CVC WHO IS ALREADY IN THE
> DOCK IN PALM OIL AND 2G SPRECTRUM CASES.
>
> ________________________________
> From: veeresh kumar <v4veer...@yahoo.com>
> To: humjanenge@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Fri, 3 December, 2010 12:03:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Disappearing decisions on CIC website
>
> Habibullah: "Certainly there are no orders to delete any decision from
> the website"
>
> Inspector Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): "Is there any other point
> to which you would wish to draw my attention?"
> Holmes: "To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."
> Gregory: "The dog did nothing in the night-time."
> Holmes: "That was the curious incident."
>
> from "Silver Blaze (The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes)", by Arthur Conan Doyle
>

Re: Reply II: [rti4empowerment] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle Syndrome" in the High Courts




 
Dear Dr. Sharma,
 
The owner / moderator of these fake googlegroups are cheater of world class. They add Ids without knowledge of the concerned person and then abuse. Sarbajit, Veeresh, Raminder Kurup etc. are leading spammers. If you are not happy in the group, please unsubscribe from the group.
 
rgds,
VB Singh
Advocate
P.S. please remove me from this FAKE group. Don't want to be associated with any group where persons mentioned above and their clowns Ashish etc. are members / moderators/ owners 


--- On Sat, 4/12/10, Dr. Jagnarain Sharma <dr.jagnarainsharma@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Dr. Jagnarain Sharma <dr.jagnarainsharma@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Reply II: [rti4empowerment] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle Syndrome" in the High Courts
To: rti4empowerment@googlegroups.com
Cc: usukulsingh@hotmail.com, virender.johar@gmail.com, wilevades@yahoo.co.uk
Date: Saturday, 4 December, 2010, 8:06 AM

Dear All
          I endorse what Urvi has stated in the message.
          We have to be careful in our  behaviour and dealings with
other members of the group
           Dr JN Sharma
           ADVOCATE/ HUMANRIGHTS ACTIVIST

