Dear Friends, RTIA05 is framed to enable common citizens to get information in a simple and easy way. From the following comments, it appears that even RTI applications should be got framed by experts (or say advocates) and got followed by experts (or say advocates) for success. I do not know if it is a way to promote greater consultation by legal consultants in RTI matter. For information of Sarbjit & Satya Prakash, I may inform that I retired as a senior govt official and understand the need for proper drafting very well. In this case, it was certainly not a case of poor drafting but pure and simple use of discretion by IC. I had clarified while asking for addresses and telephone nos that they were needed for identification of allottees and the PIO or IC could give any inormtion they deemed fit for identification instead of denying the info asked for completely. I find from other mails appearing in this group that some activists tried to find out and got names and particulars of beneficieries of say National Rural Employment Gurantee Program in some area and later on field check, many of them were found fake. They could not have carried out field checks unless they got sufficient info about beneficieries and not only names. The basic intention of RTIA is to enable enough information to be had to enable field check and thus ensure transparency. Addresses and telephone nos of industrial units, to whom the said industrial sheds were allotted, cannot result in security breach (sec 8) or pertain to commercial secrets of the third party (sec 11). In fact, the indstrial units are themselves advertising their addresses and telephone nos through various means as part of their marketing efforts. Further, as per sec 8(j), any informtion which cannot be denied to Parliament or a state legislature cannot be denied. Please note that I have given these comments not to offend anyone but just to clarify my own views. As RTI activists, I feel, that our efforts should be not to justify actions by the bureaucracy or the ICs but to encourage citizens to get info under RTIA and ensure that the provisions of RTIA are interpreted properly by all concerned. As I also wote earlier, the information sought by me should already have been given by DSIDC u/s 4 on their website. The information asked for by me is already available with most of the property dealers operating in this area and most of the sheds thus allotted are actualy lying vacant waiting to be sold or rented out. Thanking you, sincerely, mksinghal
________________________________ From: spjrti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, 15 November, 2008 9:15:21 AM Subject: [rti_india] Re: Is addresses of allottees of sheds/plots by Development Authorities an exemp Dear Friends I was also like Singhalji, frustrated with CIC decision and unable to accept that I could be wrong. Then I joined this group and come in touch with Sarbajitji. Drafting the RTI application properly (by Responsible RTI) and filing the First Appeal is most important steps to avoid disappointment. Everyone must read Sarabjitji's First Appeal to RBI (In FILES section of group) before submiting their First Appeal. Satya Prakash --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] ps.com, M K Singhal <mk.singhal@ ...> wrote: > > My Dear Sarabjit, > Thanks for your comments. With best wishes, > sincerely, > mksinghal > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
