Re: [HumJanenge] Public Grievance concerning Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar

On 7/21/12, J. P. Shah <jpshah50@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> Why not lodge complaint with Central Vigilance Commission for corrupt
> practices in CIC.
>
>
>
> -J. P. SHAH 9924106490
> http://www.jps50.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> To: s.mishra <s.mishra@nic.in>; humjanenge <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, 21 July 2012 9:43 AM
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Public Grievance concerning Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar
>
>
> To:
>
> Shri. Satyananda Mishra
> Chief Information Commisisoner of India
> Central Information Commission (at New Delhi)
>
> BY EMAIL
>
> 21-July-2012
>
> Respected Sir
>
> I am caused to represent about the perverse and arbitrary listing of cases
> before your goodself for disposal when it concerns high level Respondents
> and the role of Mr.Pankaj Shreyaskar in this.
>
> I am caused to represent to you by a letter addressed to yourself by one Mr.
> C.J.Karira dated 16.July.2012 which I have appended below, and which makes
> pointed allegations against Mr.Pankaj Shreyaskar and other CIC officers, but
> mainly against Mr.Shreyaskar.
>
> As the details of "status" of complaints and appeals at the Central
> Information Commission is in the public domain, the citizens are pained to
> observe that your Registry is deliberately delaying hearing the appeals and
> complaints involving high profile Respondents. It is an open secret that Mr.
> Pankaj Shreyaskar is the person to be approached in the CIC to ensure that
> cases are delayed, files are lost or frivolous objections are raised. It is
> also an open secret that Mr.Shreyaskar, who has curiuosly been posted in
> Delhi at the CIC since as long as I can remember, was brought in by
> Mr.Wajahat Habibullah for the purpose of obfuscating and delaying high
> profile RTI requests when the previous officer, Dr. Munish Kumar, declined
> to be as pliable as Mr.Habibullah desired.
>
> By way of example, let me cite an instance concerning Mr. Subhash Chandra
> Agrawal. In Feb/March 2011 Mr. Agrawal filed 3 or 4 2nd Appeals to you and
> also Smt. Sushma Singh. . Smt. Sushma Singh disposed of Mr. Agrawal's 3
> cases within 3 months. On the other hand Mr. Aghrwal's matter before
> yourself concerning the National Advisory Council was delayed for over 15
> months and was only disposed of last week.
>
> Another such example is how Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar and Mr. Habibullah between
> them ensured that 2nd appeals aganst the CBI concerninmg the QUATTROCHI
> investigations were never listed for disposal and files wre repeatedly
> "lost" and CIC's computer records tampered with. After Mr. Habibullah
> demitted office, the "ruling powers" were contrained to ensure that CBI was
> taken out of RTI ambit to preclude the QUATTROCHI files from being disclosed
> under RTI process.
>
> The inescapable conclusion is that something is very rotten in the Registry
> Section(s) of the Central Information Commission. Kindly take urgent steps
> to resolve such problems for the future. As a precondition, it would be
> desirable if Mr.Pankaj Shreyaskar's excessively long stay in Delhi at the
> Commission is shortened in the larger public interestand so that reform can
> go through.
>
> I would be obliged if this email is acknowledged.
>
> yours sincerely
>
> Sarbajit Roy
> B-59 Defence Colony
> New Delhi 110024
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: C K Jam <rtiwanted@yahoo.com>
> Date: Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 8:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] "Only 3 complaints lost in CIC since 2005" records
> IC(SG)
> To: "humjanenge@googlegroups.com" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
>
>
>
>
> To:
> Mr
> Satyananda Mishra
> Chief
> Information Commissioner
> Central Information
> Commission
> August
> Kranti Bhawan
> New Delhi
>
>
> Date: 16 July
> 2012
>
> Dear Sir,
>
> RE: LONG PENDING COMPLAINTS IN THE
> CENTRAL INFORMATION
> COMMISSION
>
> Sir,
> for the last one year and on several occasions, I have brought to your
> notice
> my various Complaints which are long pending in the Commission.
