[HumJanenge] Re: REMINDER Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj (ex-MP)

Dear Girish

I hope that you will at least freely admit the following

1) That your original message to this group concerning Nitish Bhardwaj
(ex-MP) was posted/circulated to this group - as it is.

2) That as Moderator of this group, I forwarded the substance of your
grievance very promptly to Mr. Mishra. Before doing so, I had taken
the precaution of verifying the details you provided and also a
PROBABLE reason for his action (which you seem to have missed out).

3) That I followed it up, and managed to get a reply from Mr. Mishra
addressing the "meat" of the problem.

4) That throughout my dialogue with Mr. Mishra I was extremely
polite / respectful and civilised.

5) I think we can safely assume that such incidents may not again come
to light IN THE NEAR FUTURE in CIC(SMS)'s registry.

6) As all my actions were done openly and cc'ed to this group, there
is no reason why other citizens / members could not have done the
same. I can truthfully say that I have got no special favours from
CIC(SM) - and in fact I have not spoken to him in last 2 years.

In conclusion I maintain that if every citizen is alert and exercises
his democratic rights properly (ie. by using right channels in a
decent manner) the system can and will respond.

When the system does not respond (and I will post examples of how I
tackle this) to decent approach then the pressure must be "ratcheted"
up. (PS: For instance I have slapped at least 2 senior public servants
publicly - without any comebacks. I have got a prominent Minister to
resign, I have got MLAs who crossed paths with me replaced and so on),
so if you still think I am stupid and naive - more power to your
elbow.

Sarbajit

On Jul 30, 9:42 am, Girish Mittal <rtng.mit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  Dear Sarbajit,
>
> As you see Mr. Mishra seems to have replied from his hotmail account. I
> don't know if we can treat his response as official response!!!
>
> Even if we consider as official response, if you believe what Mishraji is
> saying, you are either naive or stupid or both or are feigning naivete,
> stupidity or both. Consider the following:
>
> (a) Mr. Mishra does not hears cases from files, he does it exclusively on
> his computer. So the opportunity of files getting mixed by DEOs are
> virtually non existent. Besides files of 2011 and 2012 do not get mixed.
> Even the cases of senior citizens of 2012 are heard when the cases of 2012
> being hearing.
> (b) Why did this so-called mix-up happen only to an ex-MP and not to
> ordinary citizen like Mr. Karira or Mr. Mittal? Ask Mr. Karira how his
> files were "misplaced" by CIC?
> (c) It is not wrongly taken up before some others, it is wrongly taken over
> by many others. Mr. Mishra is still hearing 2011 cases and this case is of
> 2012, did it not ring alarm bells to him?
> (d) I do not know about the MP/IAS connection, so I will not comment on the
> same...
>
> Regards.
>
> Girish Mittal
>
>  [image: More message actions]
>  Jul 28 (1 day ago)
>  Dear Girish and other HJ List members
>
> I hope that this clarification from respected CIC S.Mishra-ji suitably
> clarifies that there was no "hanky panky" in Nitish Bharadwaj's
> hearing schedule and the perceived priority was due to some Registry
> error.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: satyananda mishra <satyanandamis...@hotmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 14:58:45 +0000
> Subject: RE: REMINDER Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj
>
> (ex-MP)
> To: sroy...@gmail.com
>
> Dear Mr Roy,
>           I am sorry for the delayed reply. It was due to the fact
> that I was trying to find out how this appeal got ahead of some
> others. The Registry sends hearing notice largely on a first come
> first served basis except for the following occasional adjustments:
>                    a) on account of the availability of
> Video-conferencing facility, and                       b) hearing of
> multiple cases of the same appellant or the same public authority
>            In the case of Nitish Bhardwaj, however, his case file got
> mixed up in the bundle of cases relating to the Cabinet Secretariat
> and the hearing notice was sent by the DEO in-charge on the assumption
> that it was in the right serial order. It was wrongly fixed and was
> taken up ahead of some others. The Registry and the DEO have been
> pulled up for this lapse and warned not to make such a mistake in
> future. Wherever I decide to take up a case on priority on the
> accepted grounds, I give written instruction in the case file. In this
> case, I had given no such instruction. Thus, it was a clerical error,
> at the most.
>            The insinuation that the case was taken up presumably
> because the wife of the appellant is a Madhya Pradesh Cadre IAS
> officer is both unkind and mischievous. I hope this clarifies the
> position.
>            I am grateful to you for bringing this to my notice and
> look forward to you for your continued watch over our working in the
> CIC. Regards. Satyananda Mishra
>
> From: s.mis...@nic.in
> To: satyanandamis...@hotmail.com
> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:40:09 +0530
> Subject: Fwd: REMINDER Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj
> (ex-MP)
>
> --Forwarded Message Attachment--
> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 08:12:09 +0530
> From: sroy...@gmail.com
> Subject: REMINDER Re: Clarification in case of Mr. Nitish Bharadwaj (ex-MP)
> To: s.mis...@nic.in
>
> To:
> Shri Satyananda Mishra
> Chief Information Commissioner of India
> Central Information Commission
>
> 24-July-2012
>
> Respected Sir
>
> I refer to my appended request for clarification concerning the
> purported "out-of-turn" hearing which was given to Mr. Nitish
> Bharadwaj (ex-MP) in a recent appeal decided by you in Case
> CIC/SM/A/2012/000231 on 20.July.2012.
>
> As the sequence in which cases are taken up for disposal in the
> Commission has considerable public interest  especially considering
> the very long pendency in high profile Public Authorities you have
> retained to yourself, I again request you to kindly clarify if any
> "out of turn" favour was indeed given to the appellant in that matter
> and the reasons, if any.
>
> yours faithfully
>
> Sarbajit Roy
> New Delhi