Re: [RTI INDIA] Re: Steno of ex IC MAA seems to have joined new CIC ANT ! (and strange are the new CICs ways)

Dear Sir

You are receiving these emails because you are a member of the
rti_india googlegroup.

Membership of this group is only open to RTI experts who accept
invitations to join or who apply to join or are/were members of
RTI_India@yahoogroups. Membership to this group is strictly regulated
and has been built up very slowly over the course of 6 years.

You are most welcome to unsubscribe yourself if you feel that you do
not meet our rigorous criteria for membership or cannot contribute
anything worthwhile,

In passing I can suggest that there are many other RTI egroups better
suited for lesser mortals.

Sarbajit
Moderator

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 7:43 AM, SKR - GMail <1daffi@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am not a member of your mailing list. Please stop sending unsolicited
> emails to me
> Thanks.
>
> -- S.K.Rajendran
> 1daffi@gmail.com
> ===========================================
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sroy1947" <sroy1947@gmail.com>
> To: "RTI India : Right to Information, CIC" <rti_india@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, 13 November, 2010 11:24 PM
> Subject: [RTI INDIA] Re: Steno of ex IC MAA seems to have joined new CIC ANT
> ! (and strange are the new CICs ways)
>
>
> Dear Karira
>
> Before address your complaint about copy-pasting by MA's steno, I
> would like to list my own complaints against you.
>
> 1) We do not allow copy-pasting (aka "Cross Posting") to this group.
> This rule is being strictly enforced because of the recent mushrooming
> of various RTI e-groups.
>
> 2 Because you first posted to rtiindia.org and then copy-pasted to
> this group, all the links fail to work because of the way Kushal has
> (mis)configured the VB/php script..
> For eg. the first link in your email is actually
> http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_AT_C_2010_000743_M_45554.pdf
>
> 3) FYI what CIC(ANT) is doing is correct. If there is no reply from
> CPIO as well as FAA, then the route is 2nd Appeal (u/s 19) and not
> complaint (u/s 18). None of the grounds of section 18(1) are attracted
> in this situation. (please don't say but what about 18(1)(c) "who has
> not been given a response to a request for information or access to
> information within the time limit specified under this Act;")
>
> 4) I am sure that the many RTI gurus you have over at rtiindia.org
> would already have told you this by now ;-)
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
> On Nov 13, 9:50 am, C K Jam <rtiwan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Members are well aware of the copy/paste decisions of ex IC MAA.
>>
>>
>
>