On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 6:38 PM, sunil datta
<[email protected]>wrote:

> On Feb 16, 9:39 pm, satyaakam goswami <[email protected]> wrote:
> >  On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Narendra Sisodiya <
> >
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > blog -
> > >http://lug-iitd.posterous.com/aicte-refused-to-give-details-of-mou-be.
> ..
> >
> > can we file one more RTI asking with reference to the letter from MHRD
> > stating on one hand they are saying in larger public interest and this
> > details of MOU between Microsoft and Autodesk are indeed important to
> know
> > in the interest of public , let us meetup with SFLC with all the details
> we
> > have so far when is it possible for you ,were you able to place a call
> today
> > ?
> >
> > -Satya
>
> yes, but careful drafting of RTI application is required. I think a
> lawyer should be consulted.
>
> I don't think asking for MOU will help in this regard firstly because
> one will have to fight a battle to prove larger public interest to get
> a copy of MOU ,


AICTE is not a private entity, We must have a copy of MoU to get full
details. AICTE should not hide these documents. Most important things is -
"they are hiding  some info (MoU), MoU must be having something sercet which
they do not want to be made public"



> secondly, MOU is not the right document. As you said
> "can we file one more RTI asking with reference to the letter from
> MHRD" is the right point. I will like to put some points:
> 1) Why were MHRD recommendations not taken into consideration.
>

MHRD recommendations were came this month, I filed RTI this 2-3 month back.



> 2) Name of the committee members and their experience in propritory
> and open source software and the time spend by the committee to
> decide .............
> 3) What advantages were seen in propritory and what were the
> disadvantages on open source software because of which propritory
> software was chosen.
> 4) What studies were made and the details of the experts in open
> source software who were consulted before reach to the conclusion that
> propitiatory software are the best.
>
> I have just posted some points, not properly drafted, but will help
> you on how to trap those guys. I have just reached Delhi and a bit
> tired, and I am sure you can easily find mistakes, so, if you find any
> mistake just correct yourself.
>
> If anyone want, I can try to get this properly drafted.
>
> I think RTI is the cheapest tool and the most efficient one to trap
> them. As per my experience [in Distt Courts] it will not be wise to
> file a case.
>
> Sunil Datta
> www.opensourcenuts.com
>
> --
> LUG@IITD - http://tinyurl.com/ycueutm
>



-- 
┌─────────────────────────┐
│    Narendra Sisodiya
│    http://narendrasisodiya.com
└─────────────────────────┘

-- 
LUG@IITD - http://tinyurl.com/ycueutm

Reply via email to