Dear Shri Jam
On 7 Mar 2010 the registry of Supreme court challenged
order of bench of Delhi high court declaring office of the
CJI "public authority" under RTI. Notice was issued after that
to applicant S.C.Agarwall to reply. Case is still sub-judice.
Court outsiders are speculating that Registry did not ask for
stay so CJI has accepted the High court order. Actually
the legal position is that court cannot grant itself relief in its
own cause. So baba check your own facts.
R S Pabbi
On 5/27/10, C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Arey baba, check your facts before filing reports (specially with the BBC).
> Where is the question of "leverage", when the SC itself has already agreed
> that the office of the CJI is a PA as defined in Sec 2(h) of the RTI Act ?
> "Court insiders" are giving bogus information or are sleeping.
>
> RTIwanted
>
> --- On Wed, 5/26/10, ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> From: ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@yahoo.com>
> Subject: [rti_india] Fwd: [Indiarti] CIC to approach SC as ICs refuse to
> work
> To: rti4ngo@yahoogroups.com, rti_india@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, May 26, 2010, 4:14 PM
>
> Court insiders expect that the Supreme Court will
> thus get considerable leverage over the CIC in another high profile CIC
> decision decided by a bench of only 3 Information Commissioners which
> held the Chief Justice of India to be a public authority under the RTI
> law.
>
No comments:
Post a Comment