Sunday, January 8, 2012

Re: Re: Fwd: [.RTI.] [HumJanenge] Mr. Bhaskar Prabhu defends RTI blackmailers

Dear Mr Modi

1) Till 04.06.2011 you did not know who I was. In fact you asked Mr.
Karira "Who is this S. Roy and what are his credentials, if you know
about it"

2) I OTH have known about you and your motivated articles in the
Indian Express (based mainly on handouts and selective leaks from
interested parties during the "polyester import" scams) for quite some

3) It seems that nowadays no credible newspaper is willing to hire
you, so you describe yourself as "a senior journalist now not
affiliated to any media organisation". I am of course recalling from
memory your Full Bench CIC decision in Ketan Kantilal Modi versus CBEC
where Mr. A.N.Tiwari (ji) made a 'kachumber" of your submissions (and
your old associate Mr. Shailesh Gandhi could do nothing about it).
Knowing Mr. Tiwari's manner of drafting orders - the text of the Full
Bench leaves no doubt that he also considers you to be a egoistic
"corruption fighter / blackmailer" misuing RTI Act by filing vexatious
amd multiple RTI requests deliberately to the wrong PAs who deserves
to be taken down a notch (??) or two. In fact you gave Mr Tiwari-JI
the perfect opportunity to screw all RTI blackmailers like you who
abuse provisions of the RTI Act (such as 6.3)

4) It also seems that nowadays you have elevated yourself to an RTI
PROFESSIONAL" and you charge 50% of money you "recover" for
other.people by misusing RTI Act. Your M.O closely fits that of "RTI
blackmailers" whom Bhaskar had "defended" in that news report. It is
thus clear why "empty vessels make so much noise" and why "birds of a
feather flock together".

5) I also recall a news report quoting you
as saying

"For example, a client approached me after the Bharat Sanchar Nigam
Ltd (BSNL) failed to pay him for stationery he had supplied it till
2005. The amount was Rs 30,000 and the client offered me a 50% share
if the RTI route helped him get it. As soon as I filed the
application, the BSNL issued a cheque and the amount was split between
me and my client. I have now filed a second appeal seeking
compensation of an equivalent amount which will come to me. Even the
cost of litigation will be paid to me."

This is a real money making approach to RTI by all the banias (aka
"bapus" / Gandhis) etc masquerading as RTI activists, and honest /
secular citizens would have no hesitation in describing such persons
as TOUTS and a BLOT ('kalank' ) to all true RTI activists .


