Dear Rakesh, 'Hosh' not 'Josh'. P Rajan's appeals were rightly dismissed by both M.M.Ansari as well as A.N.Tewari later on. Only IC(PB) game him some "hollow" relief in Complaint. IC(PB)'s order is the most interesting.
http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_25072006_2.pdf http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_20042007_07.pdf http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/CIC_Order_Dtd_06032006.pdf Why did P Rajan not think of 8(1)(d). Because he is a journalist. Many journalists think they are God and dont have to bother with little things like rules and exemptions which apply to ordinary 2nd class people. I have always held that 8(1)(d) is one of the most powerful (and least understood) exemptions in RTI - which is also why wily Mr.Habibullah refused to pass an order when I invoked it against all the Mir Jafars in Narmada Dam dispute. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], RAKESH GUPTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > dear sirs, > i had already vide this forum informed about the siphoning of fund and tax evasion by Mathrubhumi News paper. > CIC had helped the newspaper by denying the information TO THE INFORMER . > Tax official had not taken action on the tax evasion petetion about the Mathrubhumi News paper. > This action of laughing at the RTI user is payment (bribe) to Government officers in kind to destory the RTI Act.Main suffers of this ACt Act is Government servant. > Due to this Act, they have to become from King to service provider, the chage role is dislike by the public servant. Becasue it has resulted , their illegal bribe income reduced. > if any one want to know more, he may inspect the records at the CIC > Case Ref: CIC/MA/A/2006/258. > The informer Mr P Rajan vide this RTI requested progress in his tax evasion petetions and inspection of the records. > > with regards > rakesh gupta > > colnrkurup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Dear Mr.Manoj Pai, > By now you might have received the scan of the newspaper cutting > I had sent to you. I had translated verbattum. From the responses, it > seems it did not convey what I was wanting to convey. Incidentally I > am not the Information seeker referred in the paper. In fact I do not > know who it is. One individual from that Panchayat had tried to probe > into the affairs of the Panchayat and Mathrubhumi News paper as usual > is mocking at him instead of appreciating his job tomake his mouth > sht. Few months back the same paper had a dig when some one from > Kannur sought certin inconvenient information from the Collectorate, > Kannur. I found that news of Mathrubhumi had made people at Kannur > from digging further. I think you might have realised the cituation > by now. > > Col NR Kurup (Retd) > > --- In [email protected], Manoj Pai <manojpai@> wrote: > > > > Hello Col Kurup & friends, > > > > I have been reading the posts in this thread for a > > while. Here is a clear case of "Lost in translation". > > > > What ever were the contents of the original newspaper > > article, it was penned in good faith. Its just how you > > read it and want to believe. > > > > Majority of the readers informed me that the article > > did not contain anything adverse. It was but a kind of > > awakening alarm for the residents of Kerala. > > > > Maybe Col Kurup would like to re-read the original > > article a few more times to understand it message. > > > > Best wishes > > > > Manoj Pai > > Ahmedabad > > --- sroy1947 <sroy1947@> wrote: > > > > Col NR Kurup <colnrkurup@> wrote: > > > > > > > > In Kerala, anything concerned with the > > > Right to > > > Information Act 2005 > > > > appears to be a taboo for the visual media. The > > > news media, of > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > ______________ > > Be a better friend, newshound, and > > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click here > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
