Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Re: [rti_india] Violations by SIC Suresh Joshi.

 

Sir, the only option is to approach the Hon'ble High Court with a request to grant a Writ of Mandamus. The Information Commission being a state within the meaning of Article 21 of the Constitution can't make the citizen to wait for indefinately for the disposal of Appeals and complaints. Recently, the same kind of  Writ petition has been filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta which directed the Commission to dispose the Appeal in 45 days time. I personally feel that writing to Hon'ble Governor won't yeild much desired  result.Dont' waste time and approach the High Court soon.All the best.
 
Regards   


From: LESLIE ALMEIDA <lesals2000@yahoo.com>
To: siddharth_murarka@yahoo.com
Cc: go4_afzal@rediffmail.com; grvora@gmail.com; hamarasociety@yahoogroups.com; humjanange@yahoogroups.com; percy@ghaswalafoundation.org; rti_india@yahoogroups.com; rtimahilamanchup@googlegroups.com; sdbharti@gmail.com; kshah623@yahoo.co.in; thebravepedestrian@gmail.com
Sent: Wed, 1 September, 2010 8:09:44 AM
Subject: [rti_india] Violations by SIC Suresh Joshi.

 

Respected members.
 
Its time that all affected RTI 2nd appeal applicants of Mumbai  whoses orders are vague, or are pending like mine
7 orders are "DECISION TO BE TAKEN" over 2 years now, Complains u/s 18 are never attended
my 7 complains some  are over 3 years, could some  lawyer attached to the Bombay High Court
guide us and take up the matter at a reasonable cost, as many of us feel  frustrated, as per DOPT there is no time frame for which complains should be taken up, I wrote to the Governor with documentary evidence about 8 months back nothing happened, He has retired.C.K.Jamil. any one having similar complains can send xerox copies to me, but at High court we will need the original copy to present to court
kindly extend your support by sending me your e-mail address
positive advise and suggestions are welcome
 
Leslie Almeida
 

Sir,

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Re: [rti_india] Re: Any guesses ?

 

That is one of the funniest emails I have read on this group for a looooong time.
Much better than reading Contempt of Court issues and dog(cat)fights between members.
I nominate you as the editor of Shri Khushwant Singhs forthcoming book on RTI Humour.

RTIwanted


--- On Wed, 9/1/10, sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com>
Subject: [rti_india] Re: Any guesses ?
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, September 1, 2010, 2:07 AM

 

Dear Shri Jam

I have received the following notice from one Shri Ashish Kumar.

This refers to your defamatory remarks against the Chief Information Commissioner of India. I am directed to inform you that there is no possibility whatsoever of any of the present Central Information Commissioners being considered for the appointment as Chief Information Commissioner of India, for the reason that the selection Committee constituted u/s 12 of the Right to Information Act 2005 at its meeting has already considered and rejected their claims for appointment to this position.

I am also directed to say that all the Central Information Commissioners thereafter unanimously resolved at their weekly meeting not to participate in the lobbying for this position. Commissioner Shailesh Gandhi has, however, later withdrawn his agreement to this resolution.

I am therefore directed to say that there is no impropriety as alleged by you in inviting Law Minister or Leader of Opposition to the next Convention. Such actions will allow the members of the Selection Committee opportunity to interact with eminent retired persons including from the Corporate Sector who can better promote brand RTI.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, C K Jam <rtiwanted@...> wrote:
>
> http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Minutes/Minutes17082010.pdf
>
> Agenda 2: The Progress on the Annual Convention‐2010
> Commission was apprised of the budgetary requirements for the proposed convention scheduled for 13‐14th September, 2010. Commission agreed with the slight modifications on the budgetary requirements for the convention as projected by the secretariat of the commission. Commission directed that the matter be pursued with government for speedy disbursement.
> It was suggested to invite the Law Minister for the inaugural address and the Leader of Opposition, Lok Sabha for the Valediction.
>
> Both LoOpp and Law Minister are members of the Selection Committee for the next CIC.
>
> CIC Wajahat Habibullah superannautes on 30 September 2010.
> Proposed Covention scheduled for 13-14 September 2010.
>
> Interesting to know as to which incumbent IC is trying to "butter" his/her claims to become next CIC ?
>
> Any guesses ?
>
> RTiwanted
>


__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.


Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.


Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.

.

__,_._,___

Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C

 

Dear Sir,
 
Please don't react on comments of Ashish Kumar, as he would never come forward to reply. He is another Ravindra Kumar, who has extorted bribe from the customs officers to complaint against me merely to thwart my deputation to CBI. I have asked him to provide his mobile number but he has not replied yet.
 
Kumaraswamy has clarfified that he was not fooled by me. Bhaskarji has rightly asked him to provide copies of 120 RTI applications done by other on behalf of me. But I know that he (Ashish) would not as his allegations are based on the information provided by those officers of customs who are looting the precious revenue of nation and are real security threat for Mumbai at least. He is being fed by those customs officers of Mumbai who have joined service illegaly, facing disciplinary enquiries of corruption and are indirectly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocenent persons in the serial bomb blasts of 1993.
 
