Dear Sarbajit,
Why you have to post msg as "cetain IC" if you have read the name or know it quote the same. If any ICs is disposal rate is within 60 to 90 days I feel it sounds ok. And I feel you might have left out the listing of complaints for disposal
Inservcie for RTI
Bhaskar Prabhu
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 1:03 PM, sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com> wrote:
Somebody had posted about how a certain IC was the
most efficient and hardworking. This is unfortunately
not borne out by facts.
On 30-Aug-2010 the no. of cases listed before ICs is
as below
CIC(WB) = 2
IC(AT) = 9
IC(SM) = 14
IC(AD) = 16
IC(SG) = 12
IC(MLS) = 11
On 31-Aug-2010 the nos are:-
CIC(WB) = 2
IC(AT) = 6
IC(SM) = 17
IC(AD) = 12
IC(SG) = 12
IC(MLS) = 7
In terms of pendency (approx), some inconsistencies due to
recent reallocations.
CIC(WB) = JUNE 2009
IC(AT) = MAY 2010
IC(SM) = DEC 2009
IC(AD) = MARCH 2010 (AVERAGED)
IC(SG) = JULY 2010
IC(MLS) = FEB 2010 (AVERAGED)
Will the lazy bum please follow IC(SM)'s example
Sarbajit
__._,_.___
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment