Hi
">I too find it curious that employees of Ms Maja Batliwala, daughter of the great Sam Bahadur, are seeking information about the Army which has been upheld to be anti-national on the basis of newspaper reports,"
It is Maja "Daruwala" at CHRI, her sister is Sherry "Batliwala"
Ms. Daruwala is on this mailing list.
Sarbajit
--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr Naik
>
> This is not a court of law where I must prove anything, nor am I a PIO
> on whom the onus of proof is placed. Since you repeatedly deny that
> you have plagiarised the document in question, perhaps you can
> enlighten us on why your document was circulated to the Information
> Commissioners as the legal opinion of the CIC's legal branch ?
>
> You are quite confused, where have I claimed that you are "anti-national"?
> FYI, neither had Mr Sharma claimed that you were anti-national. As the
> decision of Ms Singh records, the CPIO of the MHA classified you as an
> anti-national to whom the information could not be given. As the Delhi
> Hig Court recently held, the C.I.C is not a "court", so it equally laughable
> for you to claim you are fighting a "case" at CIC (perhaps you meant
> "cause"). It is as laughable as when you claim that you were "litigating"
> before the CIC to be provided information from the DDA in RTI.
>
> Your understanding of the RTI Act is pitiful.
>
> -Ms Singh has already found your knowledge about RTI Act to be
> deficient, as Mr Sharma had set out from that order. .
>
> - Section 28 does not contain a clause analogous to 27(2)(e)
> for the procedure to be adopted by the Central Information Commission or
> State Information Commission, as the case may be, in deciding the appeals
> under sub-section (10) of section 19;"
>
> It is this clause which enables fees to be charged for appeals to the CIC/SIC,
>
> Unlike Mr Sharma I do not believe in personality oriented discussion. But I
> too find it curious that employees of Ms Maja Batliwala, daughter of
> the great Sam Bahadur, are seeking information about the Army which has
> been upheld to be anti-national on teh basis of newspaper reports, and also that
> you are assisting under-trials like Brigadier Ujjwal when the matter is already
> before the court and as an accused he has every legal avenue open to know
> the evidence against him under the criminal procedural laws once charges
> are framed / submitted.
>
> As Mr Sharma had posted, what is the state of RTI when an appellant
> is denied such information on sub-judice matters say Mr Tiwari or
> Mr Mishra but granted it by Mr Gandhi ?
>
> Ashish
>
No comments:
Post a Comment