Dear Rakesh

If there is no loose end in the law in this point, then why have
IC(PB), C'IC(WH) and IC(T) all delivered decisions recognising
that 7(3) allows a CPIO unbridled discretion to further fees representing
cost of providing the information which are in addition to those
prescribed for 7(1) or 7(5)? Further Fees such as Rs. 4 Lakhs,
and Rs 40,000 where the copying charges are only about Rs.600
or so.

Let us examine IC(PB)'s role. In 2006 she circulated a note in CIC
raising the 7(3) issue. It was discussed on 7.3.2006 and 14.3.200
as recorded in CIC minutes of meeting. In July 2006 she was the
first IC to pass an order (Krishan Aggarwal) allowing 7(3) fees.

Bhagat Singh does not apply here since there is no denial of
information. In fact all these ICs are saying provide the information
BUT charge HIM EXORBITANTLY for it.  IC(T) goes out of his way to
coach / tutor PIOs on how to go about doing this. Read his orders.
He orders PIOs' - compute 7(3) fees even for granting inspection to
applicants.

Are we - the so-called great RTI activists of India - prepared to
concede this battle to them? Are they Gods whose knowledg
of English or legal experience is better than ours? If after 3 years of
RTI Act and this group we cannot fight such battles we should consider
disbanding ourselves.

Sarbajit

On 11/30/08, RAKESH GUPTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Reply via email to