Hi.


Most of the goverment of india and state goverments hosting a lot of infomration under RTI. I have browsed all most 90% of them. It is observed, that majority of the public authorities have AA, PIO and APIO. It is also observed that most of the APIOs and PIOs are under the same roof. Is it clear violation of the act???????. Or is it deliberate attempt of the public authorities to gain time of another five days???????? or the drafting of the circulars by DOPT is in poor shape?????????. Can any throw light on these .


---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

•  3
  New Members

Hi Anurag,

Your query seems to be "Is the practice of appointment of APIOs and
PIOs under the same roof a deliberate attempt by P/A to gain 5 days
extra?"

Actually, (and this is where I differ with many other RTI "experts") I
opine:

1) There should be many more APIOs than PIOs. The P/A is required to
have APIOs at every sub-divisional / sub-district level These APIOs
are only to act as Post Office for receiving and conveying the RTI
requests to the CONCERNED PIO. This is the most CRITICAL step in the
RTI process - because in a P/A with multiple PIOs SOMEBODY must be
accountable to ensure that the RTI request is processed properly
WITHIN the P/A. If there are 5 days extra allowed - these 5 days are
WELL SPENT if the APIO forwards it to the right PIO(s) dealing with
the subject (ie. the APIO discharges his duties properly). If there is
any problem with the application fee or IPO then the APIO should be
doing "the needful" and not the PIO.

2) As per me, PIOs should not be receiving RTIs. PIO should be giving
information or applying their minds to exemptions (ie "dealing with"
RTI requests).

3) If the APIO /PIO is within the same premises (in many cases they
share a common wall) then it is silly to add 5 days extra. However,
the CIC has been allowing 5 days extra in such cases also. (I recall
some matter of Gita Verma's on his point)

Unfortunately the APIOs /PIOs are not working this way. There is some
vague drafting on the RTI Act in section 5(1) / 5(2). RTI'ers who
follow our Responsible RTI Code will not face such problems - because
they would have checked out the P/A's website in advance and framed /
filed their requests accordingly..

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, anurag prasad <yanuragprasad <at> ...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi.
>
>
> Most of the goverment of india and state goverments hosting a lot
of infomration under RTI. I have browsed all most 90% of them. It is
observed, that majority of the public authorities have AA, PIO and
APIO. It is also observed that most of the APIOs and PIOs are under
the same roof. Is it clear violation of the act???????. Or is it
deliberate attempt of the public authorities to gain time of another
five days???????? or the drafting of the circulars by DOPT is in poor
shape?????????. Can any throw light on these .
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
Try it now.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

•  3
  New Members

Dear Sroy

to file writ petition in high court in mumbai minimum
cost Rs 25,000 that too to make SIC/CIC to comply
withen time frame
is it worth spending that sort of money.

RTI says Rs 2 per page but not specified certified
true copies, only certified true copies are admitted
in a court of law. so one has to pay Rs 27 per page
for certified true copy
for obtaining assesment for building per year one page
Rs 230
from Building proposal department Rs 2 per page for
xerox copy plus Rs 25 for certifying it as true copy
for building plans Rs 50 for xerox for certifying came
can the common man afford these charges????

Leslie Almeida

--- sroy1947 <sroy1947 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:

