Re: [rti_india] Re: Complaint of misbehaviour against cic inforamation commissioner AN TIWARI [2

Dear Sarbajit Roy,

I strongly differ with you regarding MR ANT. In my two cases of complaint against CPIO-SEBI for providing incorrect information, although I had given him evidence, he just dismissed by writing that my complaint is false. I was going to USA, so did not move to High Court.

I asked him after receiving copy of orders, which of my allegations are false, but I never received any reply.

I asked by RTI application the same question, in reply I was offered that I can inspect the file, in which I could not find out any thing, which suggests that my allegations were false.

This is just one example, I have so many examples in cases of other persons.

S.K.Kapoor

From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, August 19, 2010 10:21:16 PM
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Complaint of misbehaviour against cic inforamation commissioner AN TIWARI [2

Dear Satishji

1) The very fact that you are a member of this group means that you are not a common information seeker. Conversely if after so many years here you still feel that you are a common information seeker then obviously we have failed.

2) Common information seekers will have no problems using RTI Act if they ask for common (ordinary) information, in fact ICs go out of their way to assist such people - as one IC says "aapko aam khaana hain ya gutli ginna hain" going out of their way to use the moral power of their office to help ordinary people to achieve results even if it means going beyond RTI .The problems start when so-called common information seekers start using RTI to settle scores, rake up dead personal issues, to "fight" corruption, to do low intensity social reform, to blackmail etc etc. The Information Commissioners are not fools and identify such people within a minute. In such situations, the ICs must assist the P/A (PIOs) to ensure that the letter and spirit of the RTI Act is adhered to insofar as exempted information is not given to undeserving (not acting in larger public interest) applicants.

3) IC ANT is actually one of the most honest ICs, and this is what makes him so universally (un)appreciated. Many people would be very happy if he was not there so that corrupt, legally bankrupt and dishonest decisions are given (as some of the other ICs are doing). and the institution of the CIC is thereby weakened. Privately even Mr Habibullah's staff who have been with him for many years admit that Mr H is not a patch on Mr Tiwari insofar as procedure and respect is concerned.

4) Lastly, where is it written in RTI Act that decisions of the CIC are to be published on the internet (computer network) so that the whole world can read them ?. (Read this statement carefully). Our other star finalist in the poll IC(MLS) has also started pulling his decisions off the CIC website. This is also proving to be a blessing to citizens who are getting fed up with receiving huge quantities of SPAM from foreign financed spies.

Sarbajit

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsatish@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Mr Sarbajit

It is not always that members cannot put up their cases before IC Mr Tiwari properly. He is very shrewd bureaucrat, knows how to hijack issues, I have come accross number of cases of information seekers in which he has blindly favoured PIOs, Not only this his behaviour towards common information seeker is not good.

I do not want to comment on his knowledge of act, but certainally his implementation is not in favour of information seekers. He puts words into mouth of respondents to suggest on which ground he can refuse information.

As regards to your saying that his orders are not challanged in Court. The reason behind is that poor information seeker cannot afford to move to High Court.

How many of his orders are posted on Web-site? I have found hardly 10%.

S.K.Kapoor

From: sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com>

To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, August 18, 2010 9:24:44 PM

Subject: [rti_india] Re: Complaint of misbehaviour against cic inforamation commissioner AN TIWARI [2

Dear Friends

1) I have assisted group members in at least 20 hearings before Mr Tiwari. Very often these are cases where the appellants could not put across their points themselves, got bad orders and started bad mouthing him.

2) Mr Tiwari understands the RTI Act incredibly well (not surprising because HE drafted it). If members started thinking like him (and me) they would not have problems using the RTI Act or getting information even at 2nd Appeal stage. PIOs and P/As respect him (and his orders) tremendously, and his orders are not challenged in court as often (or as easily) as the other ICs. But, to get a favourable order from Mr Tiwari you have to a) establish your bonafides for seeking the information b) be conservative in your interpretation of RTI Act c) not come across as a habitual RTI misuser. <-- Tests which RTI activists don't pass easily, or at all.

3) I don't get (or seek ) special treatment before any IC.

4) ANT is correct, the preamble is not part of the Act and has nothing to do with it. It was added for the benefit of "silly little ...". For eg. on "corruption" -- Where exactly does the RTI Act proper have anything substantial to say on "corruption" - and yet all the "silly little .." insist that RTI Act is to control corruption !!!

5) Here is the only decision Mr ANT has passed in one of my own cases.
http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/Decision_30112006_12.pdf
Tiwari-ji is so modest that he did not allow his name to be placed in the decision, unlike the other 4 ICs of the CIC.