On 1/8/12, Ketan Modi <> wrote:
> Dear All,
> In normal course I do not participate in such discussion and continue doing
> my
> work. But Mr. Roy is generally in a habit to engage people by extending and
> enforcing on us, unsuspecting citizens. In my 25 year life as a journo I
> have come
> across many Mr. Roys who likes to throw eggs on others at the slightest
> pretext.
> Now coming to his posting on Mr. Prabhu, I wish to clarify that he is a
> distinguished member of RTI community in Mumbai and Maharashtra. He has done
> a yeoman service when along with three other members he forced the state SIC
> to
> direct the MCGM not to charge for documents at whims and fancies and made
> the
> public authority to follow the rules in letter and spirit. It is because of
> Mr.
> Prabhu that today Mumbaikars pay only Rs.2 per page for obtaining property
> assessment documents for which prior to this order MCGM was charging a
> whopping
> Rs.260 per year.
> Now coming to the words "in defense of blackmailers" which Mr. Roy has
> preferred
> to anoint Mr. Prabhu with. Being a journalist, I had faced the similar music
> of
> being dubbed as a "blackmailer" by none other than Mr. Manmohan Singh, the
> so
> called most honest PM. The issue was that as the FM he had introduced a
> scheme
> called value based advance license which was subsequently deleted due to
> constant
> campaign against it by yours truly. In one of the news piece on a particular
> Joint
> DGFT who had issued Rs.400 crore worth of import license to import
> commodities
> free of customs duty without being authorised. CBI had booked him and he had
> told
> the investigators that he was related to Manmohan. I had inserted this in my
> news
> piece with full knowledge of the background of the case being briefed to my
> immediate superior. I had categorically mentioned that this officer claimed
> to be
> a relative of Manmohan but the latter was not involved in the scam. Next
> morning
> even as the paper hit the stand and delivered to Manmohan, after reading it
> he
> called up my editor and protested that I was blackmailing him. My editor a
> prominent name, shirked in his bed. He called up my resident editor and
> started
> shouting at him. He in turn shouted at my immediate superior whom I had kept
> in
> the loop before filing the story. This gent calls me to say that Manmohan
> has
> termed you as the blackmailer for writing what was published in the day's
> edition.
> On reaching office I went to my resident editor accompanied by my immediate
> boss
> and asked him "do you know the meaning of blackmaling?' He was stunned when
> I told
> him that blackmailing means you have done something wrong of which I learn
> and
> contact you directly or indirectly to ask for some favour in cash or kind.
> Both of
> you know that I had neither contacted Manmohan but had given him a clean
> chit.
> Both my bosses agreed with me that it was not a case of black mailing but
> inferiority complex that Manmohan suffered fearing inculpated in criminal
> cases.
> The scheme introduced by him known as VABAL was deleted because of rampant
> misuse
> by a few thousand importers causing losses to the tune of Rs.1 lakh crore
> and my
> campaign forced him to delete. In that case even Chidambaram had as next FM
> helped
> those who had misused the scheme through ill gotten double benefits by
> usurping
> the power of a central excise superintendent and writing of duty worth
> several
> crores. What is more intriguing is the CAG took notice of my news articles
> and
> concluded that nation lost lakhs of corers but in the next report ractified
> that
> there was no loss to the nation. I have narrated this story mainly for the
> benefit
> of the likes of Mr.Roys who probably genuinely believe that they are
> knowalls and
> they alone have powers to dub others with paints of their choice.
> Let me brief you more case of Mr. Roy's bias. He had terms former CIC ANT as
> one
> of the most honest and competent officers. Let me share my experience with
> all of
> you that ANT had in one of my case referred the second appeal to the full
> bench
> headed by the then CIC WH with SG thrown in. In my written submission I had
> pointed out the errors in ANT's order referring the matter to full bench.
> This
> made them feel black and blue and passed a 35 page order through which they
> changed the game by making transfer under 6(3) to be treated as a fresh
> application for which applicant was made to pay fresh fees. From where on
> earth
> these gentlemen had drawn powers to introduce something which even the
> legislature
> was not aware? And this order was subsequently cited as a preceding case law
> by
> all the ICs. Recently during an public interaction with SG when I had raised
> the
> issue he had no answer. He was also looking black and blue when I raised the
> issue
> of sticking to rules in letter and spirit while dealing with RTI Appellants
> who
> are not trained as professional lawyers. Even the Supreme Court waives
> technical
> lapses when the litigant is not represented by professionally trained
> people. I
> have experienced this even in Mumbai High Court.
> Hence instead of fighting for non-issues and dubbing all of us with choicest
> colours likes of Mr.Roys must concentrate on using the most potent weapon
> that
> this democracy has empowered us with and strengthen the same. By calling Mr.
> Prabhu or citing him being reported as a defender of black mailers, Mr. Roy
> has
> not only undermined the role of Mr. Prabhu but has exhibited his extra
> ordinary
> sense of being a ignorable pest. I reiterate that Mr. Prabhu is a proud
> member of
> our community and deserves to be praised for what he is doing to the society
> and
> Mr. Roys must desist from using his tainted brush which describes ANT whose
> ego
> was hurt when his injudiciousness was pointed out to him.
> Jai Hind
> Ketan Modi

No comments:

Post a Comment