> Dear Shanti,
>
> If there is delay in listing a 2nd appeal at the
> SIC,
> it is advisable to formally request the Registrar of
> the SIC/CIC to list the matter "forthwith" for the
> "following
> reasons" (you can list these based on your case).
>
> After 15 days you can again remind the Registry that
> matter is urgent since it concerns your "Fundamental
> Right
> to Information" which is being abridged by this
> great delay.
>
> If you THEN approach the HC in WRIT u/a 226 + 227
> against the SIC ONLY (no other Respondent), annexing
> your
> correspondence with SIC Registry, and a SINGLE
> PRAYER seeking
> directions for early disposal of your 2nd Appeal,
> any
> judge will be happy to grant you your relief
> IMMEDIATELY
> and clear his docket. You MUST serve the SIC
> Registry
> well in advance of the HC hearing date so that they
> can
> be present to agree to give you a early disposal
> (and
> get this matter off their backs).
>
> Keep all pleadings very polite and reasonable.
>
> Hope you agree.
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, shanti chordia
> <jdp_238 <at> ...> wrote:
> >
> > If the first appeal is partially or fully
> dismissed, you may prefer
> a second appeal which lies with the Commission
> within 90. More time
> may be admitted on reasonable grounds.
> > No time limit has been set in the Act for the
> disposal of appeal
> with the Commission. It is a shortcoming of the Act
> which we are
> pursuing with the government. Usually, the Central
> Information
> Commission delivers its decision within 90 days.
> > The Act has not put a cap on the time within which
> an appeal with
> the Commission has to be disposed of. In theory, the
> Commission could
> take 50 years if it wanted to.
> > The decision of the Commission shall be binding.
> However, you are
> always at liberty to approach a High Court with a
> writ petition.
> > I found the above on this link
> http://www.nyayabhoomi.org/rti/understanding.htm
> >
> > q1) is this right ?
> > q2) are there any such WRIT disposals by any HC
> directing the
> SIComms to dispose off such appeals ?
> > q3) what happens if the HC on entertaining my writ
> (admitting it and
> ordering notice !) views the non-communication from
> the SIComm as a
> deemed refusal and therefore the whole purpose will
> be killed since
> the PAs would take their own sweet time to respond
> the HC writ ..
> where the backlog for final disposal would be
> anywhere between 2 years
> and upwards !
> >
> > any leads and pointers ?
> >
> > = Shanti Chordia <at> Shanthilal
> > contact number +91 94440 19347 preferably sms
> >
> >
> > Save all your chat conversations. Find them
> online at
> http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
> >
>
>
>

__________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

•  3
  New Members

Hi Leslie,

1) We are using the THREAT of going to HC in Writ. So whatever you
draft in RTI could appear to be with the motive of going to HC (This
is obviously on a case to case basis as to when to use this tactic for
it could also backfire and the P/A clams up).

2) Although I am amazed that filing a writ in a HC costs 25,000 (not
if you Do-It-Yourself) with the method as I guided you (you could keep
it within Rs. 2000 all told).

3) If the HCs are really so expensive (or the lawyers are conning
you), As a SPECIAL OFFER for genuine English speaking [RTI_India]ns
public spirited and confident enough to appear in person, I may be
able to arrange that they get the benefit of bulk-rates for drafting,
typing and filing / clerkage in the Supreme Court. It shouldn't
exceed Rs.5,000 (no credit) and you will normally be standing before a
bench within 10 days. Even if you lose (as you probably will the first
time around) it will be a valuable experience and will improve your
RTI'ing like anything. NB: This is not a con like some RTI NGOs are
touting (ie. where they phasao victims of CIC / SIC under
free-ka-laalach and take money from the other side).

4) For civil suits involving evidence you may have to give certified
copies, but there is usually some flexibility in Writs where the
citizen can make a declaration in the supporting affidavit that all
annexures are true copies to the best of his knowledge.

BTW: "certified copies" are included in definition of "information".
So you shouldn't have to pay more than Rs.2 per page. Fellow RTI'ers
can inform us how are they interpreting this in the various States?