As far as allegation of links with Abu Salem and Chhota Rajan is concerned, this thought would be generated in the mind of a pervert and corrupt person only having real links with underworld.
 
I avoided this topic to be discussed to save precious time of esteemed members. Sarbajit Sir should not feel offended by this message as it is my right to participate in the discussion pertaining to me. Ashish who has initiated this discussion and let him come clean on his allegations and reveal the basis on which he has based them.   
 
With warm regards,
 
VB Singh
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." - Albert Einstein


--- On Tue, 31/8/10, eGov RTI <egovrti@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: eGov RTI <egovrti@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
To: "eGov RTI" <egovrti@yahoo.com>, ashishkr1965@yahoo.com, "VB Singh" <vijay_bsingh@yahoo.co.in>, kapoorsatish@yahoo.com, rtirti.khan@gmail.com, umi_sbs@yahoo.com, sroy1947@yahoo.com, rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "VMK" <vmkumaraswamy@gmail.com>, "Bhaskar Prabhu" <mahitiadhikarmanch@gmail.com>
Cc: iyer_ga@yahoo.com, djshah1944@yahoo.com, harirajmr@gmail.com, vmehtaudctbby@hotmail.com, virender.johar@gmail.com, peoplefortransparency@yahoo.com, lesals2000@yahoo.com
Date: Tuesday, 31 August, 2010, 11:58 PM

 
Dear Mr. Bhaskar Prabhu,
 
This is V. M. Kumaraswamy,
 
Just want to let you know is that ASHISH KR does not have 6th sense the way you have written.
 
ASHISH KR, does not have SENSE at all  !!!
 
ASHISH KR, does not know what he is talking about and what he is writing about.
 
ASHISH KR has not responded to my emails at all , WHY ??
 
Is ASHISH KR, MODERATOR of rti_india yahoogroup ??
If he is, we can all imagine the status of that yahoogroup.
 
ASHISH KR need to be tamed by rti_india yahoogroup. For writing unwarranted things in the group.
 
ASHISH KR does nto understand the flight of people. Who is going through hardship in their lives.
 
People like ASHISH KR makes life MISERABLE for WHISTLE BLOWERS and sincere RTI Activists.
 
Thanks
V. M. Kumaraswamy
 
--- On Tue, 8/31/10, Bhaskar Prabhu <mahitiadhikarmanch@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All,
Oh ! Ashish has 6th sense and he has virtual record of application done on behalf of V.B Singh by others -:) Let him post 120 applications that were done by others on behalf of V.B.Singh. Just using the names of Chota Rajan and Abu Selem shows that Ashish is a arm chair public spirited person and has knack to attach these names malign some person, since names are frequently talked in customs.

In-service for RTI

Bhaskar Prabhu

--- On Sat, 8/28/10, eGov RTI <egovrti@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: eGov RTI <egovrti@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
To: "eGov RTI" <egovrti@yahoo.com>, ashishkr1965@yahoo.com, "VB Singh" <vijay_bsingh@yahoo.co.in>, kapoorsatish@yahoo.com, rtirti.khan@gmail.com, umi_sbs@yahoo.com, sroy1947@yahoo.com, rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "VMK" <vmkumaraswamy@gmail.com>
Cc: iyer_ga@yahoo.com, djshah1944@yahoo.com, harirajmr@gmail.com, vmehtaudctbby@hotmail.com, virender.johar@gmail.com, peoplefortransparency@yahoo.com, lesals2000@yahoo.com
Date: Saturday, August 28, 2010, 2:51 AM





From: eGov RTI <egovrti@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Cc: ashishkr1965@yahoo.com, "VB Singh" <vijay_bsingh@yahoo.co.in>
Date: Friday, August 27, 2010, 9:47 PM

WHAT,  ashish kr1965 ashishkr1965@yahoo.com,  is writing  in the rti_india yahoo group is wrong.  Ashish kr does not know what he is writing.
 
This is Mr. V. M. Kumaraswamy of INDIARTI and eGovINDIA Group.
 
Ashish does not know what has really happened.
 
Ashish needs to think before writing these things in a group like this.
 
Mr. V. B. Singh did not fool me.
 
Thanks\
Sincerely
 
V. M. Kumaraswamy


--- On Fri, 8/27/10, VB Singh <vijay_bsingh@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

From: VB Singh <vijay_bsingh@yahoo.co.in>
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, August 27, 2010, 8:20 PM

 
Dear Ashish,
 
This is not the correct forum to reply to the questions raised by you. I don't want to waste precious time of other group members on personal issues. Please ask VM Kumaraswamy about this. If you are interested in knowing about me please give your location, contact numbers etc. and we would discuss this issue along with VM Kumaraswamy, Darak etc..  
 
With warm regards,
 
VB Singh
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." - Albert Einstein


--- On Sat, 28/8/10, ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, 28 August, 2010, 8:35 AM

 
Dear Mr Singh

Before asking me for proof of information, please confirm if
you published these allegations below and what your proof
was then ?

Ashish

   Dear Sir,

   Are you also part of the team which is resorting to victimisation and
   harassment.

