Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Re: [rti_india] Re: NACO can't ensure Audio-Visual privacy! Reply from NACO under RTI !

 

Thanks a lot!

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 10:01 PM, sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Dear Snehansu

Another alert member (agreeing me with my analysis) has kindly informed me that you have also cross posted your message to other RTI Yahoo groups. Ordinarily you would have been barred from posting further to this group (as being in violation of our rules). As a very special case instead of banning you, we are putting you on "moderation" to enable you to continue posting to this thread.

Sarbajit
Moderator



--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "sarbajitr" <sroy1947@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Snehansu
>
> This is an RTI group = not a forum to rant about general crap.
>
> The PIO of NACO has given you very "good" replies to your rather "bad" queries. This helpful PIO has provided you with much more information than the normal PIO would or you are entitled to.
>
> For eg. he could have dismissed your question no. 5 by saying that the information (as defined in RTI Act) is not held by his authority. <-- Please carefully understand what this means !!
>
> In the same way the PIO could have evaded your 9th query by replying
> "The information applied for is hypothetical / presumptuous / non-existent." <-- Please also understand this carefully !!
>
> The scope of RTI is only to get you the information, and is not meant to solve your (or the world's) problems. Neither is this group (forum) a place to solve non-RTI problems.
>
> As we have often said, we are not interested in who you (or your NGO) are or what your pet hobby horse is.
>
> Finally, if your English is not adequate to draft RTIs, you should be aware that you can also file in Hindi or the local language of your area.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "snehansubhaduri" <snehansu.bhaduri@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Forum,
> >
> > In reference to my quiries(As pasted below) sought under RTI Act from NACO, dated 02/02/2010, some of the information proves that still remaining "Black Spots" in Treatment is not taking cared of or ignored by reasoning but threat to the lives and Rights of people living with HIV in India.
> >
> > For example,
> > Question no.5.Does all NACO ART Centers ensuring Audiovisual Privacy throughout India?
> > Ans:
> > "All efforts are made to ensure Audio visual privacy during counseling at all ART Center within the constraints of availability of space in the hospital where ART Center is functioning".
> >
> > Is it believeable practically?
> > Why such hospitals has been selected for ART Centers?
> > Isn't it a major black spot in practical treatment delevery?
> > Does NACO Exparts know/feel the impact of such CARE LESS part of the Treatment, on the clints of ART Centers?
> >
> > Another Example,
> > Question no.9.
> > Why still now GIPA Coordinator Posts in different SACS like MPSACS are still vacant?
> > Which are the SACS with ongoing GIPA Coordinator vacancy?
> > Answer:
> > Posts are vacant mainly due to unavailability of suitable candidates.
> > Posts are still vacant as per information available to NACO till december 2009 are Madhya Pradesh,Andaman and Nikobar islands, Goa, Jharkhand, Maharastra, Rajasthan, Tamilnadu, Arunachal pradesh, Assam, Meghalaya, Sikkim and Pondecherry.
> >
> > The answer proves that still today GIPA is overlooked/ ignored in Reality.
> > What efforts have been taken by NACO to promote GIPA within the PLWH community(Old and new ) and how PLWH community is being empowered about GIPA to meet up the selection criteria of GIPA?
> > Is it true that PLWH community lacking Graduates?
> > Why Graduate PLWHs are not coming forward?
> > Does the Advertisement for the post reaches to all PLWH communuty?
> >
> > Finally, how long the ongiong practice of NACO will last to ignore our Basic Rights just by causing, cousing and causing?
> >
> > Thanking you
> >
> > In solidarity,
> >
> > Snehansu Bhaduri
> > snehansu.bhaduri@
> > 9874693613(mob)
> >
> > Note: Please find the copy of complete reply sheet in attachment or ask if any body need this personally.
> >
>


__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Posted by at No comments:

Monday, March 29, 2010

[rti_india] Re: PIO, Commissioner,MCD

 

Further to this post . The UP CM Secretariat forwards my RTI application to Principal Secretary Home, whose PIO forwards it 30-45 days later to the SSP, Gautam Budh Nagar, who in turn responds after 45-60 days . This is really frustrating .