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, LESLIE ALMEIDA <lesals2000 <at> ...> wrote:
>
> Dear Sroy
>
> to file writ petition in high court in mumbai minimum
> cost Rs 25,000 that too to make SIC/CIC to comply
> withen time frame
> is it worth spending that sort of money.
>
> RTI says Rs 2 per page but not specified certified
> true copies, only certified true copies are admitted
> in a court of law. so one has to pay Rs 27 per page
> for certified true copy
> for obtaining assesment for building per year one page
> Rs 230
> from Building proposal department Rs 2 per page for
> xerox copy plus Rs 25 for certifying it as true copy
> for building plans Rs 50 for xerox for certifying came
> can the common man afford these charges????
>
> Leslie Almeida
>
>
> --- sroy1947 <sroy1947 <at> ...> wrote:
>
> > Dear Shanti,
> >
> > If there is delay in listing a 2nd appeal at the
> > SIC,
> > it is advisable to formally request the Registrar of
> > the SIC/CIC to list the matter "forthwith" for the
> > "following
> > reasons" (you can list these based on your case).
> >
> > After 15 days you can again remind the Registry that
> > matter is urgent since it concerns your "Fundamental
> > Right
> > to Information" which is being abridged by this
> > great delay.
> >
> > If you THEN approach the HC in WRIT u/a 226 + 227
> > against the SIC ONLY (no other Respondent), annexing
> > your
> > correspondence with SIC Registry, and a SINGLE
> > PRAYER seeking
> > directions for early disposal of your 2nd Appeal,
> > any
> > judge will be happy to grant you your relief
> > IMMEDIATELY
> > and clear his docket. You MUST serve the SIC
> > Registry
> > well in advance of the HC hearing date so that they
> > can
> > be present to agree to give you a early disposal
> > (and
> > get this matter off their backs).
> >
> > Keep all pleadings very polite and reasonable.
> >
> > Hope you agree.
> >
> > Sarbajit
> >
> > --- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, shanti chordia
> > <jdp_238 <at> > wrote:
> > >
> > > If the first appeal is partially or fully
> > dismissed, you may prefer
> > a second appeal which lies with the Commission
> > within 90. More time
> > may be admitted on reasonable grounds.
> > > No time limit has been set in the Act for the
> > disposal of appeal
> > with the Commission. It is a shortcoming of the Act
> > which we are
> > pursuing with the government. Usually, the Central
> > Information
> > Commission delivers its decision within 90 days.
> > > The Act has not put a cap on the time within which
> > an appeal with
> > the Commission has to be disposed of. In theory, the
> > Commission could
> > take 50 years if it wanted to.
> > > The decision of the Commission shall be binding.
> > However, you are
> > always at liberty to approach a High Court with a
> > writ petition.
> > > I found the above on this link
> > http://www.nyayabhoomi.org/rti/understanding.htm
> > >
> > > q1) is this right ?
> > > q2) are there any such WRIT disposals by any HC
> > directing the
> > SIComms to dispose off such appeals ?
> > > q3) what happens if the HC on entertaining my writ
> > (admitting it and
> > ordering notice !) views the non-communication from
> > the SIComm as a
> > deemed refusal and therefore the whole purpose will
> > be killed since
> > the PAs would take their own sweet time to respond
> > the HC writ ..
> > where the backlog for final disposal would be
> > anywhere between 2 years
> > and upwards !
> > >
> > > any leads and pointers ?
> > >
> > > = Shanti Chordia <at> Shanthilal
> > > contact number +91 94440 19347 preferably sms
> > >
> > >
> > > Save all your chat conversations. Find them
> > online at
> > http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________________
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?
> Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
>

•  3
  New Members

Sir,

Thank u very much for quick response. I willget back with inputs after some time........


sroy1947 <sroy1947 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi Anurag,

Your query seems to be "Is the practice of appointment of APIOs and
PIOs under the same roof a deliberate attempt by P/A to gain 5 days
extra?"

Actually, (and this is where I differ with many other RTI "experts") I
opine:

1) There should be many more APIOs than PIOs. The P/A is required to
have APIOs at every sub-divisional / sub-district level These APIOs
are only to act as Post Office for receiving and conveying the RTI
requests to the CONCERNED PIO. This is the most CRITICAL step in the
RTI process - because in a P/A with multiple PIOs SOMEBODY must be
accountable to ensure that the RTI request is processed properly
WITHIN the P/A. If there are 5 days extra allowed - these 5 days are
WELL SPENT if the APIO forwards it to the right PIO(s) dealing with
the subject (ie. the APIO discharges his duties properly). If there is
any problem with the application fee or IPO then the APIO should be
doing "the needful" and not the PIO.

2) As per me, PIOs should not be receiving RTIs. PIO should be giving
information or applying their minds to exemptions (ie "dealing with"
RTI requests).

3) If the APIO /PIO is within the same premises (in many cases they
share a common wall) then it is silly to add 5 days extra. However,
the CIC has been allowing 5 days extra in such cases also. (I recall
some matter of Gita Verma's on his point)

Unfortunately the APIOs /PIOs are not working this way. There is some
vague drafting on the RTI Act in section 5(1) / 5(2). RTI'ers who
follow our Responsible RTI Code will not face such problems - because
they would have checked out the P/A's website in advance and framed /
filed their requests accordingly..