>
> Although
> you have given verbal instructions to various officers and staff, in my
> presence, to list these on a priority basis, it seems that your officers and
> staff are continuously trying to delay the listing of these complaints on
> one
> pretext ore the other.
>
> The
> long pending Complaints are:
>
> S. No. Appeal/Complaint Nr. Filing Date Public Authority
> 1. CIC/SM/A/2011/901282 19-01-2010 AllahabadHigh Court
> 2. CIC/SM/A/2011/901284 19-01-2010 Andhra Pradesh High Court
> 3. CIC/SM/A/2011/901286 19-01-2010 Guwahati High Court
> 4. CIC/SM/A/2011/901287 19-01-2010 Chattisgarh High Court
> 5. CIC/SM/A/2011/901288 19-01-2010 GujaratHigh Court
> 6. CIC/SM/A/2011/901290 20-01-2010 Himachal Pradesh High Court
> 7. CIC/SM/A/2011/901293 21-01-2010 Jharkhand High Court
> 8. CIC/SM/A/2011/901295 21-01-2010 MP High Court
> 9. CIC/SM/A/2011/901285 23-01-2010 MadrasHigh Court
> 10. CIC/SM/A/2011/901289 24-01-2010 Orissa High Court
> 11. CIC/SM/A/2011/901316 24-01-2010 PatnaHigh Court
> 12. CIC/SM/A/2011/901147 03-03-2010 Punjab & Haryana High Court
> 13. CIC/SM/A/2011/91299 16-03-2010 Rajasthan High Court
> 14. CIC/SM/A/2011/901300 25-04-2010 SikkimHigh Court
> 15. CIC/SM/A/2011/901302 25-04-2010 Uttarakhand High Court
>
>
> As
> you can see from the above table, these have been pending for more than two
> and a half years !
>
> If
> anyone in the Commission had bothered to open these complaints and even
> glanced
> at them casually, he would have realized the effort I have put in to prepare
> these complaints – each Complaint took me at least 3 to 4 days.
>
> Firstly,
> these Complaints were "lost" by Mr
> Pankaj K P Shreyaskar, when he was Dpty. Registrar to the Ex CIC, Mr Wajahat
> Habibullah.
>
> I
> was asked to resubmit the Complaints. The resubmitted
> Complaints were once again "lost". These were finally registered by Mr
> Vijay Bhalla, the present Dpty. Registrar.
>
> I
> have tried my best to meet everyone from the Chief Information Commissioner
> in
> the Commission (including ex Chiefs Mr Habibullah and Mr Tiwari and
> yourself),
> Secretary (the past Secretary and the present Secretary), The Additional
> Secretary, Registrars, Designated Officers and Clerks, repeatedly and on
> several occasions even outside the Commission. I have written innumerable
> letters, emails and repeated reminders. But nothing has happened.
>
> Since
> you became the Chief Information Commissioner in January 2011, I have met
> you in
> person, several times on this issue as well as sent written letters and
> reminders. Based on these, you have issued instructions to your officers and
> staff – but they have even disobeyed and
> disregarded your own instructions.
>
> On
> December 28, 2011 while conducting a hearing against Ten High Courts on
> Section
> 4 suo moto disclosure, in the presence of at least twenty people,
> you instructed Mr Akash Deep Chakravarti, Mr Pankaj K P Shreyaskar and Mr
> Vijay
> Bhalla – to read these complaints, prepare a comparative chart and put up
> before you within 15 days.
> More than six months have passed, but they have still not done so.
>
> During
> my last conversation with Mr Vijay Bhalla, about a month ago, I was informed
> that if he lists these long pending Complaints, Mr Akash Deep Chakravarti
> and
> Mr Pankaj K P Shreyaskar are threatening him that there will be "Contempt of
> Court", since there is a stay order from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in
> relation to WP(C) 3530 of 2012, Order dated 23.05.2011 .
