Dear Mr Singhal
1) The Hon'ble Court has agreed that CIC was correct in directing DDA (on my previous Complaint) that section 4 was to complied with by uploading to their website / internet
2) The Court has properly held that my pending complaint will continue to be disposed by the CIC itself (not by out-sourcing) under the RTI Act and the prescribed Rules. The Hon'ble Court has also allowed the CIC to summon the VC/DDA (or any other officer) for purposes of evidence.
3) A close analysis of the Judgement shows that the Court advises that CIC must deal with non-compliance with CIC's lawful directions by the Commission itself under its powers of section 18 (for complaints).
Sarbajit
--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, M K Singhal <mk.singhal@...> wrote:
>
> Mr Sarabjit,
> The main issue in this case was that DDA had still not uploaded sec 4 suo motto declared info on their website nor organized their organization for complying with RTI requirements. CIC efforts in this direction, by calling VC, DDA for hearing and forming an enquiry committee to enquire into the matter, failed as per Delhi HC orders. What can now be done in this matter. Does it mean that nothing can now be done to ensure sec 4 compliance by PAs or to ensure that they organize themselves to fulfil needs of RTIA05.
> mksinghal
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: sarbajit roy <mail.sarbajitroy@...>
> To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tue, 25 May, 2010 10:50:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Delhi HC impact: CIC emerges divided house
>
> Â
> Just some more inputs
>
> 1) Mr Habibullah (are you reading this ?) is getting obviously some very bad advice from his charmed circle / legal advisers.
>
> 2) Mr Habibullah's cronies have decided to brazen it out, claiming
>
> a) that this decision changes nothing insofar as CIC is concerned
> b) It is not a personal reflection on Mr Habibullah
> c) That the "inherent powers" (also known as "all other powers enabling in this behalf") of the RTI Act permit Tughlak to continue on in this fashion. In partculuar Mr H is determined to show that he can and will constitute "Benches" in the face of the judgement.
>
> Unfortunately for Mr Habibullah, his kitchen cabinet is wrong on all 3 counts
>
> Mr Habibullah is also badly advised that no contempt petition can lie against him and his brother Commissioners for sitting henceforth either individually or in Benches (other than as the complete collegium like the US Supreme Court). Justice B.D.Ahmed has given me a double barrel shotgun loaded for bear and I intend to use it :-)
>
> In passing after this judgement, for the CIC to sit singly or in Benches to function effectively, now requires an amendment of the RTI Act itself and can no longer be carried out simply by amending the DoPT's Appeal Procedure Rules as Mr H's cronies fondly wish after this judgement
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Sidharth Misra <sidharthbbsr@ gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Â
> >Delhi HC impact: CIC emerges divided house
> >AS reported in ZeeNews, (PTI), May 25, 2010
> >
> >New Delhi: The Delhi High Court's decision on the working of Central
> >Information Commission has divided the panel as some commissioners
> >have favoured suspension of work till government clears the issue of
> >constitution of benches, while others rejected the demand.
> >
> >A meeting of all the Information Commissioners was convened by Chief
> >Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah Tuesday where some
> >senior-most commissioners said that hearings should be stopped till
> >the issue of benches is clarified by the government, sources privy to
> >meeting said.
> >
> >When contacted, Habibullah refused to comment on the proceedings of
> >the meeting but said there would be no change in the working of the
> >Commission.
> >
> >"We have sought legal opinion on the order. I have been told that
> >there was nothing in the order which barred the hearing by individual
> >commissioners. We will abide by the High Court order and will approach
> >the government seeking clarity on the matter but the work will
> >continue," Habibullah said.
> >
> >The Delhi High Court on Friday struck down 'The Central Information
> >Commission (Management) Regulations, 2007' framed by the Chief
> >Information Commissioner for deciding appeals under the RTI, saying
> >the CIC has no power to enact such regulations under the transparency
> >law.
> >
> >The court order was seen by some Information commissioners as a
> >question mark over the legality of the manner in which appeals are
> >heard before it, sources said.
> >
> >At present, appeals are heard by individual commissioners or a group
> >of commissioners in Division or Full Bench depending on the matter.
> >
> >Two senior-most commissioners said hearings should be stopped as
> >continuation in the present manner would mean contempt of court. The
> >view did not get support of the Chief Information Commissioner and two
> >other members who said stopping work would not be in public interest,
> >they said.
> >
> >Meanwhile, rest of the members remain indecisive about continuing the hearing.
> >
> >When the meeting was about to end the members demanding suspension of
> >hearings asked Habibullah to issue an order for continuation of work
> >and said in case there is a contempt of court, he must own
> >responsibility for the same.
> >
> >"The constitution of benches has nothing to do with the rules that
> >have been struck down by the Delhi High Court. CIC was working in this
> >manner even before these rules came into being in 2007. The order does
> >not say that hearing appeals in such a way is illegal or should be
> >stopped," they said.
> >
> >PTI
>
No comments:
Post a Comment