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, anurag prasad <yanuragprasad <at> ...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi.
>
>
> Most of the goverment of india and state goverments hosting a lot
of infomration under RTI. I have browsed all most 90% of them. It is
observed, that majority of the public authorities have AA, PIO and
APIO. It is also observed that most of the APIOs and PIOs are under
the same roof. Is it clear violation of the act???????. Or is it
deliberate attempt of the public authorities to gain time of another
five days???????? or the drafting of the circulars by DOPT is in poor
shape?????????. Can any throw light on these .
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
Try it now.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

•  3
  New Members

Dear Freinds ,
In an very early Case coming up To hearing with Karnataka Information Commission , The PIO Ms Kathyaini (PRO also) Took a stand that She should have the Advantage of the 5 days to receive the RTI Application from APIO in the same building /same campus , as such her reply made after 30days was in order .
Our arguments were that since the APIO & PIO work in one Building/campus the argument that it takes 5 days to move within the campus is illogical, untenable and further APIO posts should be in places where PIO is not located and every PIO should necessarly be Custodian of Documents and not merely an officer who process or answers replies ( In this case PRO is not the custodian of Town planning sketches & Plans , Like wise PIO in Law Department of Canara Bank is not custodian papers deposited as Deposit of title deeds with an intention to create mortagage (Legally Known as Equitable mortagage)
Hence the reply sent after 30 days is not valid as there is already an Refusal which has been deemed at the Time of lapse of 30 days , the reply now becomes infructous as we had made our complaint on the 31st day .
Karnataka Information commission found our arguments in order but ordered setting up of an RTI Cell exclusively to process RTI pleas under Clause 19(8)(a)(iv)
Hence it is clear violation of the Act

N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte & Trustee RTI Study Centre, #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004

Save all your chat conversations. Find them online at http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php

•  3
  New Members

Hi Vikram,

Some of the arguments are fallacious:

1) The Act specifically provides that 5 days extra is allowed when RTI
request is received by the APIO. So technically Ms. Kathayaini is /
was correct. If any change is required it is to be made in the RTI Act.

2) I am shocked that your SIC has apparently ordering RTI cells to be
formed by virtue of 19(8)(a)(iv). It reads as

"(iv) by making necessary changes to its practices in relation to
the maintenance, management and destruction of records;"

What correlation does this have with RTI cells / PIO practices? None.
But perhaps the facts and circumstances of the individual case may
have some bearing.

3) It is not required that designated PIO must be custodian of
documents OR vice-versa. By virtue of 5(4) r/w 5(5) any PIO can seek
any assistance from any "officer" - ie. clerks / peons / drivers etc
are excluded. So the PIO of Law department (if he is receiving PIO) is
required (and also empowered) to collect the information from his
Titles Dept to give to applicant INSTEAD of transferring it u/s 6(3)
to the PIO of his Titles Dept.

I am increasingly getting the feeling (if what you say is true) that
there is complete anarchy at the Karnataka SIC - which is functioning
in a high handed fashion.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, Vikram Simha <vikramsimha54 <at> ...> wrote:
>
> Dear Freinds ,
> In an very early Case coming up To hearing with Karnataka
Information Commission , The PIO Ms Kathyaini (PRO also) Took a stand
that She should have the Advantage of the 5 days to receive the RTI
Application from APIO in the same building /same campus , as such her
reply made after 30days was in order .
> Our arguments were that since the APIO & PIO work in one
Building/campus the argument that it takes 5 days to move within the
campus is illogical, untenable and further APIO posts should be in
places where PIO is not located and every PIO should necessarly be
Custodian of Documents and not merely an officer who process or
answers replies ( In this case PRO is not the custodian of Town
planning sketches & Plans , Like wise PIO in Law Department of Canara
Bank is not custodian papers deposited as Deposit of title deeds with
an intention to create mortagage (Legally Known as Equitable mortagage)
> Hence the reply sent after 30 days is not valid as there is already
an Refusal which has been deemed at the Time of lapse of 30 days , the
reply now becomes infructous as we had made our complaint on the 31st
day .
> Karnataka Information commission found our arguments in order but
ordered setting up of an RTI Cell exclusively to process RTI pleas
under Clause 19(8)(a)(iv)
> Hence it is clear violation of the Act
>
> N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte & Trustee RTI Study Centre, #12 Sumeru
Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004
>
>
> Save all your chat conversations. Find them online at
http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
>