On 12/3/10, DSouza Wilberious Evanglist <wilevades@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Despite, all of us claiming ourselves as self proclaimed, self styled RTI
> Activists, be it High-end, Mid-end, Low-end or Hard Core, Medium Core or
> Soft
> Core activism, we, neither together by solidarity, nor by individual
> excellence,
> have been able to ensure that every public authority fulfills their
> obligation
> under section 4 of RTI act 2005, which should have been with 120 days after
> enactment of that Act, even after about 5 & 1/2 years after enctment of that
> Act.
>
> We have, just as in any movement it occurs, derelicted in our duty that we
> enjoined ourselves,  by an act of volition & not by compulsion to reaffirm
> our(every citizen's in any democracy) right to information that is by axiom
> is
> inherent , human & fundamental right of every citizen in any democracy,
> reaffirmed by the Apex Court of India in  Raj Narain vs State of U.P> &
> Peoples
> Union for Civil Liberties vs Union of India & the Unbiversal declaration of
> Human Rights by the UN.
>
> Instead we stray & quarrel over issues that should well be ignored just as a
> blinkered horse does, in its stride.
>
> Unless we ensure that every public authority discloses  chirefly the
> following,
> RTI will remain elusive as it is today.
>
> A.    As per section 4(ii) of RTI Act 2005, please inform the powers, duties
> &
> responsibilities of the persons working as functionaries of Public
> Authority.
>
>
> B.    As per section 4(iii) of RTI Act 2005, please inform the procedure to
> be
> followed by the persons working as functionaries of Public Authority in
> decision
> making process, channels of supervision for them in discharge of their
> duties &
> decisions by them in that process, their accountability for acts & omissions
> by
> them in discharge of their duty as functionaries of Public Authorities.
>
> C.    In the information about their accountability for acts & omissions by
> them
> in discharge of their duties as functionaries of Public Authority, should
> contain the following information too which is concomitant of the term
> accountability :
>
> 1.     The hierarchical functionary/ies who is/are empowered to initiate
> disciplinary action as per the departmental disciplinary procedure, in case
> of
> these functionaries are accused of,
>
> a.     Violating the Fundamental & Human Rights of Citizens of India e.g.
> showing disrespect to, use of abusive language, signs of disrespect,
> discourteous behavior, use of physical force, derision, mockery, innuendos
> behaving in an accentuated manner e.g. show of anger, contempt, speaking in
> an
> inflected voice, demeaning, snide remarks etc.
>
>
> b.     Acting ultra vires (beyond allowed empowerment limits) in discharge
> of
> their functions & exercise of powers vested with them.
>
> c.     For selective application of rule, exception in application of rules,
> disparate application of rules, abuse of authority to favour one to the
> detriment of another, transgression of authority, trespassing the powers
> vested
> with a hierarchical functionary, failure to implement laws rules,
> favouritism,
> nepotism in application of laws etc.,
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
> WEDS
>
> Mr Roy,
> If you are considered a  high-end RTI activist,then I will gladly bid
> goodbye to
> the RTI groups.BTW,before you pass judgement,I would suggest you ask the
> people
> who are on the Group (and VERY REAL people,believe me,L because I have met
> or
> spoken telephonically to many of them) as to whether I contribute positively
> or
> not.
> Hardcore doesn't imply licence to kill(with rude words) it implies a deep
> commitment ,and I think we will have to put to the vote whether your
> commitment
> is deeper than that of the  the next man/woman.
> I have witnessed your personal attacks on this Group on people,with specific
> reference to Mr Rejimon.For a long period in the middle ,I did not come
> across
> your posts.You have,however,returned,and you are spewing venom most of the
> time,
> I request the moderators of the Groups on which Mr Roy is a member,to take
> me
> off those Groups if I also figure in those lists.All except
> rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.com The rest of you,please carry on with your
> Group
> of high-enders!
> Best of luck.
> Urvi Sukul Singh
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "sroy1947" <sroy1947@gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 2:59 PM
> To: "HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005"
> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle Syndrome" in the High Courts
>
>> Dear Ms Singh
>>
>> This is a group for hard=core RTI activists. Quite obviously ladies
>> with weak constitutions are not up to digesting alot of what is posted
>> to this group and most of which is quite frankly nausea inducing
>> concerning the rampant corruption in the Info Commissions and the
>> judiciary..
>>
>> I concur that a group like rti4empowerment@yahoogroups is the only
>> group which will suit your delicate temperament. The moderator there
>> is really scraping the bottom of the barrel if he permits posts from
>> you and RSingh631 etc to his members (somebody else has already shown
>> that half the member list over there is fake).
>>
>> PS: If you read the first post in this thread, you will find that it
>> was not I who raised this issue/attack but the Law Commission of
>> India.
>>
>> Sarbajit
>>
>> Urvi Sukul Singh wrote:
>>> Mr Roy,
>>> You suggest action against people making suggestions yet  your language
>>> and
>>> the tenor of you mails is absolutely unbearable at times.Time someone
>>> took
>>> action against you.Most of what one has read over the last few weeks is a
>>> load of rubbish,with you a regular participant.
>>> I have requested being taken off all groups other than
>>> rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.Kindly comply.Otherwise,till I get the
>>> mails,if
>>> I feel the need I will reply.
>>> Urvi Sukul Singh
>>> PS I find this attack on the judiciary very unseemly.
>>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Urvi Sukul Singh <usukulsingh@hotmail.com>
> To: HumJanenge RTI India Right to Information Act 2005
> <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>; humjanenge@googlegroups.com;
> humjanenge@yahoogroups.co.in; rti4empowerment@googlegroups.com; rti4emp
> yahoo
> <rti4empowerment@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thu, 2 December, 2010 15:24:00
> Subject: [rti4empowerment] Re: [HumJanenge] Re: "Judge Uncle Syndrome" in
> the
> High Courts
>
>
>
>