[HumJanenge] Re: STICKY : Vexatious & frivolous RTI misusers

Dear Sandeep

It is evident you set very low standards for yourself and other people
to adhere to.
Emotions have their place, but not when it comes to "larger PUBLIC
interest".

1) We do not know what information the applicant asked for - so we
cannot speculate that it falls within section 4 disclosure.

2) The CIC order clearly records that CPIO gave him all the
information sought. This is not disputed. Both the appeals were only
to get additional funding to save his son's life. As per me this is
clearly a case of MISUSE of RT Act. RTI is a TIMEBOUND procedure,
hence people resort to using it as a way to either a) "bring their
problem to notice of somebody senior" b) "blackmail the public
department by their RTI" c) Sheer ignorance of RTI Act d) Misguidance
by NGOs and activists (many of whom charge money for providing such
dubious "service"), e) Generating a "cause of action" to go to court
with . I have experienced 100's of cases where NGOs are charging ,
say, Rs. 500 for submitting these "PETITIONS".

3) The problem is that RTI is time bound with a 2 layer appeals
process and decisions published on the internet (some of which reach
the media). In contrast the Public Grievance redressal mechanism is
slow, clunky and (equally) ineffective..

4) Your Bareilly example is a prime example of MISUSE of RTI Act. I
dont see how you can defend such people.
.
5) About Relief funds being used for political purposes. This is well
known. Of course RTI should be used to investigate such things. Who
knows, you could either get "lucky" like Mr. Shailesh Gandhi or
highly unlucky like Mr. Muzib-Ur-Rehman (both of whom sought the same
information) - the difference being that Rehman obtained it and is now
in fear of his life - whereas Gandhi chose to compromise.

Sarbajit

On Jul 20, 9:06 pm, Sandeep gupta <drsandgu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I fully agree with you on first link but i disagree w.r.t. second
> link. What is wrong in a person seeking information about relief fund?
> after all this information was part of section 4 of the act. why
> should the citizens not know about the money received under prime
> minister relief fund, money distributed with list of beneficiaries.
> What is wrong in a person wanting to know something about relief fund
> and use it for seeking assistance for his son. How is he misusing RTI
> act? RTI act is not only for public interest purpose. a citizen can
> seek information for personal interest purpose.
> Let me give an example:
> At Indian Veterinary Research institute, Bareilly, a person was not
> given admission to PhD. when he filed RTI, he was given admission in
> lieu of withdrawal of RTI application.
> Now lets come to relief fund:
> We have found using RTI that CM Relief fund in Punjab was used for
> political purpose. a PIL is pending in high court. Can a citizen not
> suspect that something could be wrong with PM relief fund.
> i have filed a number of applications and have got information to the
> tune of thousands of pages (per application). a person at first
> instance would say that it is misuse of RTI act. In all the cases, on
> scrutiny of documents received, we found something fishy.
>
> On 7/20/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dear HJ members
>
> > Group Moderators have decided to experiment with concept of "STICKY"
> > threads.
>
> > As an experiment, (and to counter arguments of the NCPRI harami
> > brigade that there is no such animal as a vexatious RTI activist), our
> > first STICKY thread is titled "Vexatious & frivolous RTI misusers".
>
> > Please keep adding more and more examples of such RTI parasites who
> > are giving a bad name to genuine RTI users. List members are also
> > encouraged to suggest more STICKY thread topics.
>
> > Please also keep the subject line intact, especially the term STICKY
> > (eg. by replying using the "REPLY" option in your email-client).
>
> > READ the 2 links given below. BOTH of them are "irresponsible" RTIs,
> > but the 2nd one is an understandable example of RTI "misuse" showing
> > limits of RTI.
>
> > Sarbajit
>
> >http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SM_A_2011_001884_M_87329.pdf
> >http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SM_A_2011_002011_M_87330.pdf
>
> --
> Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
> 1722, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
> Phone: 91-99929-31181