•  3
  New Members

Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the
rti_india group:

Ours is a group of responsible socially concerned people.
I urgently request your assistance in weighting the relevance
today of 14 socio-religious issues. Please cast votes
for a MAXIMUM of 5 options which are the most important issues
for you. If you STRONGLY feel that some other issues
are more important kindly email me direct. I hope that the
results of this poll will be useful to other members in
their own actions. You must TICK the final Choice (not
counted as a vote). THANKS. Sarbajit

o Denunciation of polytheism,
o Rejection of the caste system and its abolition
o Rejection of the dowry system and its abolition,
o Abolition of laws like 498A / Dom Violence Act
o Emancipation of women, (not Women's reservation Bill)
o Promoting Widow remarriage
o Stopping Child Marriages
o Reform of educational system,
o Opposition to sati (the practice of burning widows alive),
o Spread of knowledge by universal access to information,
o Legal reform especially in fields of personal, family and secular law,
o Simplicity and purity in public and private affairs
o Opposing corrupting influences like intoxicants (liquor/tobacco/drugs), cinema / television, devadasi system, politicians etc.
o Advocating harsher punishments for paedopilia
o TICK THIS FIELD (prevents automated responses)

To vote, please visit the following web page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/surveys?id=12727825

Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are
not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups
web site listed above.

Thanks!

•  3
  New Members
•  1
  New Polls

Its no point trying to counter the PIOs stand, line by
line. A view from the third angle is required here.
Have and open mind, when ever the respondents put up
their defence. After all they are trying to save their
skin.

One has to examine how the APIO was appointed. Was it
by the Public Authority, Under Section 4(1)(b)(xvi) or
by the head of office under section 5(2)?

If the former is true, the APIO can enjoy the grace of
5 days like elaborated by Sarbajit. For the latter,
Section 5(4) & 5(5) will come into play and going by
the CIC's decision where the moderator of the list was
the appellant, I guess, five days benefit cannot be
allowed. I know many in this list would raise the
contents of second para of 5(2) but we have several
CIC decisions stating otherwise.

May I ask what is the main object of the RTI
Applicant. While we file applications to access
information on public interest, we do not focus on the
penalty provision for the APIO/PIOs etc. I generally
give the APIOs at least ten days of doubt and never go
for a complain until and unless the malafide grounds
can be proven or there is gross and deliberate delay
on the part of the PIO.

I dont buy your story on the "custodian" theory you
prayed before the SIC. Though Sarbajit has already
explained, let me inform, if I were the SIC, I would
have turned down your arguments on the grounds that
you were actually referring to the Manual of Office
Procedure and not the RTI Act. This Manual of DoP&T
will not necessarily apply here. Thanks to one of the
earlier decisions by IC(PB).

Yes, maybe the SIC has erred in the interpretation of
19(8)(a)(iv). But then the SIC is still the boss and
empowered to do so under various provision in the act.

Maybe you could have pressed for the lack of
implementation of Section 4(1)(b) by the Public
Authority instead. Especially 4(1)(b)(iv), (v) & (vi).
You would have checkmated the Public Authority by
quoting from their own manuals, just like IC Prof.
Ansari did in the Pyarelal case full bench decision
concering file notings. He used the definations from
the DoP&T's own Manual of Office procedure.

Its over two years since the RTI Act was implemented.
Every time I find more and more RTI Applicants, NGOs,
Activists etc. seem to focus exclusively on Sections 5
to 20. Just why do you folks skip Section 2 & 4. The
real gold mine lies in these two sections. Its barely
three pages long. Print them out in large letters and
read them as many times as possible.

