Dear Sh.Rakesh Agarwal,
In my decision against deptt of post, IC(A) have rejected my appeal by his 
Takia Kalam--"there is no denial of information". appellant is free to inspect 
the relevant files.
As there is no denial of information, the appellant is free to seek inspection 
of the relevant records, so as to identify and specify the required 
information, which should be furnished as per the provisions of the Act. 
 
Actually , I sent one RTI application and one first appeal from Bikaner to 
Jaipur at the same office,same day ,same post office.RTI application returned 
back after 13 days with remarks of incorrect pin code and address.This prima 
facie false reply has been given clean chit in his decision WITHOUT MENTIONING 
ACTUAL DESIRED INFORMATION IN THE DECISION.
Decision No. 2792/IC(A)/2008 dated 09/07/2008 on Appeal from Sh. Manoj K. Kamra 
Vs Department of Posts
If you really plan to challange his decision,kindly examine my file also 
available at CIC OFFICE.
regards
Manoj K.Kamra
 


--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Rakesh Agarwal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: Rakesh Agarwal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [rti_india] Ansari's novel interprentation of "information"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL 
PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], "'Hemant Goswami'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 8:56 PM






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]

 














      

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

Reply via email to