Ansari's novel interprentation of "information"
Information Commission M.A. Ansari read out section 2(j) to me and said that
a Commissioner can decide to allow inspection in lieu of copies of
documents. He also said that since Inspection is mentioned in clause (i) and
copies in clause (ii), I should be grateful if he gave me access under the
"preferential" clause.
The hearing took place yesterday in a case where Department of Posts had
asked me to deposit more than Rs.1,25,000 as "Labour charges". As half
expected, he accused me of malafide and said that I cannot expect the
government officers to do research for me.
All I wanted was the delivery status of all articles sent through speed post
across the country on one particular day - chosen at random - in order to
assess their performance. My speed post articles were being delivered in 3
to 10 days within the same city and some articles either went missing or
were delivered to the wrong address. Mr. Ansari said I should visit their
offices across the country and inspect the status for myself; this is when
he mentioned the "preferential" clause.
I am preparing a writ for Delhi High Court. This is the 3rd such instance
with Ansari over the last two years.
I have immense respect for other ICs but whilst Padma's knowledge of RTI is
elementary, Ansari is an example of how to deliberately and shamelessly kill
transparency and accountability.
A copy of Premchand's "Panch Parmeshwar" is on the way to Ansari - with a
bouquet.
Rakesh Agarwal
NyayaBhoomi
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
RSS Feed