Best wishes

Manoj Pai

Ahmedabad
--- sroy1947 <sroy1947 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi Vikram,
>
> Some of the arguments are fallacious:
>
> 1) The Act specifically provides that 5 days extra
> is allowed when RTI
> request is received by the APIO. So technically Ms.
> Kathayaini is /
> was correct. If any change is required it is to be
> made in the RTI Act.
>
>
> Sarbajit
>
> Application from APIO in the same building /same
> campus , as such her
> reply made after 30days was in order .
> > Our arguments were that since the APIO & PIO work
> in one
> Building/campus the argument that it takes 5 days to
> move within the
> campus is illogical, untenable and further APIO
> posts should be in

__________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

•  3
  New Members
•  1
  New Polls

Dear Sarbajit,

Thanks for your prompt reply, I am a retired Merchant
navy officer,After making a study on RTI and thanks to
the knowledge of websites on RTI which is of immence
help for a layperson like me, which has given me a lot
of help for which i am thankful for, I am running a
free RTI helpline at St andrews church premises at
hill road bandra west mumbai
the high court fees are gone up i personally visited
the High court fees for admission gone up from 5000 to
10000, than paper work, lawyers fees, cheapest may be
Rs 20,000. For appearance for hearing anything between
Rs 1000 to 5000 depends on status of lawyer,
small time lawyers may charge Rs 1000 but many sell
you out, being paid by opposite side
I had lately filed a complain against a lawyer
at Bar council the fees last year was 250 this year
raised to Rs 850, Rs 100 for stamp paper, as i had the
format for typing the affidavate Rs 30, after which i
hand to make seven sets xerox copies Rs 240
no stapler pins but stiched with red tread paid Rs 20
, to notarise same Rs 100 tavel expenses Rs 20
cheapest mode of transport Bus and train
so i paid over one thousand rupees, now waiting for
hearing
I do know that one can represent oneself in a court
but the initial procedure is tedious, i tried filing
one case myself but could not do so, also lawyers put
objection if lay people fight cases why they have to
be lawyers, study so much, waste time in courts
become a member of Bar association pay fees etc.
if the procedure was user friendly it would be ok
i am fighting the biggest co-operative society
the Salsette catholic co-operative society Bandra
after making a complete study of the Maharashtra
co-operative society act and rules, i won two cases
at Dy.Registar of co-operative society quashi judicial
court although they are corrupt using RTI against them
got order in my favour on the merrits of the case the
society had two lawyers to represent them while i
fought the case on my own no lawyer, now they have
appealed by review petition at Joint registars again
here too i am fighting the case on my own, fighting
these big sharks.win or loose
next it will go to co-operative court where i will
need a lawyer and have to spend money
I cannot go to supreme court directly without going to
lower courts, i am grateful to your offer
but supreme court will not entertain my case without
me following the due process of law going to lower
courts. If i could jump the fence and go directly to
supreme court i would be happy to do so, please
explore the possibility if i can do so, go straight to
supreme court.if not i will have to go one step at a
time and finally at supreme court take your kind
assistance, my brother in law stays in Delhi so
no problem of stay.

