Saturday, July 28, 2012

[HumJanenge] Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj (ex-MP)

Dear Girish and other HJ List members

I hope that this clarification from respected CIC S.Mishra-ji suitably
clarifies that there was no "hanky panky" in Nitish Bharadwaj's
hearing schedule and the perceived priority was due to some Registry
error.

Sarbajit

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: satyananda mishra <satyanandamishra@hotmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:58:45 +0000
Subject: RE: REMINDER Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj (ex-MP)
To: sroy.mb@gmail.com


Dear Mr Roy,
I am sorry for the delayed reply. It was due to the fact
that I was trying to find out how this appeal got ahead of some
others. The Registry sends hearing notice largely on a first come
first served basis except for the following occasional adjustments:
a) on account of the availability of
Video-conferencing facility, and b) hearing of
multiple cases of the same appellant or the same public authority
In the case of Nitish Bhardwaj, however, his case file got
mixed up in the bundle of cases relating to the Cabinet Secretariat
and the hearing notice was sent by the DEO in-charge on the assumption
that it was in the right serial order. It was wrongly fixed and was
taken up ahead of some others. The Registry and the DEO have been
pulled up for this lapse and warned not to make such a mistake in
future. Wherever I decide to take up a case on priority on the
accepted grounds, I give written instruction in the case file. In this
case, I had given no such instruction. Thus, it was a clerical error,
at the most.
The insinuation that the case was taken up presumably
because the wife of the appellant is a Madhya Pradesh Cadre IAS
officer is both unkind and mischievous. I hope this clarifies the
position.
I am grateful to you for bringing this to my notice and
look forward to you for your continued watch over our working in the
CIC. Regards. Satyananda Mishra

From: s.mishra@nic.in
To: satyanandamishra@hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:40:09 +0530
Subject: Fwd: REMINDER Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj (ex-MP)



--Forwarded Message Attachment--
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 08:12:09 +0530
From: sroy.mb@gmail.com
Subject: REMINDER Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj (ex-MP)
To: s.mishra@nic.in

To:
Shri Satyananda Mishra
Chief Information Commissioner of India
Central Information Commission

24-July-2012

Respected Sir

I refer to my appended request for clarification concerning the
purported "out-of-turn" hearing which was given to Mr. Nitish
Bharadwaj (ex-MP) in a recent appeal decided by you in Case
CIC/SM/A/2012/000231 on 20.July.2012.

As the sequence in which cases are taken up for disposal in the
Commission has considerable public interest especially considering
the very long pendency in high profile Public Authorities you have
retained to yourself, I again request you to kindly clarify if any
"out of turn" favour was indeed given to the appellant in that matter
and the reasons, if any.

yours faithfully

Sarbajit Roy
New Delhi

On 7/24/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:
> To:
> Shri Satyananda Mishra
> Chief Information Commissioner of India
> Central Information Commission
>
> 24-July-2012
>
> Respected Sir
>
> A message has been posted to HUMJANENGE email group concerning the
> alleged "out of turn" hearing granted to Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj (ex-MP)
> recently in a matter before yourself.
>
> As pendency and delay in the Commission is a matter of considerable
> public interest, I would request you to kindly suitably clarify if any
> out-of-turn hearing was in fact granted, and the reasons for this. As
> is very well known, Mr. Bharadwaj's wife is an IAS officer also from
> Madhya Pradesh cadre and her service matters (which are indirectly the
> subject of Mr. Bharadwaj's decided appeal) concerned the DoPT/MoP of
> which you were once the Secretary.
>
> With best wishes
>
> Yours sincerely
>
> Sarbajit Roy
> New Delhi
>

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.