[rti_india] How Can One Escape From Atrocities of SIC, Kerala

 

 

With the  popularity  placebo newly gained by SIC, Kerala  with his   confrontation of   the  Legislature , the SIC   is marching fast to  a goal of perfect nincompoopery. Some of the recent orders of SIC, Kerala speaks by itself as partly highlighted below .   1. Afrer suppressing the  complaints/second appeals pertaining to request for  information likely to  expose corruption or maladministration of  old comrades-at-arms for  more than 3 years they are abruptly  dismissed collectively AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM (giving the appellant absolutely no chance of being heard).in utter violation of his own Rules -  Rule No.7 of Kerala SIC (Procedure for Appeal)Rules 2006. In certain cases the order is silent of sending any notice even to the respondent or AA.during the   3 year period (Cases Nos CP No.146 & 147/2007/SIC on file No.4767/SIC-Gen2/2006 & 502/SIC-Gen2/2007dismissed on 12-1-2010 refers.)   2. The SIC, Kerala had the audacity to order in his judgement dismissing 5 complaints collectively  AUDI ALTERM  PARTEM  on 3-2-2010  claiming that " Section 18(3) of the RTI Act would say that with regard to administration and practical procedural aspects, the SIC is vesed with the powers of Civil Court and the CPC 1908 is applicable in all cases. He specificaly claims that the SIC can exercise powers under  Section 11 CPC (Res judicata)  quoting that "No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue in a former suit etc....."  It is a pity that the SIC even after 4 years could not grasp 18(3) of the Act which state that the SICshall while inquiring into any matter under this section ( viz., Section 18), have the same powers as are vested in a civil court while trying a suit under the CPC 1908 in respect of following matters, viz., (a) summoning.etc.,.......... (b)requiring the discovery and inspection....... (c)receiving evidence on affidavit (d) requisitioning any public record or copies ....... (e)issuing summons for examination.......... (c) any other matter which may be prescribed ( viz., by an authority competent to prescribe)   3.. According to him he need to  consider only question of public importance. He refuse to understand at least  the preamble of the RTI Act which lays down   " Now, THEREFORE, it is expedient to  provide for furnishing certain information to CITYZENS who desire to have it." (It does not use the word "public"    4. It is worth noticing that the SIC does not say that what is sought is "Not Information " nor "it is not held " nor "it fall under excemptions given in Section 8 or 9" The above is the type of disposal of SIC, Kerala when he  is unable to face the appellant,; but want to protect the corrupt and does not want the information  inconvenient to the PA to be disclosed.   5. At this rate I will not be surprised if the SIC, Kerala claim that the information sought will be provided  AT THE PLEASURE OF THE SIC'

__._,_.___

Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic

Messages in this topic (2)

Recent Activity:

• New Members 3

Visit Your Group

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

.

__,_._,___