--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "Arun" <arun_agrawal@...> wrote:
>
> Dear all: What is the way out if a PIO forwards the request to another PIO within his own department after 17 days [ which he actually is not required to do ]. And the PIO to whom the RTI application if forwarded takes the view that he needs 30 days from the day he received the transferred application. I have several cases like that with UP Police and UP CM Secretariat.
>
> --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "sarbajitr" <sroy1947@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Lalit
> >
> > http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/CIC_Order_Dtd_25022006.pdf
> >
> > "Er. Sarbajit Roy versus DDA" 25-Feb-2006
> >
> > "The DDA is a single public authority. Since this is a matter concerning adjustments within the same public authority Sec 6 (3) cannot apply. Accordingly the CPIO Ms. Neemo Dhar, who had received the request from the complainant, was, as per section 7(1) of the ACT, under obligation to seek information from her colleague and provide it to the complainant."
> >
> > To get out of this 'chakravyuha', you can either file a complaint u/s 18 citing this order or file a first Appeal to the superior officer of the CPIO who received it first. It is advisable to file the First Appeal since it is a time bound process.
> >
> > Rakesh Agrawal got some similar decisions later against MCD / DP.
> >
> > Sarbajit
> >
> > --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, Lalit Mohan Sharma <lmsdelhi@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Friends
> > >
> > > I filed an RTI with PIO, Commissioner office, MCD on 4 Feb 2010,
> > >
> > > PIO Town Hall (Addl Dy Commissioner-HQ) kept the application with him from 4 Feb to 16 Feb
> > >
> > > 16 Feb to 4 March --Asst Commissioner (Shah South Zone)
> > >
> > > 4 Mar to 15 Mar -- Suptg Engg-1 (Shah South Zone)
> > >
> > > 15 Mar onwards-- Supdg Engg (Project) Ambedkar Stadium
> > >
> > >
> > > They have made the mockery of RTI, transferring application under sec 5(5) and 6(3) to each other within same public authority for last 50 days and transferring it in more than max. allowed 5 days .
> > >
> > > This is (I think) due to our inactive /insufficient CIC/SICs
> > >
> > > Same is the case with Delhi Police and
> > > DDA
> > > Now Where should I go for First Appeal? Which FAA???
> > >
> > > Please provide CIC order regarding Single Public Authority as applicable to MCD, DP, DDA.
> > >
> > >
> > > Please do provide your valuable comments also on Single Public Authority
> > >
> > >
> > > Lalit Mohan Sharma
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your Mail works best with the New Yahoo Optimized IE8. Get it NOW! http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/internetexplorer/
> > >
> >
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Posted by at No comments:

[rti_india] PIO, Commissioner,MCD

 

Dear all: What is the way out if a PIO forwards the request to another PIO within his own department after 17 days [ which he actually is not required to do ]. And the PIO to whom the RTI application if forwarded takes the view that he needs 30 days from the day he received the transferred application. I have several cases like that with UP Police and UP CM Secretariat.

--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "sarbajitr" <sroy1947@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Lalit
>
> http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/CIC_Order_Dtd_25022006.pdf
>
> "Er. Sarbajit Roy versus DDA" 25-Feb-2006
>
> "The DDA is a single public authority. Since this is a matter concerning adjustments within the same public authority Sec 6 (3) cannot apply. Accordingly the CPIO Ms. Neemo Dhar, who had received the request from the complainant, was, as per section 7(1) of the ACT, under obligation to seek information from her colleague and provide it to the complainant."
>
> To get out of this 'chakravyuha', you can either file a complaint u/s 18 citing this order or file a first Appeal to the superior officer of the CPIO who received it first. It is advisable to file the First Appeal since it is a time bound process.
>
> Rakesh Agrawal got some similar decisions later against MCD / DP.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, Lalit Mohan Sharma <lmsdelhi@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Friends
> >
> > I filed an RTI with PIO, Commissioner office, MCD on 4 Feb 2010,
> >
> > PIO Town Hall (Addl Dy Commissioner-HQ) kept the application with him from 4 Feb to 16 Feb
> >
> > 16 Feb to 4 March --Asst Commissioner (Shah South Zone)
> >
> > 4 Mar to 15 Mar -- Suptg Engg-1 (Shah South Zone)
> >
> > 15 Mar onwards-- Supdg Engg (Project) Ambedkar Stadium
> >
> >
> > They have made the mockery of RTI, transferring application under sec 5(5) and 6(3) to each other within same public authority for last 50 days and transferring it in more than max. allowed 5 days .
> >
> > This is (I think) due to our inactive /insufficient CIC/SICs
> >
> > Same is the case with Delhi Police and
> > DDA
> > Now Where should I go for First Appeal? Which FAA???
> >
> > Please provide CIC order regarding Single Public Authority as applicable to MCD, DP, DDA.
> >
> >
> > Please do provide your valuable comments also on Single Public Authority
> >
> >
> > Lalit Mohan Sharma
> >
> >
> >
> > Your Mail works best with the New Yahoo Optimized IE8. Get it NOW! http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/internetexplorer/
> >
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Posted by at No comments:

[rti_india] Re: PIO, Commissioner,MCD

 

Mr Rakesh Agarwal

Kindly provide similar decisions against MCD and Delhi Police

Lalit Mohan Sharma

--- On Mon, 29/3/10, sarbajitr <sroy1947@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

Dear Lalit

http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ CIC_Order_ Dtd_25022006. pdf

"Er. Sarbajit Roy versus DDA" 25-Feb-2006

"The DDA is a single public authority. Since this is a matter concerning adjustments within the same public authority Sec 6 (3) cannot apply. Accordingly the CPIO Ms. Neemo Dhar, who had received the request from the complainant, was, as per section 7(1) of the ACT, under obligation to seek information from her colleague and provide it to the complainant. "

To get out of this 'chakravyuha' , you can either file a complaint u/s 18 citing this order or file a first Appeal to the superior officer of the CPIO who received it first. It is advisable to file the First Appeal since it is a time bound process.

Rakesh Agrawal got some similar decisions later against MCD / DP.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india@yahoogrou ps.com, Lalit Mohan Sharma <lmsdelhi@.. .> wrote:
>
> Dear Friends
>
> I filed an RTI with PIO, Commissioner office, MCD on 4 Feb 2010,
>
> PIO Town Hall (Addl Dy Commissioner- HQ) kept the application with him from 4 Feb to 16 Feb
>
> 16 Feb to 4 March --Asst Commissioner (Shah South Zone)
>
> 4 Mar to 15 Mar -- Suptg Engg-1 (Shah South Zone)
>
> 15 Mar onwards-- Supdg Engg (Project) Ambedkar Stadium
>
>
> They have made the mockery of RTI, transferring application under sec 5(5) and 6(3) to each other within same public authority for last 50 days and transferring it in more than max. allowed 5 days .
>
> This is (I think) due to our inactive /insufficient CIC/SICs
>
> Same is the case with Delhi Police and
> DDA
> Now Where should I go for First Appeal? Which FAA???
>
> Please provide CIC order regarding Single Public Authority as applicable to MCD, DP, DDA.
>
>
> Please do provide your valuable comments also on Single Public Authority
>
>
> Lalit Mohan Sharma
>
>



Your Mail works best with the New Yahoo Optimized IE8. Get it NOW!.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Posted by at No comments:

[rti_india] Re: PIO, Commissioner,MCD

 

Dear Lalit

http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/CIC_Order_Dtd_25022006.pdf

"Er. Sarbajit Roy versus DDA" 25-Feb-2006

"The DDA is a single public authority. Since this is a matter concerning adjustments within the same public authority Sec 6 (3) cannot apply. Accordingly the CPIO Ms. Neemo Dhar, who had received the request from the complainant, was, as per section 7(1) of the ACT, under obligation to seek information from her colleague and provide it to the complainant."

To get out of this 'chakravyuha', you can either file a complaint u/s 18 citing this order or file a first Appeal to the superior officer of the CPIO who received it first. It is advisable to file the First Appeal since it is a time bound process.

Rakesh Agrawal got some similar decisions later against MCD / DP.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, Lalit Mohan Sharma <lmsdelhi@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Friends
>
> I filed an RTI with PIO, Commissioner office, MCD on 4 Feb 2010,
>
> PIO Town Hall (Addl Dy Commissioner-HQ) kept the application with him from 4 Feb to 16 Feb
>
> 16 Feb to 4 March --Asst Commissioner (Shah South Zone)
>
> 4 Mar to 15 Mar -- Suptg Engg-1 (Shah South Zone)
>
> 15 Mar onwards-- Supdg Engg (Project) Ambedkar Stadium
>
>
> They have made the mockery of RTI, transferring application under sec 5(5) and 6(3) to each other within same public authority for last 50 days and transferring it in more than max. allowed 5 days .
>
> This is (I think) due to our inactive /insufficient CIC/SICs
>
> Same is the case with Delhi Police and
> DDA
> Now Where should I go for First Appeal? Which FAA???
>
> Please provide CIC order regarding Single Public Authority as applicable to MCD, DP, DDA.
>
>
> Please do provide your valuable comments also on Single Public Authority
>
>
> Lalit Mohan Sharma
>
>
>
> Your Mail works best with the New Yahoo Optimized IE8. Get it NOW! http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/internetexplorer/
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Posted by at No comments:

[rti_india] PIO, Commissioner,MCD

 

Dear Friends

I filed an RTI with PIO, Commissioner office, MCD on 4 Feb 2010,

  1. PIO Town Hall (Addl Dy Commissioner-HQ) kept the application with him from 4 Feb to 16 Feb

  2. 16 Feb to 4 March --Asst Commissioner (Shah South Zone)

  3. 4 Mar to 15 Mar -- Suptg Engg-1 (Shah South Zone)

  4. 15 Mar onwards-- Supdg Engg (Project) Ambedkar Stadium


    They have made the mockery of RTI, transferring application under sec 5(5) and 6(3) to each other within same public authority for last 50 days and transferring it in more than max. allowed 5 days .

    This is (I think) due to our inactive /insufficient CIC/SICs

    Same is the case with Delhi Police and DDA

Now Where should I go for First Appeal? Which FAA???

Please provide CIC order regarding Single Public Authority as applicable to MCD, DP, DDA.


Please do provide your valuable comments also on Single Public Authority

 

 Lalit Mohan Sharma 
 

Your Mail works best with the New Yahoo Optimized IE8. Get it NOW!.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, March 28, 2010

[rti_india] Re: NACO can't ensure Audio-Visual privacy! Reply from NACO under RTI !

 

Dear Snehansu

Another alert member (agreeing me with my analysis) has kindly informed me that you have also cross posted your message to other RTI Yahoo groups. Ordinarily you would have been barred from posting further to this group (as being in violation of our rules). As a very special case instead of banning you, we are putting you on "moderation" to enable you to continue posting to this thread.

Sarbajit
Moderator

--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "sarbajitr" <sroy1947@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Snehansu
>
> This is an RTI group = not a forum to rant about general crap.
>
> The PIO of NACO has given you very "good" replies to your rather "bad" queries. This helpful PIO has provided you with much more information than the normal PIO would or you are entitled to.
>
> For eg. he could have dismissed your question no. 5 by saying that the information (as defined in RTI Act) is not held by his authority. <-- Please carefully understand what this means !!
>
> In the same way the PIO could have evaded your 9th query by replying
> "The information applied for is hypothetical / presumptuous / non-existent." <-- Please also understand this carefully !!
>
> The scope of RTI is only to get you the information, and is not meant to solve your (or the world's) problems. Neither is this group (forum) a place to solve non-RTI problems.
>
> As we have often said, we are not interested in who you (or your NGO) are or what your pet hobby horse is.
>
> Finally, if your English is not adequate to draft RTIs, you should be aware that you can also file in Hindi or the local language of your area.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, "snehansubhaduri" <snehansu.bhaduri@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Forum,
> >
> > In reference to my quiries(As pasted below) sought under RTI Act from NACO, dated 02/02/2010, some of the information proves that still remaining "Black Spots" in Treatment is not taking cared of or ignored by reasoning but threat to the lives and Rights of people living with HIV in India.
> >
> > For example,
> > Question no.5.Does all NACO ART Centers ensuring Audiovisual Privacy throughout India?
> > Ans:
> > "All efforts are made to ensure Audio visual privacy during counseling at all ART Center within the constraints of availability of space in the hospital where ART Center is functioning".
> >
> > Is it believeable practically?
> > Why such hospitals has been selected for ART Centers?
> > Isn't it a major black spot in practical treatment delevery?
> > Does NACO Exparts know/feel the impact of such CARE LESS part of the Treatment, on the clints of ART Centers?
> >
> > Another Example,
> > Question no.9.
> > Why still now GIPA Coordinator Posts in different SACS like MPSACS are still vacant?
> > Which are the SACS with ongoing GIPA Coordinator vacancy?
> > Answer:
> > Posts are vacant mainly due to unavailability of suitable candidates.
> > Posts are still vacant as per information available to NACO till december 2009 are Madhya Pradesh,Andaman and Nikobar islands, Goa, Jharkhand, Maharastra, Rajasthan, Tamilnadu, Arunachal pradesh, Assam, Meghalaya, Sikkim and Pondecherry.
> >
> > The answer proves that still today GIPA is overlooked/ ignored in Reality.
> > What efforts have been taken by NACO to promote GIPA within the PLWH community(Old and new ) and how PLWH community is being empowered about GIPA to meet up the selection criteria of GIPA?
> > Is it true that PLWH community lacking Graduates?
> > Why Graduate PLWHs are not coming forward?
> > Does the Advertisement for the post reaches to all PLWH communuty?
> >
> > Finally, how long the ongiong practice of NACO will last to ignore our Basic Rights just by causing, cousing and causing?
> >
> > Thanking you
> >
> > In solidarity,
> >
> > Snehansu Bhaduri
> > snehansu.bhaduri@
> > 9874693613(mob)
> >
> > Note: Please find the copy of complete reply sheet in attachment or ask if any body need this personally.
> >
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)