Mr Sarbajit,
Wow, cannot believe your appreciation of IC(SS) !
I do not know about the "seasoned bureaucrat" part, but she definitely
passes strange orders as an IC.
Here is a sample:
The Commission has received second appeal dated 24.8.2011 from Shri
S.R. Yadav, Bikaner, u/s 19 of the RTI Act, 2005..............
.
.
.
3. The appellant filed first appeal dated 7.4.2011 before appellate authority
& Chairman, Bar Council of Rajasthan, Jodhpur, which was also not decided
by the appellate authority.
4. In order to avoid multiple proceedings under the RTI Act, the matter is
remitted to Appellate Authority & Chairman, Bar Council of Rajasthan,
Jodhpur, with a copy of second appeal, with the following directions:
i) In case the first appeal dated 7.4.2011 has not been disposed of by AA,
he should dispose of the first appeal by passing a speaking order, after
hearing the parties in the matter, within two weeks of receipt of this
order.
ii) In case AA has already disposed of the firstappeal, he should furnish a
copy of his order to the appellant within one week of receipt of this................
========
(NOTE: There are many more similar ones)
Isn't the CIC the second appellate authority ?
RTIwanted
From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 3, 2012 7:33 PM
Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: No delay at CIC. 45 days to hearing/disposal.
.
.
.
IC(SS) is a seasoned bureaucrat, she doesn't make such foolish
mistakes. If I blindly had to chose between supporting an order of
hers versus the say of some disgruntled RTI activist, I would chose
her order any day.
Sarbajit
>
IC(SS) is a seasoned bureaucrat, she doesn't make such foolish
mistakes. If I blindly had to chose between supporting an order of
hers versus the say of some disgruntled RTI activist, I would chose
her order any day.
Sarbajit
>
No comments:
Post a Comment