Kindly see the section refered in the Judgement.
7 (3) Where a decision is taken to provide the information on payment of any further fee representing the cost of providing the information, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall send an intimation to the person making the request, giving— (a) the details of further fees representing the cost of providing the information as determined by him,together with the calculations made to arrive at the amount in accordance with fee prescribed under subsection (1), requesting him to deposit that fees, and the period intervening between the despatch of the said intimation and payment of fees shall be excluded for the purpose of calculating the period of thirty days referred to in that sub-section; Under lined portion clearly means fees should be as per Section 7(1) Further fee in the present subsection means additional fee to be paid in addition to fee already paid Rs 10/ Rs 50/ or any other fee at the time of RTI request as per the RTI Act.. Now see Section 7(1) 7. (1) Subject to the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 5 or the proviso to subsection (3) of section 6, the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, on receipt of a request undersection 6 shall, as expeditiously as possible, and in any case within thirty days of the receipt of the request, either provide the information on payment of such fee as may be prescribed or reject the request for any of the reasons specified in sections 8 and 9: Provided that where the information sought for concerns the life or liberty of a person, the same shall be provided within forty-eight hours of the receipt of the request. The plain reading of above clear that interpreation by ICT is without reading the whole provision. with regards rakesh gupta --- On Sun, 30/11/08, sroy1947 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: sroy1947 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [rti_india] URGENT APPEAL To: [email protected] Date: Sunday, 30 November, 2008, 9:46 AM Dear Fellow RTI-ers As many of us know IC A.N. Tiwari is on a one man crusade to scuttle the RTI Act. I am not going to list the numerous tactics he uses, but shall stick to his published decisions. For example, IC(T) is the brains behind a novel interpretation of 7(3)(i) whereby he permits P/As to charge exorbitant "costs" from the applicants. These are some of these decisions. http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ AT-14072008- 04.pdf http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ Decision_ 26032008_ 25.pdf http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ AT-22052008- 15.pdf http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ AT-08072008- 16.pdf http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ AT-22052008- 15.pdf CIC/AT/C/2007/ 00282 15.10.2007 I URGENTLY (within 48 hours) require SERIOUS assistance from this group. 1) A list of decisions (with CIC links) of other ICs where they go along with IC(T)'s reasoning. I seem to recall IC(A) had also given a few decisions like this. 2) A list of decisions of other ICs where this approach of 7(3) was rejected. I seem to recall IC(PB) had a few of these. 3) An analysis of why IC(T) is wrong. Any SC judgements etc. 4) An analysis of why IC(T) could be right. Sarbajit Connect with friends all over the world. Get Yahoo! India Messenger at http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/?wm=n/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
