Shri MLS and best IC! Why r u joking? Which group has conferred this award and before conferring the award, whether it has taken the opinion of the members of that group.
I can site many erroneous decisions by him against the Delhi Development Authority. It is a separate matter that I have not challenged them the the High Court but this fact does not mean that the appellants are satisfied with his decisions. In many deserving cases, he had never penalized the CPIO.
In the past, he used to start proceedings by making remark targetting the Appellant whether if wants to eat the mangoes or want to count the seed (Gutali). (Aam khane se matlab hai yaa gutali ginne se). Tell me your grievance and that would be settled implying do not press for the information.
Respondent to my complaint to the CCIC, MLS refused to hear one of my appeal against DDA and recommended for its transfer to CCIC which was later on heard by some other Shri Shailesh Gandhi, IC. In fact, I was happy on this decision of Shri MLS. However, I cound not attend the hearing in that case as have not received the notice of hearing due to change of my address.
From: C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com>
To: "humjanenge@googlegroups.com" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, 24 November 2011 5:20 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] What is happening to the IC voted as the "best" by this group ?
What is happening to the IC voted as the "best" by this group ?
This matter was originally scheduled for hearing for today dated 22.11.2011.
However, the Registery of the Commission had adjourned this matter to 26.12.2011 due
to administrative reasons. It appears that notice to this effect did not reach the Public
Authority on account of which Capt. Amit Mohan and Advocate B.K. Saini have
appeared before the Commission today. As Capt. Amit Mohan has travelled all the way
from Suratgarh(Rajasthan) and requests for the hearing today so that he does not have to
appear before the Commission again at considerable Government cost and as the Counsel
appearing for the Public Authority is also present before the Commission, I have decided
to hear this matter today itself and dispose it of as per law.
What happened to Item 7 of the Appeal Procedure Rules ?
What happened to Principles of Natural Justice ?
How many times any appellants have been heard by IC MLS in the absence of "respondents" and orders passed based on record ?
Seems that IC MLS was in a hurry - he gives no reasons for denial of information for items 1, 4 and 5.
The first appeal was against the decision of CPIO for payment of additional fees (appellant invoked 7(6)).
So, CPIO agrees to give all information, FAA denies and CIC overturns FAA'S orders and does not give any reasons for only allowing part disclosure.
Also note that FAA has denied information on Sec 4(1)(b) citing Sec 7(9) and no commets from IC MLS regarding this.
RTIwanted
No comments:
Post a Comment