   Why is Narayan Singh after me like leach? Why had Narayan Singh audacity
   to inform one of the Supdt. posted in AIU that he had got me transferred
   from Vigilance? Why did he tell another Supdt. that he has got four filres
   opened against me in vigilance and that he would ensure that I do not go
   to CBI on deputation?

   Had I not requested you to protect me from Narayan Singh? Now Bathija has
   also joined Narayan Singh?

   Don't you know that Narayan Singh had been receiveing bribe from Airport
   Officials like BN Ojha for clearing carriers? Don't you know that Narayan
   Singh Cell number is 9821229380 which is a third party number and he pays
   thousands of rupees monthly bill? Is it not true that there were several
   complanits against Narayan Singh in vigilance which were closed? Don't you
   know that Narayan Singh had tried to protyect DS Tilwani also? Is it not
   true that Narayan Singh had also protected Alok Garg by leaking the
   contents of files attended by me? Why are you protecting Narayan Singh?

   Do you agree with allegation that I had accepted bribe of Rs.4 crores from
   Taufik Haji Gaffar? If so why do you not call Taufik Haji Gaffar himself
   and verify the fact? Do you not know know what manipulations were beiung
   done in Delhi High court to get the detention order of Taufik Haji Gaffar
   quashed by Ram Jethmalani and Chidambaram after which I had complained to
   President of India after which Taufik was detained?

   Why did you not call the Rahul Bahandari and Meena two officers of Central
   Excise who allegedly bribed me for not suspending them as per news report
   published in Surat newspaper?

   I am being victimised and harrased by the officers of vigilance
   directorate to protect Alok Garg and other senior officers of the
   department. I know who was tout of your Additional Director General and
   her husband in Delhi with whom they used to go for dinner in Sidhdhartha
   Hotel, Pusa Road, Delhi. I know how Taufik Haji Gaffar was helped by
   officers of Customs when he was arrested by CIU in 1999 in bogus bank
   gaurantee case.I have documenatary proof to show how one of the Deputy
   Commissioner, Surat DRI, presently posted in the Directorate General of
   vigilance, had protected Taufik in a DRI case in connivance with KO Paul,
   SIO/ DRI, Man Singh SIO/ DRI and Parveen Katyal /I.O., DRI. I know how Dr.
   NK Soren has been protected by Directorate General of Vigilance in a
   export fraud case inspite of clear cut evidence of Jayesh gala against
   him. I know how many Rebate files of Avinash Exports, Surat, have been
   been sanctioned by another Depurty Commissioner, presently posted in the
   Directorate General of Vigilance, looking after Surat Rebate Case on the
   basis of forgeed export documents alonwith Surendra Mehta. I know how an
   Asstt. Commissioner of Vigilance has managed to come to Vigilance Mumbai
   from Kalkata to remain in Mumbai within two months. Can he go against
   whimds and fancy of senior officers? I am aware that one of your Supdt.
   was in touch with Editor Surat Saamna and Tejas Desai and tried to scuttle
   the Surat Rebate investigation. Please ask VH Bathija how many carriers he
   used to clkear every night when he was in AIU and batch and how many girls
   he used to screw. I know at least one lady whom Bathija used to screw? I
   know how PK Sinha has been protected by ADG/Vig, WZU, inspite of his
   having signed the DRI-I backdated in CSD case. I know how the enquries of
   SK Bharadwaj, retired Member CBEC, DS Sra, then Commissioner of Customs
   (General), Mumbai and now Chif Commissioner have been scuttled to allow
   them to retire peacefully and avail promotion.

   Your department is digging my grave. They are asking the address of my
   dead father for a flat alreadty intimated to the department under Rule 18
   (2)of Conducr Rules.

   You are posted in Vigilance to eradicate corruption from customs whereas
   you are protecting the corrupots and vicimising the sincere and honests.
   Had I been so corrupt why did you ask me to join vigilance and entrusted
   me the enquiry of Surat Rebate case?

   You project yourself as one of the honest officer in the department but
   have you ever tried to defend me inspite of knowing fully well that
   enquiries conducted by VH Bathija, MA Andrade and Narayan Singh are based
   on personal vendetta.

   Since you are one of the blue eyed boy of DG, Vigilance and know me well,
   I request you to request him to close all my files and punish Narayan
   Singh and others who were instrumental in opening these files.

   Since I have already been placed under cloud for none of my mistake and
   for performing my duties with sincereity and honestly, I am not bothered
   about my career and will expose every corrupt officers of the departement.

   My father and brothers have left for me enough property to look after
   their families and my family. Please send me to jail after dismissal from
   service and keep honests like Narayan Singh, VH Bathija, MA Andrade, PB
   Chitre, SS Rana, Satish Agrawal, Surendra Mehta, Alok Garg, Saudan Singh, HN Prasd, Ravindra Kumar and Dr. NK Soren etc. in the department.

   I am copying this email to the President of India, CVC and others to let
   them know how the West Zone Unit of the Directoratae General of Vigilance
   is victimising and harrasing me to protect corrupt officials of customs.

