Hmmm... Those who cant stand the heat of the kitchen shouldn't cook. Elvis has just left the building.
We don't deal in conspiracy theories but fact. Here is a fact: http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_31012008_28.pdf The decision of CIC in Shri Dinesh Thaker versus Ministry of Company Affairs. Shri Thakker r/o Mumbai (Maharashtra) applied for information u/s 6 of RTI Act - IC ANT asked him to fuck off - saying that by a previous decision of his (ie. ANT's) the P/A is not bound to honour requests for information under RTI Act, that the PIO is not bound to give information, and that the P/A is free to demand whatever fees it wants to provide information including by requiring the applicant to withdraw his RTI request in favour of already laid down procedures. In a nut-shell Mr Thakker (like scores of similar applicants) was told that provisions in the Companies Act of 1956 OVER-RIDE those of RTI Act 2005. Now the moot point is, "WHERE IS THE PREVIOUS DECISION OF ANT AND WHY IS IT NOT ON THE CIC WEBSITE?" For those interested it is "K. Lall Vs. Ministry of Company Affairs; Appeal No.CIC/AT/A/2007/00112; Date of Decision:12.4.2007." Well as it turns out, this "landmark" decision was WRITTEN BY the P/A (and rubber stamped by ANT) because the bloody fool Appellant( a serial RTIer senior citizen) failed to show up, and incidentally raised all sorts of stupid grounds - such as "I am not interested in receiving information but only want my queries to be answered". CRUCIALLY, it was not delivered in "open proceedings" as required by Rules. As a result, this "binding" decision of IC ANT is used by every other IC to deny information via RTI Act - and to allow P/As to charge whatever they want to provide information. These buggers are stealing the RTI Act from under our noses, what are we going to do about it ? Sarbajit --- In [email protected], "Krishnaraj Rao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Possible spam: Index|View Source > This message was identified as spam. > > Sorry Chief. I can't subscribe to conspiracy theories... yours or anybody else's. > > If your actions as moderator are governed by a conspiracy theory of this sort, then I would rather not be part of your email group. > > I shall unsubscribe myself from your group. All the Best to you. > > I do hope you will choose not to moderate out any of our exchanges this morning... including the one earlier that asked your members to email me directly if they want to continue receiving my despatches. > > Warmly, > Krish >
