Hi Pravin, Krishnaraj, 1) This is [RTI_India] and not HJ :-)
2) Inspection u/s 6 is distinct from inspection u/s 4. 3) Website is not mandatory under RTI Act. 4) Nothing wrong with being "motley". Diversity is what makes India great. Our laws make us great too. Our constant fighting with each other over things like religion, caste, linguistics etc is what keeps us ever alert for war with our neighbours. 5) FYI the concept of "inspection" vide 4(4) was first propounded on [RTI_India]. A few days later HJ picked (stole?) it up. Unfortunately in Maharashtra (and HJ), the standard of English has didged like anything and they couldnt understand the limited scope of inspection vide 4(4) we conceived for it. Since Krishnaraj was a signatory to the declaration I excerpted, we can discuss it on R.I. (also since I only have "read only" privileges on HJ and am not allowed to corrupt HJ members there by exposing their mentors and gurujis by my posts). Sarbajit --- In [email protected], Pravin Dali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dear Krisharaj Rao, > > > I agree with u that it is now need of tha day to take inspection of public authorities by group of activist together. > > > I have to share with u and HJ members,my experience of inspection of DGR office,Malhotra House. > > I had asked for inspection regarding compliane of section 4 of RTI and other 10 points,vide my application dt.23.9.08.A copy is attached h/w. > > DGR replied and I took the inspection on 15.1.08 by proir appointment.The concerned clerk showed me one file in which all 14/15 provisions under section4 were covered.I asked Mr.Amne,PIO,regarding web publishing of such information,so as to reduce/minimise the inflow of RTI applications.He replied that Dept do not have enough fund for web site,computerisation and e governance. > I asked him how much it cost to construct the website?He said that he is not > knowning. > > Web publishing do not cost much.Several govt dept/PSU,s have approched NIC(National Informatics Centre) for websites,complaint management software,intellegence softwares,business softwares,etc and accordingy NIC has done the job.Its results are good.But co po dept is never willing to apply IT & RTI in spirit.This is due to their vested interst.These people make the money out of every complaint.That too from both the side.The complaint/matters are source of income for them. > > Among other points,I had asked the dept regarding infornation on fradulent societies wherein recoveries are effected from managing commitees under section 83/88 of Mcs Act. > > He has repied that they do not have such records. > > The commissioner of co operation textiles has also not cared for impementation of section 4 of the RTI.He has not replied on that that issue. > > It is now high time to take the collective inspection and compel public authrities to publish the requrements on website,update at regular intervals,e governannce etc. > > I hope u and HJ members take it seriosly. > > Thanks. > > Pravin M Dali. > 9869415672 > > > > > Krishnaraj Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :-) > > 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] > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Get perfect Email ID for your Resume. Get before others grab. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
