Some initative by motivated citizens inspection of SIC office is a step in the right direction if there are more knowlegable RTI activist's they should join in the Raid and support Krisnaraj Rao and others, if Krishnaraj Rao has powers of ACB, i am sure he would also raid their homes for hidden assests, let us work on a common platform for eradicating corruption, and if for some reason we cannot go along with him give him the moral support. L.Almeida
--- On Sun, 11/16/08, Krishnaraj Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Krishnaraj Rao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Inspection of offices of public authority. To: [email protected] Date: Sunday, November 16, 2008, 11:20 AM :-) 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] com> 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 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xx > > 2008/11/15 sroy1947 <[EMAIL PROTECTED] com <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] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
