:-) I am glad to hear Anil Heble's opinion on this public platform... at long last. It is amazing how one-to-one meetings change equations and perceptions.
This motley guy who has little better to do thanks you deeply, Anil. Warm Regards, Krish On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 7:56 AM, ANIL HEBLE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For lack of better things to do these motley group of activists have > been > "raiding" offices of Public Authorities more in Maharashtra and less in > other places. Even if permitted under the Act, making this a regular habit > is > only helping in pushing the backs of these chosen Authority's to the wall. > > May make more sense in spreading power of RTI Act amongst people . > > Regards / Anil Heble > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > 2008/11/15 sroy1947 <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <sroy1947%40yahoo.com>> > > > Recently a few misguided (or rather misinformed) RTI activists raided > > the office of Maharashtra SIC demanding as follows:- > > > > "that under section section 4 read with section 2 (j)(i), every public > > authority has an obligation to allow inspection of files without > > appointment, prior appointment or any preconditions. We expect that > > henceforth, your office will give inspection of all your records which > > can be given under RTI Act, sought by any citizen of India." > > > > What is even more surprising is that these people claim to be RTI > > veterans seeking information since Nov 2006 under RTI. > > > > If the above (novel) interpretation is true <rol> then why do we need > > section 6, and SICs in the first place. I got this as a "PRESS > > RELEASE" in my email box, and a few RTI Yahoo groups have published it > > where it stands uncontradicted. > > > > Sarbajit > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
