[RTI INDIA] Re: Fwd: [HumJanenge] Former CIC challenges notice by CIC

Oh and I forgot to mention that at the meeting of the Selection
Committee Mr L.K.Advani put his foot down and refused to
accept Mr Ansari as the next CIC. And which also explains
why Mr Ansari is such a popular choice for interlocutor in J&K.

Sarbajit

On Nov 2, 10:20 pm, sroy1947 <sroy1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sir
>
> I must respectfully say that you are being somewhat parsimonious with
> the truth (see below) which has been circulating on internet forums
> (and established by dox obtained in RTI) ..
>
> 1) You also endorsed a copy of that letter to Secretary/Personnel
> knowing very well that in terms of the Indian Constitution the
> President is bound to act on the.aid and advice of the Council of
> Ministers.
>
> 2) In your letter you requested that you be relieved from office by
> 30.Oct..2009
>
> 3) You had already arranged that in view of the short time available
> that the senior-most Information Commissioner be recommended for
> elevation as CIC. That it was your understanding that Mr M.M.Ansari
> was the senior-most IC based on his date of joining the Commission. It
> was also your understanding that Mr Ansari would serve a full term
> of 5 years as Chief Information Commissioner based on his date of
> birth and the peculiar wording of sections 12/13.
>
> 4) That the PM agreed that meeting of Selection Committee could be
> fixed on either 26 or 27 Sept 2009.
>
> 5) That in the meantime Mr Tiwari called your bluff and established
> that he was the senior-most Information Commissioner through certain
> legal precedents
>
> 6) That accordingly you deemed it prudent to withdraw your resignation
> on your own despite the fact that there is no express provision in law
> for you to do so. By doing so you disregarded the judgment of the
> Supreme Court relied upon in Ms Omita Paul's resignation pertaining to
> articles 124 and 217 of the Const which held that the resignation is
> effective immediately upon its being submitted.
>
> 7) And which is why I submitted that it would be much better to stick
> to the official line, ie. that your resignation was conditional,
> unlike Ms Omita Paul's.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Nov 2, 7:46 pm, wajahat <whabibul...@nic.in> wrote:
>
> > My letter was addressed and sent to the President
> > Wajahat
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: sroy 1947 <sroy1...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Tuesday, November 2, 2010 2:04 pm
> > Subject: Re: [RTI INDIA] Re: Fwd: [HumJanenge] Former CIC challenges notice by CIC
> > To: rti_india@googlegroups.com
>
> > Sir
>
> > The DoPT has categorically informed citizens in RTI that
>
> > 1) Your resignation was not effective immediately because it was conditional upon your expressed wish to be relieved of office by Madam President, thereby distinguishing your case from Ms Omita Paul's
>
> > 2) There is no provision in the RTI Act for a resignation, once submitted, to be withdrawn.
>
> > 3) There is a laid down procedure for resignations such as yours to be forwarded to Madam President via the DoPT after obtaining the approval of the Minister. This is usually done upto a month after the date of the resignations. In your case, the Minister declined to forward your resignation to Madam President. In other words, Madam President never even had a chance to read your letter of resignation and had to be content with press reports.
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 8:05 AM, wajahat <whabibul...@nic.in> wrote:
>
> > Silly! A fictional media report does not a notice make. And i did withdraw the resignation. It can hardly be' unwise' to conceal the truth
> > Wajahat