Re: [HumJanenge] Re: New 500 words Rule

Dear Er. Sarbajit,
Reproduced the Inserted Rule 14 in our State
14 REQUEST RELATE ONLY TO SINGLE SUBJECT MATTER

A request in writing for information under section 6 of the Act shall relate in subject matter and it shall not ordinarily exceed one hundred and fifty words . If an applicant wishes to seek information on more than one subject matter , he shall make seprate applications.
Provided that in case, the request made relates to more than one subject matter ,the PIO may respond to the relating to the first subject matter only and may advise the applicant to make seprate application for each of the other subject matters.*
* Inserted by Karnataka Right to information (amendement)rules 2007 vide Notification No DPAR 2 RTI 2007 dated 13/02.2007

N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.


--- On Mon, 29/10/12, sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: sarbajit roy <sroy.mb@gmail.com>
> Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: New 500 words Rule
> To: "HumJanenge Forum People's Right to Information, RTI Act 2005" <HumJanenge@googlegroups.com>
> Date: Monday, 29 October, 2012, 7:30 PM
> Hi Vikram
>
> I dont have the wording of the Karnataka RTI Rule before me.
> Was it
> 150 words ?
> Under new Central DoPT Rules, address of applicant and PIO
> is counted
> in 500 words.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> On Oct 29, 6:25 pm, Vikram Simha <vikramsimh...@yahoo.co.in>
> wrote:
> > Elaborate Point no 2 . In oyr state we have Argued
> before KIC that Address do not Form part ihe Body Seeking
> Information
> > N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna
> Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004.
> >
> > --- On Mon, 29/10/12, Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: Sarbajit Roy <sroy...@gmail.com>
> > > Subject: [HumJanenge] Re: New 500 words Rule
> > > To: "humjanenge" <humjanenge@googlegroups.com>,
> tnkeea...@yahoo.co.in
> > > Date: Monday, 29 October, 2012, 5:48 AM
> > > Dear Krish
> >
> > > 1) The RTI application cannot be "rejected" ONLY
> on the
> > > ground that it
> > > contains more than 500 words. So the answer to
> your question
> > > is YES, a
> > > CPIO can reject it along with another reason IF
> (and only
> > > if) that
> > > other reason is a valid reason for rejection (like
> new Rule
> > > 9,
> > > insufficient / excess fee etc).
> >
> > > 2) The answer to your question is YES. An RTI
> application
> > > must
> > > ORDINARILY be within 500 words (which INCLUDES the
> name and
> > > address of
> > > CPIO and applicant). So for a RTI containing 1375
> words the
> > > PIO can
> > > demand Rs 30 as application fee by treating it as
> 3
> > > applications. Note
> > > that he is not "rejecting it"
> >
> > > 3) The FAA ought not to reject it. OTH the CIC can
> do
> > > anything
> > > (including reject it if they feel the application
> was
> > > frivolous,
> > > vexatious, etc etc)
> >
> > > Sarbajit
> >
> > > On 10/28/12, TNK <tnkeea...@yahoo.co.in>
> > > wrote:
> > > > The recent rule dated 31st July 2012
> restrict
> > > applications with 500 words.
> >
> > > > In the same rule says that no application to
> be
> > > rejected only on the ground
> > > > that it exceeds 500 words.
> >
> > > > My doubts:-
> >
> > > > 1. Can PIO rejects the application with some
> other
> > > reason along with the
> > > > reason of "more than 500 words"?
> >
> > > > 2. Theses restriction included in the heading
> of
> > > Application fee. Can PIO
> > > > demand more fee as the application is more
> than 500
> > > words.
> >
> > > > 3. Application not to be rejected by PIO on
> this 500
> > > words ground. Thus FAA
> > > > or CIC can reject on this ground?
> >
> > > > Andaman Krish
>