>
>
> I
> have personally read that stay order from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and
> it
> is obvious that the both Mr Chakravarti and Mr Shreyaskar are trying to
> shelter
> behind this particular stay order so that they can hide their inefficiency,
> lethargy and corrupt practices.
>
> The
> stay order has nothing to do with the subject matter of my above long
> pending
> Complaints and it is clear that both Mr Chakravarti and Mr Shreyaskar have
> neither read any of my Complaints and nor have they understood the stay
> order
> from the Hon'ble Delhi High Court.
>
> The
> only conclusions I can draw from this bitter
> experience is:
>
> 1. That
> your officers and staff are corrupt and amenable to extraneous influences
> since they have intentionally lost these complaints twice and have also
> disobeyed your repeated instructions.
>
> 2. Your
> officers and staff and Mr Pankaj K P Shreyaskar in particular, have some
> malicious vendetta against me because of which they are intentionally
> and deliberately trying to block the listing of these Complaints since 30
> months.
>
> 3. The
> officers and staff of the Commission are influenced by the "name and fame"
> of the complainant, since I have proof that other Complaints against the
> same public authorities, which have been filed much later than my
> complaints,
> have already been listed, heard and orders passed. Your officers and staff
> are
> therefore discriminating against me on the basis of some unknown
> reasons.
>
> 4. Your officers and staff are disobedient to the extent that they do not
> even follow and obey your own instructions.
> Under Section 12(4) of the RTI Act 2005,"the general superintendence,
> direction and
> management of the affairs of the Central Information Commission"vests in
> you. It is a sad that the officers and staff of the Commission fail to abide
> by the instructions of even the Chief Information
> Commissioner himself, who is the head of the Commission.
>
> 5. The
> Central Information Commission does not follow the "first come first served"
> principle in listing of Complaints. Your officers and staff are lethargic
> and
> oblivious of this principle of fair play OR are corrupt
> to the extentthat they list matters pertaining
> to appellants/complainants because they have been "influenced" and "bought
> over" by vested interests.
>
> I am present in Delhi
> on the 18th July 2012 for a hearing of four cases by your good self
> and request you for a personal meeting to resolve this issue once and
> for all.
>
> Sadly,
> I have to state that this is the last attempt I am making to get these long
> pending cases listed and heard, because as you would have realized by now,
> the
> whole experience has been totally frustrating, bitter and a waste of time
> for
> me. Rather than waste my limited resources on the corrupt, inefficient,
> lethargic, incompetent, disobedient and
> insubordinate officers and staff of the Commission, it would be better
> if I spent them on training Citizens and PIOs in using the RTI Act properly
> and
> correctly - at least they have ears !
>
>
> Thanking
> You,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> To: humjanenge <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4:15 PM
> Subject: [HumJanenge] "Only 3 complaints lost in CIC since 2005" records
> IC(SG)
>
>
> CIC/SG/A/2012/000643
> http://rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SG_A_2012_000643_19270_M_84898.pdf
>
> Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Shreyaskar,
> CPIO & Director
> Central Information Commission
>
> "The Appellant states that he is extremely disappointed with the way
> the Commission is working. He states that he has sent these complaints
> number of times and any of his communication are being reported to be
> lost. He expresses is anguish that if CIC cannot keep its records
> properly how can, it set example for Public Authorities. The PIO
> states that this is the only instance which is being reported and
> there are no other instances which have been reported to the
> Commission. The Commission recommends to the Secretary of the
> commission to ensure that communication received from Appellant are
> not lost and recorded properly."
>
> Only 1 instance of CIC records not being maintained properly. <rol>
> Q: Why didn't SG
> inquire into Pankaj Shreyaskar's bizarre statement.
> Ans: Because for many years IC(SG) was responsible for digitisation of
> the CIC's records.
>
> Sarbajit