[HumJanenge] Re: IC Sushma Singh and her strange orders...

Dear Karira

In both the examples you have cited, IC(SS) demonstrates how as a
"seasoned bureaucrat" she is PRO-CITIZEN to ensure that applicant gets
EITHER his information (EVENTUALLY) or a "reasoned DEPARTMENTAL order
which can be adjudicated on in appeal (either again before the CIC ..
recall that Archana Pande case .. or in the High Court).

This is a good strategy on her part to ensure that FAAs cannot get
away with passing vague orders. She deserves to be complimented for
this.

Sarbajit

On May 15, 11:14 am, C K Jam <rtiwan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> IC Sushma Singh is known for her copy/paste orders (in spite of Mr Sarbajit claiming that she is a seasoned bureaucrat)
> seems to be now going overboard in her zeal to dispose matters before her and reduce pendency ! Looks as if disposal is the other word fro remanding back:
>
> (Asking FAA to decide on Penalty)
>
> http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2011_001982_T_8214...
>
> 4. Having considered the submissions of the CPIO and the appellant, the
> Commission observes that there is a delay of 42 days in providing of requisite
> records to the appellant. The documents requested on 9.6.2011 after inspection,
> were provided only on 22.7.2011.  The FAA, CESTAT is hereby directed to
> consider the submissions of Shri Mohinder Singh, CPIO and identify the person
> responsible for the delay and recover the penalty amount from him. If both are
> responsible, the penalty should be recovered on pro-rata basis from both Shri
> Mohinder Singh, CPIO and Shri Pramod Kumar, Deemed CPIO.
>
> 5. Penalty of Rs. 10,500/- (Rupees ten thousand five hundred only) for the
> delay of 42 days @ Rs. 250/- per day is imposed u/s 20(1) of the RTI Act, 2005,
> which shall be recovered in 5 monthly instalments of Rs. 2,100/- (Rupees two
> thousand one hundred only) either from both Shri Mohinder Singh, CPIO and
> Shri Pramod Kumar, deemed CPIO on pro-rata basis or from any one of them,
> identified responsible for the delay, by the FAA, from their pay and allowances
> from the month starting June, 2012 to October, 2012.
>
> ===================
>
> (Remanding back even when FAA has passed an order)
>
> http://www.rti.india.gov.in/cic_decisions/CIC_SS_A_2012_000243_M_8265...
>
> 4. In his second appeal filed before the Commission, it is the contention of
> the appellant thateven after passing of the order by the FAA dated 5.7.2011,
> directing the CPIO to provide the information sought by the appellant in respect
> of Point 3(b)(iii), 3(b)(iv), 3(b)(v) and 3(b)(vi), complete and correct information
> has not been provided to him by the CPIO in his letter dated 12.8.2011. The
> CPIO on the other hand submits that he had complied with the directions of the
> FAA.
> 5. In view of the dissatisfaction expressed by the appellant with the replies
> provided to him by the CPIO, the matter is remitted back to the FAAwith the
> direction to provide information by passing a speaking order in respect of Point
> 3(b)(iii), 3(b)(iv), 3(b)(v) and 3(b)(vi), by treating the second appeal filed before
> the Commission as first appeal, within three weeks of receipt of this order.
>
> Can someone clarify whether she is "Information Commissioner" or "Remanding Commissioner" ?
>
> RTIwanted