   Regards,
   VBSingh


On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 7:34 AM, ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dear moderators of this group.
>
> 1. The volume of spam in our inbox originating from this group is
> intolerable, The spam filters need to be readjusted to ruthlessly
> filter out contributions not concerned with RTI.
>
> 2. A cabal of disgruntled officers facing serious disciplinary and
> corruption charges, now masquerading as RTI activists @whistleblowers,
> have obtained membership recently to this group and started using our
> groups bandwidth to divert our focus from discussion on RTI instead to
> unwarranted accusations against Information Commissioners.
>
> 3.  The contempt notice from the Central Information Commission to Mr.
> Umapathi S is
> a clear caution that free speech has its limits. Mr Umapathi seems
> oblivious to the high office of the President of India in his
> defamatory complaint concerning ANT which is replete with invective
> and  personal spite. One seriously wonders how a public authority like
> the State Bank could employ such individuals, or why we should put up
> with them at our group.
>
> 4) The case of Mr VB Singh is even more serious and deserves immediate
> intervention. He is a practiced hand at misusing yahoo groups since
> 2006. http://www.mail-archive.com/bharatudaymission@yahoogroups.com/msg01800.html
> In another example from 2006 he managed to fool Kumaraswamy of INDIARTI
> http://customsmuddle.wordpress.com/2006/07/02/this-rti-request-to-cvc-of-v-m-kumaraswamy-needs-to-followed-up-by-an-rti-activists-if-any-questions-write-to-v-m-kumaraswamy-he-will-reply-for-your-questions/
> The wild allegations and intemperate language used by Mr Singh in this
> email mandate that such persons should not be allowed to post to/from
> this group or communicate with our members. Shailesh Gandhi,  Rajesh
> Darak and other Mumbai activists have filed over 120 RTI requests
> collectively on behalf of Mr Singh, a vigilance officer, who faces
> numerous serious accusations of corruption in cross cases iof
> smuggling nvolving Abu Salem, Chota Rajan gangs.
>
> Ashish
>
>>
>> From: umapathi s <umi_sbs@yahoo.com>
>> Date: Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:28 AM
>> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
>> To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
>>
>>
>>  Dear Members Now it is becoming clear that the CIC is exceeding its power and its own jurisdiction . AS one of our members mentioned it is nothing but  tactics to silence our voice.
>>
>> In order to have a constructive conclusion, I mention below points which may help members to decide on the legality of the contempt notice issued by CIC.
>>
>> 1)     There is a dilemma whether or not CIC is a court.
>>
>> 2)     If we accept that CIC is a court, even in this case, CIC has no power to issue the show- cause notice for Contempt proceedings.
>>
>> 3)       As per one of the decisions of the Hon'ble High court of Delhi,   "the lower courts have no power to prosecute a person for contempt of court". 'A perusal of provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act would show that a court subordinate to high court has no powers to initiate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act. Under the act, the high court alone can take cognizance of an alleged contempt having been committed in respect of subordinate courts,' the court said.
>>
>> 4)      Only higher courts can take cognizance of contempt committed by a person against lower judiciary.  In the same Judgments the court observed that "A subordinate court is supposed to send a reference of the matter to the high court. A subordinate court cannot itself assume jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act and issue show cause notice as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated,
>>
>> 5)       Whether our group is private or public it doesn't matter much. What is imp is publication is any manner which scandalize or interfere with the administration of justice. This is to be decided by following the rule of law and facts and circumstances of the case.
>>
>> 6)      The contempt proceedings have to be used only sparingly and cautiously.
>>
>> 7)      The contempt Jurisdiction is not to protect an individual Judge. ( if  ICs are declared as Judges).it is meant for the maintenance of effective legal system.
>>
>> 8)      Contempt proceedings can be used only when the proceedings are pending. (In the instant case, the IC had already decided the case).
>>
>> 9)      Contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal and quasi-judicial.
>>
>> 10)  I shall be attaching the Scanned copy of the notice received by me soon (I have no scanner at Home, hence the difficulty), to prove the authenticity of my posting as some members mentioned.
>>
>> 11)  I started the thread on this topic since it is a new and vital subject on the powers of the CIC and our Fundamental rights. The aim is to invite the views of OUR enlightened members .Tomorrow our other members may be forced to face such situations
>>
>> 12)  I have addressed the complaint to Hon'ble President as "Her Excellency" in my complaint. No defamatory statement is made by me and it has nothing to do with the present notice issued by CIC.
>>
>> Regards.
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: VB Singh <vijay_bsingh@yahoo.co.in>
>> To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Fri, 27 August, 2010 9:42:05 AM
>> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
>>
>>
>






__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C

 

Dear Sh Umapathi,

Very well drafted reply, wish you success.

S.K.Kapoor


From: umapathi s <umi_sbs@yahoo.com>
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, August 31, 2010 1:09:23 PM
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C

 

Dear Members , regarding the subject of contempt notice, I have submitted a detailed reply to the Commission today by speed post and e-mail. I express my sincere thanks to many members of this Group  who exchanged their views (both positive and negative)on the subject.Reading  my  detailed reply  which is reproduced below would clarify many of the issues on the subject. if membes want ,the thread can be closed.
 
