Dear Vijay
1) High Courts / SC are "courts of record". Hence their decisions may be "reported" after specific permission is given by the bench concerned. The CIC is decidedly not a court of record, and its decisions have no precedentary value legally speaking - and so PIOs / FAAs are not bound by them. For eg. IC(MLS) has now openly started disagreeing with Mr Habibullah's decisions and specifies "*this* Commission ...."
2) The RTI Act says things like 4(1)(d) "provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons.". By this only the affected persons are entitled to copy of the CIC decisions. 4(1)(c) "publish all relevant facts while formulating important policies or announcing the decisions which affect public;" does not help us because CIC decisions do not affect the "PUBLIC".
Similarly 4(1)(a) clearly specifies that records of CIC (which includes its decisions) are to be connected over a network throughout India ... (which excludes internet), So taking all this into consideration certain ICs in their infinite wisdom have virtually stopped posting decisions online NOW THAT THE CIC MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS 2007 ARE STRUCK DOWN.
3) Certainly as an affected person you are entitled to receive a copy of ANT's decisions in your matters. The way to get info about CIC decisions involving other people is to file an RTI request u/s 6.
4) Except for Shailesh Gandhi hardly any other IC is levying penalty. So this is not unique to IC ANT. A very strong case can be made out for not levying penalty indiscriminately. Read IC ANT's decision in that LIC Chennai lift matter to note how penalties should be levied.
5) Look, despite what you believe or have been led to believe, the RTI Act is not about exposing corruption or redressing one's grievances. If you insist on using it for that purpose, you must be prepared for the consequences and stone-walling that follows.
Sarbajit
--- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, VB Singh <vijay_bsingh@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Sarbajitji,
> Â
> I am confused by the last para of your mail "where is it written in RTI Act that decisions of the CIC are to be published on the internet (computer network) so that the whole world can read them ?."
> Â
> Do you mean that we are not entitled to decisions delivered by Information Commissioners and if that is so, why the judgements of High Courts and Apex Court are uploaded? RTI Act is intended to facilitate information which were / are under cover and if the decisions of Information commissioners, are kept under cover and not uploaded as it is not in the statute, then how we are going to get information about descisions delivered by Information Commissioner.
> Â
> The decisions delivered by Shri AN Tiwari in my cases have not been uploaded and link can't be provided. It is observed that decisions regarding others have also not been uploaded. I have filed more than 50 application under RTI since then, but CPIO and or FAA deny the information ignoring judgement BUT, it is a fact that the CPIOs and FAAs of department deny information under Section 8 without giving reasons and in appeals FAAs confirm the decision of CPIOs. This is delibereately done as they know that no penal action under Section 20 (1) is going to be taken against them by ANT.
> Â
> Whistleblowers like me who have faced a lot including murder of own brothers, feel dejected by the attitude of ANT, when he pounce on us during video conferencing and threaten us. Is he empowered to threwten us who are victim of corrupts in the department and want to use RTI to expose them and thus redress our grieavances? Â
> Â
> With warm regards
> VB Singh
> “The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.†- Albert Einstein
>
>
> --- On Fri, 20/8/10, sarbajitr <sroy1947@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: sarbajitr <sroy1947@...>
> Subject: [rti_india] Re: Complaint of misbehaviour against cic inforamation commissioner AN TIWARI [2
> To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Friday, 20 August, 2010, 4:02 PM
>
>
> Â
>
>
>
> Dear Vijay
>
> My intentions insofar as the RTI_India e-group is concerned are
> publicly accessible.
> http://old.nabble.com/Important-Announcement-to29279795.html#a29279795
>
> quote:
>
> "primary purpose of this group is to facilitate information exchange between the stakeholders in RTI process, so that responsible citizen users get maximum information in RTI without delay, and that PIOs and FAAs deny maximum information to irresponsible applicants / appellants without fear of penalty.
>
> The secondary (but equally important) purpose is to expose all the
> 'harami' RTI activists, and Information Commissioners who are killing
> the RTI movement to the detriment of responsible RTI users."
>
> PS: If you have specific problems with orders of Mr Tiwari in your cases, please post the links, so that we can analyse the problem.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india@yahoogroups.com, VB Singh <vijay_bsingh@> wrote:
> >
> > It is not understood� what are the intentions of� Sarbajit
> >
> > VB Singh
> > “The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.†- Albert Einstein
> >
> >
> > --- On Thu, 19/8/10, Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy.mb@>
> > Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Complaint of misbehaviour against cic inforamation commissioner AN TIWARI [2
> > To: rti_india@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Thursday, 19 August, 2010, 10:21 PM
> >
> >
> > �
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Satishji
> >
> > 1) The very fact that you are a member of this group means that you are not a common information seeker. Conversely if after so many years here you still feel that you are a common information seeker then obviously we have failed.
> >
> > 2) Common information seekers will have no problems using RTI Act if they ask for common (ordinary) information, in fact ICs go out of their way to assist such people - as one IC says "aapko aam khaana hain ya gutli ginna hain" going out of their way to use the moral power of their office to help ordinary people to achieve results even if it means going beyond RTI� .The problems start when so-called common information seekers start using RTI to settle scores, rake up dead personal issues, to "fight" corruption, to do low intensity social reform, to blackmail etc etc. The Information Commissioners are not fools and identify� such people within a minute. In such situations, the ICs must assist the P/A (PIOs) to ensure that the letter and spirit of the RTI Act is adhered to insofar as exempted information is not given to undeserving (not acting in larger public interest) applicants.
> >
> > 3) IC ANT is actually one of the most honest ICs, and this is what makes him so universally (un)appreciated. Many people would be very happy if he was not there so that corrupt, legally bankrupt and dishonest decisions are given (as some of the other ICs are doing). and the institution of the CIC is thereby weakened. Privately even Mr Habibullah's staff who have been with him for many years admit that Mr H is not a patch on Mr Tiwari insofar as procedure and respect is concerned.
> >
> > 4) Lastly, where is it written in RTI Act that decisions of the CIC are to be published on the internet (computer network) so that the whole world can read them ?. (Read this statement carefully). Our other star finalist in the poll IC(MLS) has also started pulling his decisions off the CIC website. This is also proving to be a blessing to citizens who are getting fed up with receiving huge quantities of SPAM from foreign financed spies.
> >
> > Sarbajit
> >
> >
>
No comments:
Post a Comment