6) We can always have a repoll on such questions as Sid has suggested.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, Hari Goyal <rtidwarka@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr. Sarbajit.Roy,
>
> You are lucky that you have experience of ANT's positive approach but majority
> of RTI activists in Delhi have very bad experience with the author of the RTI
> Act, 2005. To me he told me 'Preamble of the Act' has nothing to do with the
> provisions of the main act. That was our wishful thinking. Should we extend his
> argument to the Preamble of the Indian Constitution also?
>
>
> Hari Goyal
> 011-25082239
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: sarbajitr <sroy1947@...>
> To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tue, 17 August, 2010 9:47:50 PM
> Subject: [rti_india] Re: Complaint of misbehaviour against cic inforamation
> commissioner AN TIWARI [2
>
>
> No Sir, you are wrong.
>
> I have appeared before all the ICs of CIC (except Dipak Sandhu), and I can vouch
> that if there is any 1 single IC I would want my case to be listed before for a
> really important piece of information it would be A.N.Tiwari.
>
> The reason ANT's decisions are not being uploaded to CIC website is very well
> known in CIC and has nothing to do with Mr Tiwari's probity.
>
> It was a very sad day(s) for Indian RTI when
> a) Mr Tiwari was not made Chief Information Commissioner in 2005
> b) When Mr Habibullah decided to stick on like a leech /limpet in 2009 and again
> denied Mr Tiwari the C'IC-ship.
>
> And just to remind everyone, in an open poll conducted here last year, an
> overwhelming majority of our voting members decided that Mr Tiwari was amongst
> our best Central ICs and by a very wide margin.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "umapathi" <umi_sbs@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > yes sir, you r right. His behaviour and kind of decisions he is announcing
> >definately gives a clue that he is in hand in glove with the CPIO and Public
> >Authorities. He is unfit to continue in the post and deserves to be removed. But
> >as per RTI Provision, the removal of the IC's are very difficult.All the victims
> >of this AN TIWARI should write to the Hon'ble President and cheif CIC to bring a
> >pressure to remove him. Then only AN Tiwari will mend his approach towards RTI
> >applicant.His continuation in the same post would do more harm to the efficiency
> >of the RTI Act. Regards.
> >
> > --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, VB Singh <vijay_bsingh@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Umapathiji.
> > > Ã‚
> > > It is not first the time that AN Tiwari has behaved like this. His behaviour
> >is like that only with all RTI applicants. He is against the RTI Act and I
> >wonder who has selected him to be Information commissioner. Same thng has
> >happended with one of an upright officer of Mumbai customs on 08.03.2010 and
> >this Tiwari has gone to the extent of directing Chief Commissioner of Customs,
> >Mumbai ZoneI -I to make adverse entry in his ACR.
> >
> > > Ã‚
> > > All CPIOs and public authorities whoÃ‚ intend to deny information take help of
> >decisions delivered by him. His decisions are also not being uploaded in
> >website, for reason best known to him. Undersigned has represented to Chief
> >Information Commissioner of India on this issue. After decision of Hon'ble
> >Justice Ravindra Bhat in the matter ofÃ‚ Bhagat Singh by Delhi High Court, he has
> >started taking help of another decision dated 10.11.2006 of same court to agree
> >withÃ‚ decisions of CPIOs and Appellate Authority,Ã‚ which is illegal.
> > > Ã‚
> > > He has taken certain circular from CPIO to substantiate his decision. I
> >suspect that he is in hand and glowes with CPIOs and Public Authorities not to
> >impose penalty on them
> > > Ã‚
> > > President of India and the Chief Information Commissioner are requested to
> >take punitive action against Tiwari and recommend stoppage of his pensions.
> > > Ã‚
> > > With regards,
> > > VB Singh
> > >
> > > --- On Tue, 17/8/10, umapathi s <umi_sbs@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > From: umapathi s <umi_sbs@>
> > > Subject: [rti_india] Complaint of misbehaviour against cic inforamation
> >commissioner AN TIWARI [2 Attachments]
> > > To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
> > > Date: Tuesday, 17 August, 2010, 2:25 PM
> > >
> > >
> > > Ã‚
> > >
> > >
> > > [Attachment(s) from umapathi s included below]
> > >
> > >
> > > DEAR MEMBERS, i wish to bring to the kind attention of our community members
> >about the indecent and arrogant misbehaviour of information commissioner AN
> >TIWARI .He insulted me i..e complainant in front of the respondents i.e. total 6
> >members and made objectional remarks against me during his proceddings . He was
> >further giving suggestions to respondents how to avoid providng information and
> >was favouring the respondents. He didn't dispose each and every appeals cum
> >complaints seperately and didn't consider the grounds and prayers mentioned
> >therein. Decision is yet to be announced. As his behaviour is unbecoming of a
> >information commissioner, I immediately brought this aspect of his misbehaviour
> >by way of complaint to the notice of Cheif CIC , W. Habibbullah with a request
> >not to list my pending appeals and complaints before him. Further, I also
> >submitted a detailed complaint to the Hon'ble President of India urging for his
> >removal under the provision of
> > > the Act. copy of the complaints is attahced herewith , kindly offer your
> >suggestions. we need to resist such misbehaviouron the part of the ICs with
> >strong opposition so that they become aware of their duties and responsibilites
> >of adjudicaing the dispute as a Judge. Now they are acting as a corrupt public
> >servants. It is high time, such information commissioner should be exposed to
> >public of their corrupt motives. Regards.
> > >
> >
>