I need to clarify the points raised by Shri. Ashish in this context otherwise it would create wrong impresssion and admission of his points. I am not an official of the Bank facing any disciplinary actions or corruption charges nor I am declaring my self as RTI Activists or Whistleblower. Mr. Ashish should know something about one before commenting on them. Mr. Ashish doesn't  know  anything about my background or any details about my activity. It is not necessary for Ashish to know how my appointment in State BAnk was made in this forum. if the moderator of the present group wish to expel me from the Group as Mr. Ashish desired, I have no objections and they can do so. As one of our members suggested united we stand, divided we fall. so, unity is strength. no purpose is going to be  served by cirticising our own members of the Group. Everyone has a right to use one's right as he deems fit and proper subject to the limitations imposed by law.
 
AS one of the members suggested I am not attaching the file but is posting the reply itself in the message. sorry  for the same. 
Thanking you.
 
Regards.
 
 

FROM:                                                                          DATE: 31-08-2010.

UMAPATHI.S

POST Box NO.1307,

Jalahalli Post Office,                                         BY SPEED POST

BANGALORE-560013.

 

 

TO:

Shri. Aakash Deep

Joint Secretary (LAW),

Central Information Commission,

306, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhavan,

Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110 066.

 

 

Sub: SUBMISSION OF REPLIES TO YOUR SHOW CAUSE NOTICE.

Ref: your letter dated 19-08-2010 bearing number: CIC/legal/2010/077.

 

--------

Dear Sir,

 

Please kindly refer your captioned letter (received by me on 26-08-2010) calling for explanation and tendering unconditional apology to Hon'ble Information Commissioner shri. A.N.Tiwari. In this connection I submit the following for your kind attention.

 

 

1) At the outset I state that my communication addressed to rti_india@yahoogroups.com is misconceived by the Commission as defamatory and scandalizing to the Hon'ble Information Commissioner shri. A.N.Tiwari. I state that I had no such intention as I have high regards for the all the Hon'ble Central Information Commissioner, including shri. A.N.Tiwari. it is unfortunate to note that it has created a wrong impression at CIC.

 

 

  2) I state that the last two lines of my mail mentioned by the CIC are neither defamatory nor scandalizing if it is understood in the proper context and the circumstances in which it was written. The words "corrupt" and "corrupt motives" were intended to mean as "improper" or "illegal behaviour". The word corruption or corrupt has wide meaning and conveys different meaning in different circumstances.  It is a much used - and abused- term and not easily defined. Apart from obtaining illegal gain or gratification, Corruption would mean abuse of power in decision making process, dishonest or illegal behaviour especially of people in authority. It signifies a form behavior that deviates or departs from ethics, morality, law and civic virtues. It is dishonest or partial behaviour in the discharge of duty and includes breach of trust. Corruption means act of impairing integrity, Virtue or moral principles. It also means departure from what is pure, simple or correct. Sometimes it has the same meaning of "illegal" and hence some times contravention or non-compliance of any law or rule by authorities would also fall within the expression of corruption. Corrupt has the same connotation as "illegal". The prevention of Corruption Act -1988 has also not defined the term Corrupt or corruption. The committee on prevention of Corruption (popularly known as Santhanam Committee) based on whose recommendation the "Central Vigilance Commission" was set up, defined corruption as "improper or selfish exercise of power and influence attached to a public office or to the special position one occupies in public life."  It is in this context of   "illegal exercise of power" or "improper exercise of power" that the words "corrupt" were meant by me and not as obtaining any illegal gratification for personal gains. Therefore my wordings are neither defamatory nor scandalizing.  I sincerely regret my wordings and writings in my Mail for causing wrong impression leading to the issue of your notice of contempt Proceedings.

     

 

3) I state that the behaviour or conduct of the Information Commissioner during the proceedings was improper and illegal as shri. A.N.Tiwari insulted me in presence of banks' respondents and made certain other objectionable statements about my integrity, intention and purpose of filing Appeals cum complaints before the Commission. Further I state that, shri A.N.Tiwari was impatient and behaved arrogantly during the proceedings. It is against this background that I was constrained to make a complaint to the Hon'ble President of India and Hon'ble Chief Central Information Commissioner. The communication addressed to the Yahoo Group was also made in good faith and in Public interest so as to invite member's opinions and suggestions .Hence, I state that my acts are neither deliberate nor motivated as alleged by the Commission. I exercised my ordinary right of criticizing the improper behaviour of shri. A.N.Tiwari in good faith and I feel I have not committed any wrong. Accordingly, my conscience doesn't permit me to tender any unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari as called upon by the Commission.    

 

4) I further state that the Commission, Headed by Chief Information Commissioner, is free to enquire whether or not my allegations of improper and illegal behaviour on the part of shri. A.N.Tiwari is true or false. As the proceedings of my Appeals cum complaints were conducted through Video Conferencing, the records of those proceedings are easily made available. The Commission can observe the said proceedings and if my allegations are baseless or unfounded, it is free to initiate the contempt proceedings against me or take actions for making false complaint as per law. In substance, I request the Commission to take an objective consideration of all the factors and exercise its power as deem fit i.e. either taking actions against  me for making false allegations or taking corrective measures by advising shri. A.N.Tiwari not to insult the appellants/complainants during its proceedings in future. I am ready to extend all my co-operation in this regard.

 

 

5) I state that the notice issued by the Commission calling upon explanation and unconditional apology to an individual Information Commissioner is not in accordance with law. The Commission is a subordinate court under the jurisdiction of Hon'ble High Court. A perusal of provisions of Contempt of Courts Act would show that a Court subordinate to High Court has no powers to initiate proceedings under Contempt of Courts Act. Under Section 10 of Contempt of Courts Act, the High Court alone can take cognizance of an alleged contempt having been committed in respect of subordinate Courts. In order to bring the alleged conduct to the notice of High Court, a subordinate court is supposed to send a reference of the matter to the High Court. A subordinate court cannot itself assume jurisdiction under Contempt of Courts Act and issue show cause notice as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated. (Pl refer the Judgment of Hon'ble High court of Delhi dt 05-08-2010, case number Crl.Mc-2899 of 2009 for more details).  The provisions of Contempt of Courts Act cannot be resorted to by subordinate court even as a threatening provision or for calling upon to tender an unconditional apology to an individual Judge (in this case shri. A.N.Tiwari) .If there are prima facie materials before the Commission for initiating Contempt Proceedings, it should have sent the reference to the High Court and it is for the Hon'ble High Court to issue show cause notice. I feel that the Commission is not empowered to call for explanation or for calling an unconditional apology to the information Commissioner in the name of initiating action under Contempt of Court Act-1971. Under these circumstances I feel that there is no need to tender any unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari at this stage. If Commission still feels that my acts constituted contempt of court, it can   make a complete reference (including the contents of Video Conferencing taken place on 11-08-2010) for the reference of Hon'ble High Court and I would be ready to face the trail as per laid down law. In other words, I am requesting the Commission to adopt due process of law so that the truth can be ascertained and action be initiated against those responsible for violation of law.

 

 

6) I state that the Commission is not adopting fair and transparent procedures in initiating action under the contempt of Court Act. Before issuing the show cause notice and calling for unconditional apology to the information commissioner, the commission should have ascertained the intention of the alleged contemner i.e. whether the intention is bonafide or mala fide. My email communication was addressed to the rti India Yahoo group where posting is restricted   only to limited registered Group members. The Said Group members would exchange their views and opinions on the various aspects having impact on RTI Act-2005.My posting in those Group is to invite members' opinions and views and also to highlight  the misbehavior on the part of the shri. A.N.Tiwari and the insult experienced by me during the proceedings. Whatever written in my complaints and also in my email communication was based   on true facts and the sole object was only to take remedial action by the concerned authorities and to invite the opinions of Group members. Hence my intention was bonafide one. On the other hand,   if my intention was mala fide, I would have posted the contents of said e-mail openly in various other forums like press and media and other various websites so as to convey the message to larger section of the people across the county. Such kind of exercise is not very difficult in the present age of Technology. But as the Commission can see itself, I had addressed my communication expressing my grievance and experience only in two websites (i.e. rtiindia.org and rti India yahoo Group) which are related with RTI Act. The object was only to highlight the Misbehavior of shri. A.N.Tiwari and to invite their free and open suggestions. This act of mine is completely within the scope of law since Article 19(a) of the Constitution of India confers the Fundamental Right to freedom of Speech and Expression on every citizen. This being the case, no mala fide can be attributed to me. Open and fair criticism of a Judge is not an offence under contempt of court Act. The path of criticism is a public way.  It is open to anyone to express fair, reasonable and legitimate criticism of any act or conduct of a judge in his judicial capacity. The Commission, I am sorry to mention, has failed to consider this vital aspect before issuing me a show cause notice calling for explanation and unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari. The approach of the Commission is illegal and amounts to abuse of power. Hence I am not willing to tender any apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari as called upon by the Commission. 

 

 

7) I state that the commission is not exercising its power in the right spirit.   If we look at the present show cause notice calling for explanation and unconditional apology from another angle, it becomes clear that commission has exercised its power to safeguard or protect an individual Information commissioner i.e. shri. A.N. Tiwari. The law of contempt or the power of Contempt is essentially meant for keeping the administration of justice pure and undefiled. The contempt of court jurisdiction is not to protect an individual judge, it is to protect the administration of justice from being maligned. (Pl see (2001) 2 S.C.C.171 at pp.177-78:2001(1) A.L.D. (Cri) 222 (S.C.). Further, the contempt is a matter between the court (i.e. the High Court in this case) and the contemner. Whether or not to tender an apology is to be decided by the Court taking cognizance of the alleged contempt. The High Court, not the subordinate court, is the best judge how to deal with the alleged contemner.  In the instant case, it can be seen that my e-mail communication which was addressed to rti India yahoo Group has been forwarded by one member (i.e. shri. Subramanian) of our group having e-mail id "gs.manian@nic.in    personally to   shri A.N. Tiwari having e-mail id "an.tiwari@nic.in which is the source for initiating the present contempt proceedings against me and calling for  an unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari. The decision of the Commission to initiate the contempt proceedings based on the e-mail received by shri. A.N. Tiwari and calling for the unconditional apology to him is only an exercise to protect his own self image. The Commission viewed my communication as defamatory to Hon'ble Commissioner Shri. A.N.Tiwari and hence called upon to tender an unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari by assuming the power of Hon'ble High Court. Further, even though my wordings are not defamatory, the commission issued me the show cause notice without any distinction made between mere defamation and contempt of court. The Commission should have ascertained whether my writings are a mere defamatory attack on shri. A.N.Tiwari or whether it is calculated to interfere with the course of justice, since it is only in the later case that the grounds for taking action for contempt would arise. So, on these grounds too, the commission's notice calling for explanation and unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari is illegal and is issued in the interest of defending the misbehavior of shri. A.N.Tiwari. The citizen's right to offer healthy and constructive criticism which is fair in spirit must be left unimpaired in the interest of Commission itself. Instead of asking me to tender unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari, the commission should have, I feel, advised shri. A.N.Tiwari to behave properly during its proceedings so that such complaints are not received by them in future. Hence, I state that there is no need to tender any unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari as called upon by the Commission.

