Re: [rti_india] Why CIC / SIC are not court of record

Friday, August 20, 2010

Re: [rti_india] Why CIC / SIC are not court of record

You have cleared a thing that there is dissentment among Information Commissioners in CIC and people have to face the consequences.

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 Fri, 20/8/10, sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com>
Subject: [rti_india] Why CIC / SIC are not court of record
To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, 20 August, 2010, 6:10 PM

Vijay has raised an important question on publication of CIC's decisions

1) Important HC / SC decisions are legally binding on their inferior courts / tribunals, and thereby affect the public, so they are required to be widely known.

2) A "court of record" has the power to fine / imprison for contempt of itself. The CIC does not fall under this category.

3) The CIC is merely a "tribuna;" to review administrative actions / decisions of the Govt pertaining to Right to Information. We must not make the mistake of elevating CIC to an exalted position, they were babus and continue to be babus. The word babu BTW derives from 'baboon' a species of red-bummed monkey.

4) A court of record is entitled to have a seal. Now that the Regulations are gone, so has the CIC's "seal".

5) A court of record can have a "registrar". Similarly with Mnagement Regulations gone so should the Registrars.

Wise men like ANT and MLS know all this, so the frequency of their orders coming on-net has decreased. So Bijay shouldn't expect any action from WH on his email acknowledgment against ANT's non-orders on-net.

Sarbajit