Rgds leslie

--- sroy1947 <sroy1947 <at> yahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi Leslie,
>
> 1) We are using the THREAT of going to HC in Writ.
> So whatever you
> draft in RTI could appear to be with the motive of
> going to HC (This
> is obviously on a case to case basis as to when to
> use this tactic for
> it could also backfire and the P/A clams up).
>
> 2) Although I am amazed that filing a writ in a HC
> costs 25,000 (not
> if you Do-It-Yourself) with the method as I guided
> you (you could keep
> it within Rs. 2000 all told).
>
> 3) If the HCs are really so expensive (or the
> lawyers are conning
> you), As a SPECIAL OFFER for genuine English
> speaking [RTI_India]ns
> public spirited and confident enough to appear in
> person, I may be
> able to arrange that they get the benefit of
> bulk-rates for drafting,
> typing and filing / clerkage in the Supreme Court.
> It shouldn't
> exceed Rs.5,000 (no credit) and you will normally be
> standing before a
> bench within 10 days. Even if you lose (as you
> probably will the first
> time around) it will be a valuable experience and
> will improve your
> RTI'ing like anything. NB: This is not a con like
> some RTI NGOs are
> touting (ie. where they phasao victims of CIC / SIC
> under
> free-ka-laalach and take money from the other side).
>
> 4) For civil suits involving evidence you may have
> to give certified
> copies, but there is usually some flexibility in
> Writs where the
> citizen can make a declaration in the supporting
> affidavit that all
> annexures are true copies to the best of his
> knowledge.
>
> BTW: "certified copies" are included in definition
> of "information".
> So you shouldn't have to pay more than Rs.2 per
> page. Fellow RTI'ers
> can inform us how are they interpreting this in the
> various States?
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, LESLIE ALMEIDA
> <lesals2000 <at> ...> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Sroy
> >
> > to file writ petition in high court in mumbai
> minimum
> > cost Rs 25,000 that too to make SIC/CIC to comply
> > withen time frame
> > is it worth spending that sort of money.
> >
> > RTI says Rs 2 per page but not specified certified
> > true copies, only certified true copies are
> admitted
> > in a court of law. so one has to pay Rs 27 per
> page
> > for certified true copy
> > for obtaining assesment for building per year one
> page
> > Rs 230
> > from Building proposal department Rs 2 per page
> for
> > xerox copy plus Rs 25 for certifying it as true
> copy
> > for building plans Rs 50 for xerox for certifying
> came
> > can the common man afford these charges????
> >
> > Leslie Almeida
> >
> >
> > --- sroy1947 <sroy1947 <at> ...> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Shanti,
> > >
> > > If there is delay in listing a 2nd appeal at the
> > > SIC,
> > > it is advisable to formally request the
> Registrar of
> > > the SIC/CIC to list the matter "forthwith" for
> the
> > > "following
> > > reasons" (you can list these based on your
> case).
> > >
> > > After 15 days you can again remind the Registry
> that
> > > matter is urgent since it concerns your
> "Fundamental
> > > Right
> > > to Information" which is being abridged by this
> > > great delay.
> > >
> > > If you THEN approach the HC in WRIT u/a 226 +
> 227
> > > against the SIC ONLY (no other Respondent),
> annexing
> > > your
> > > correspondence with SIC Registry, and a SINGLE
> > > PRAYER seeking
> > > directions for early disposal of your 2nd
> Appeal,
> > > any
> > > judge will be happy to grant you your relief
> > > IMMEDIATELY
> > > and clear his docket. You MUST serve the SIC
> > > Registry
> > > well in advance of the HC hearing date so that
> they
> > > can
> > > be present to agree to give you a early disposal
> > > (and
> > > get this matter off their backs).
> > >
> > > Keep all pleadings very polite and reasonable.
> > >
> > > Hope you agree.
> > >
> > > Sarbajit
> > >
> > > --- In rti_india <at> yahoogroups.com, shanti chordia
> > > <jdp_238 <at> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > If the first appeal is partially or fully
> > > dismissed, you may prefer
> > > a second appeal which lies with the Commission
> > > within 90. More time
> > > may be admitted on reasonable grounds.
> > > > No time limit has been set in the Act for the
> > > disposal of appeal
> > > with the Commission. It is a shortcoming of the
> Act
> > > which we are
> > > pursuing with the government. Usually, the
> Central
> > > Information
> > > Commission delivers its decision within 90 days.
> > > > The Act has not put a cap on the time within
> which
> > > an appeal with
> > > the Commission has to be disposed of. In theory,
> the
> > > Commission could
> > > take 50 years if it wanted to.
> > > > The decision of the Commission shall be
> binding.
> > > However, you are
> > > always at liberty to approach a High Court with
> a
> > > writ petition.
> > > > I found the above on this link
> > > http://www.nyayabhoomi.org/rti/understanding.htm
> > > >
> > > > q1) is this right ?
> > > > q2) are there any such WRIT disposals by any
> HC
> > > directing the
> > > SIComms to dispose off such appeals ?
> > > > q3) what happens if the HC on entertaining my
> writ
> > > (admitting it and
> > > ordering notice !) views the non-communication
> from
> > > the SIComm as a
> > > deemed refusal and therefore the whole purpose
> will
> > > be killed since
> > > the PAs would take their own sweet time to
> respond
> > > the HC writ ..
> > > where the backlog for final disposal would be
> > > anywhere between 2 years
> > > and upwards !
> > > >
> > > > any leads and pointers ?
> > > >
> > > > = Shanti Chordia <at> Shanthilal
> > > > contact number +91 94440 19347 preferably sms
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Save all your chat conversations. Find
> them
> > > online at
> > >
> http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/webmessengerpromo.php
>
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

•  2
  New Members
•  1
  New Polls