Dear all:
This debate can go on for ever .
The District Judge, District Gautam Budh Nagar , U.P. requires that
RTI fee ( Rs 500 ) be paid either by cash or via demand draft .
They dont accept IPOs or Court fee stamps .
Arun Agrawal
------------
--- In rti_india@yahoogrou
>
> AP High Court needs only the 25Rs Court Stamps for RTI applications.
> Supreme Court wants only IPO's not Court Stamps :)
>
> In one of the RTI SC pointed in the reply as a mistake from our side as we fixed the Court Stamps
>
>
>
> ____________
> From: Arun <arun_agrawal@
> To: rti_india@yahoogrou
> Sent: Thu, March 25, 2010 3:30:02 PM
> Subject: [rti_india] Re: Postal Order Vs Cout Fee Stamp in RTIs
>
>
>
> The precription by law is one thing, its implementation absolutely
> another .
>
> 1.The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India requires IPOs to be
> made out to Secretary, ICAI
>
> 2. The Passport Office in Ghaziabad insists IPOs be made out in the name
> of "Passport Office"
>
> The Senior Superintendent of Police in Noida requires that IPOs to be
> made out to SSP, District Gautam Budh Nagar
>
> The UP CM Secretariat in Lucknow directs that IPOs to be made out in
> the name of PIO, CM Office
>
> Thus we can see that there is no uniformity and the all the directions
> issued by DoPT in this regard are
>
> simply ignored .
>
> At how many places, Central and State PIOs can we fight to follow the
> prescribed directions ?
>
> Dr Arun Agrawal
>
> --- In rti_india@yahoogrou ps.com, "sarbajitr" <sroy1947@ .> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Niladri
> >
> > Who is the "Sanju" you refer to and why should members of this group
> follow this garbage advice based on flawed empirical data ?
> >
> > What is to prevent someone in the public authority filching the IPO,
> filling in his (false) name and getting it encashed ? IPOs are not used
> only for the Rs.10 application fee but also for the further fees which
> may be very substantial. If you go through the records of this group you
> will find many instances of blank IPOs being returned by PIOs.
> >
> > When there is a straight way - prescribed in law for using IPOs - ie
> sending an IPO made out to the "Accounts Officer" of the Public
> Authority - you must make out a very strong case for advising against
> it.
> >
> > Sarbajit
> >
> > --- In rti_india@yahoogrou ps.com, "niladri_shekhar_ das_in"
> niladri_shekhar_ das_in@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Thanks for everybody's response.
> > >
> > > I will take the suggetions of Dr Arun and Sanju.
> > >
> > > In fact Sanju has already solved the problem in a wonderful way. In
> his words :
> > >
> > > ============ ========= ========= =
> > >
> > > In my RTIs I leave the address field blank and in the application
> include some statement like 'Attached is the Postal order, number
> XXXXXXX. Since I am not sure of the designation of the appropriate CPIO,
> I have left the address blank in the Postal order. The application may
> be kindly be addressed to the designated PIO".
> > >
> > > It has worked without hassles till now.
> > >
> > > Sanju
> > >
> > > ============ ========= ========= ========= ====
> > >
> > > This is a great learning for me. Thanks everybody.
> > >
> > > Niladri
> > >
> >
>
No comments:
Post a Comment