 

 

8) I further state that the commission's approach in issuing show cause notice in case of alleged contempt is also not being applied equally as per law. There are many cases of direct complaints of non-compliance of commission orders by the CPIO and FAA of public authorities. When such complaints of non-complaints are made to the Commission, the commission is not initiating the contempt proceedings nor taking stern actions against the public authorities (that too after waiting for many months) for their willful disobedience. Even my own complaint of non-compliance is not being handled by the Commission since long. So, a genuine question arises in one's mind as to the biased approach on the part of the Commission. The Commission could issue me a show cause notice and called upon for tendering an unconditional apology within  two days of receiving the forwarded mail (i.e. indirect reference) while no such action is taken by the commission on  many of  direct complaints of non-compliance of its orders (i.e. direct reference) by the public authorities. I have not come across any instance of issuing the contempt notice to any CPIO or FAA by the commission even though there are clear grounds for proceeding in such cases. There are many cases of willful disobedience of Commission's order warranting initiation of criminal contempt against them.  This kind of duality or inequality should be avoided by the Commission and the commission is requested to adopt the principle of equity and equality in the larger interest of keeping the administration of justice pure and undefiled.

 

 

9) I further state that I have received commission's decisions in more than 50 cases so far and I am grateful to the commission as I could make some complaints to the Central Vigilance Commission based on the documents so obtained under RTI Act. I know that the commission is a vital institution of national importance vested with the primary jurisdiction of adjudicating the dispute arising out of RTI Act-2005. In the past I have not made any such complaints or writing against any of the commissioner or officials of the Commission. I have due regards and respect for them. As a law abiding citizen, I know the consequence of making a wrong or false allegations against the authorities holding constitutional position.  I have no intention of either defaming shri. A.N.Tiwari or scandalizing the commission or interfering with the administration of justice. It is once again stated that the said communication was made with bonafide intention of reporting the misbehavior of shri. A.N.Tiwari and the insult I underwent in presence of bank's respondents which deeply affected my sentiments and values. Hence, I had to criticize shri. A.N.Tiwari by reporting the factual aspects of the proceedings. Though it has caused embarrassment to the Commission, it can't attract any of the offence under the contempt of Courts Act and it can't be interpreted as scandalizing the commission.  The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its case Indirect Tax Practitioners Association v/s R.K. Jain,(date of Judgment 13-08-2010) has held that   truth should ordinarily be allowed as  defence in contempt proceedings and honest criticism of judiciary which is in public interest don't attract  action under contempt proceedings. Hence, I would say that such bonafide criticism made in public interest serve as valuable guide in rectifying its errors and mistakes and ensures citizen participation in the judicial process so that  due and proper administration of justice can be achieved. I express my sincere thanks for giving me an opportunity to clarify things which has caused embarrassment to the Commission.

 

 

10) I finally state that considering all the facts and detailed explanation submitted as above, there are no grounds for the commission to initiate any further action either under contempt of Courts Act or Criminal action under India Penal Code. There is no need to tender any unconditional apology to shri. A.N.Tiwari. Hence, it is requested to drop those proceedings against me in the interest of equity and justice. In spite of these grounds and circumstances submitted by me, if the Commission initiate any action against me it amounts to abuse of power and the Commission would be doing them at its own risk and cost.  

 

 

The present explanation is being sent by speed post to the commission's address. The soft copy of the same is also sent to Chief Central Information Commissioner and also to information Commissioner Shri. A.N.Tiwari. kindly communicate your decision in the matter. Also kindly note the change of address and direct all your correspondence to the new address in future.

 

Thanking you,                                                           yours faithfully,

 

Place: Bangalore

Email:umapthi.s.rti@gmail.com.                              (umapathi.s)

Phone: 9480017995.

 

     

From: ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@yahoo.com>
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 28 August, 2010 7:34:09 AM
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C

Dear moderators of this group.

1. The volume of spam in our inbox originating from this group is
intolerable, The spam filters need to be readjusted to ruthlessly
filter out contributions not concerned with RTI.

2. A cabal of disgruntled officers facing serious disciplinary and
corruption charges, now masquerading as RTI activists @whistleblowers,
have obtained membership recently to this group and started using our
groups bandwidth to divert our focus from discussion on RTI instead to
unwarranted accusations against Information Commissioners.

3.  The contempt notice from the Central Information Commission to Mr.
Umapathi S is
a clear caution that free speech has its limits. Mr Umapathi seems
oblivious to the high office of the President of India in his
defamatory complaint concerning ANT which is replete with invective
and  personal spite. One seriously wonders how a public authority like
the State Bank could employ such individuals, or why we should put up
with them at our group.

4) The case of Mr VB Singh is even more serious and deserves immediate
intervention. He is a practiced hand at misusing yahoo groups since
2006. http://www.mail-archive.com/bharatudaymission@yahoogroups.com/msg01800.html
In another example from 2006 he managed to fool Kumaraswamy of INDIARTI
http://customsmuddle.wordpress.com/2006/07/02/this-rti-request-to-cvc-of-v-m-kumaraswamy-needs-to-followed-up-by-an-rti-activists-if-any-questions-write-to-v-m-kumaraswamy-he-will-reply-for-your-questions/
The wild allegations and intemperate language used by Mr Singh in this
email mandate that such persons should not be allowed to post to/from
this group or communicate with our members. Shailesh Gandhi,  Rajesh
Darak and other Mumbai activists have filed over 120 RTI requests
collectively on behalf of Mr Singh, a vigilance officer, who faces
numerous serious accusations of corruption in cross cases iof
smuggling nvolving Abu Salem, Chota Rajan gangs.

Ashish

>
> From: umapathi s <umi_sbs@yahoo.com>
> Date: Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 10:28 AM
> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
> To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>  Dear Members Now it is becoming clear that the CIC is exceeding its power and its own jurisdiction . AS one of our members mentioned it is nothing but  tactics to silence our voice.
>
> In order to have a constructive conclusion, I mention below points which may help members to decide on the legality of the contempt notice issued by CIC.
>
> 1)    There is a dilemma whether or not CIC is a court.
>
> 2)    If we accept that CIC is a court, even in this case, CIC has no power to issue the show- cause notice for Contempt proceedings.
>
> 3)      As per one of the decisions of the Hon'ble High court of Delhi,  "the lower courts have no power to prosecute a person for contempt of court". 'A perusal of provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act would show that a court subordinate to high court has no powers to initiate proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act. Under the act, the high court alone can take cognizance of an alleged contempt having been committed in respect of subordinate courts,' the court said.
>
> 4)      Only higher courts can take cognizance of contempt committed by a person against lower judiciary.  In the same Judgments the court observed that "A subordinate court is supposed to send a reference of the matter to the high court. A subordinate court cannot itself assume jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act and issue show cause notice as to why contempt proceedings should not be initiated,
>
> 5)      Whether our group is private or public it doesn't matter much. What is imp is publication is any manner which scandalize or interfere with the administration of justice. This is to be decided by following the rule of law and facts and circumstances of the case.
>
> 6)      The contempt proceedings have to be used only sparingly and cautiously.
>
> 7)      The contempt Jurisdiction is not to protect an individual Judge. ( if  ICs are declared as Judges).it is meant for the maintenance of effective legal system.
>
> 8)      Contempt proceedings can be used only when the proceedings are pending. (In the instant case, the IC had already decided the case).
>
> 9)      Contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal and quasi-judicial.
>
> 10)  I shall be attaching the Scanned copy of the notice received by me soon (I have no scanner at Home, hence the difficulty), to prove the authenticity of my posting as some members mentioned.
>
> 11)  I started the thread on this topic since it is a new and vital subject on the powers of the CIC and our Fundamental rights. The aim is to invite the views of OUR enlightened members .Tomorrow our other members may be forced to face such situations
>
> 12)  I have addressed the complaint to Hon'ble President as "Her Excellency" in my complaint. No defamatory statement is made by me and it has nothing to do with the present notice issued by CIC.
>
> Regards.
>
> ________________________________
> From: VB Singh <vijay_bsingh@yahoo.co.in>
> To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Fri, 27 August, 2010 9:42:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C
>
>


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    rti_india-digest@yahoogroups.com
    rti_india-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    rti_india-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[rti_india] Violations by SIC Suresh Joshi.

 

Respected members.
 
Its time that all affected RTI 2nd appeal applicants of Mumbai  whoses orders are vague, or are pending like mine
7 orders are "DECISION TO BE TAKEN" over 2 years now, Complains u/s 18 are never attended
my 7 complains some  are over 3 years, could some  lawyer attached to the Bombay High Court
guide us and take up the matter at a reasonable cost, as many of us feel  frustrated, as per DOPT there is no time frame for which complains should be taken up, I wrote to the Governor with documentary evidence about 8 months back nothing happened, He has retired.C.K.Jamil. any one having similar complains can send xerox copies to me, but at High court we will need the original copy to present to court
kindly extend your support by sending me your e-mail address
positive advise and suggestions are welcome
 
Leslie Almeida
 

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___