As Far as my Knowledge goes , the first part of any Appeal/Complaint Proceddings should be of Ensuring that the Information Seeker Gets the Relief of Getting the Information and then and only then can the Second part of Compensating for any detriment suffered or Penalty proccedings heard . The Erring PIO is given oppurtunity to either counter the Accusations leveled by way of written or oral arguments -- Like PIOs argue that they received the RTI Request itself after the mandatory period (for which they have the inward register) , they were entrusted with another work on deputation (one case is now before division bench of Karnataka high Court) , That they could not trace the File , Previous Incumbent has not handed over charge nor keys to the Safe where the records are kept( KIC directed the Asst Commissioner to Break Open the Lock in his Presence) But i donot think that there will no " new Facts Emerging or came to light" when all his statements are recorded , I still have reservations that penalty proccedings are not conducted properly and there is lots of Scope for manipulations . We got dtudy these ten cases and that too half of them of IC-ANT and what were the reasons given for seting aside such penalties levied --- Intersting issue
N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte & Trustee RTI Study Centre , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004. --- On Sun, 14/12/08, Satish Kumar Kapoor <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Satish Kumar Kapoor <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [rti_india] CIC's lies exposed in Parliament > To: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, 14 December, 2008, 3:52 PM > This figure of penalities and withdrawal of penalities > itself speak bise of ICs in dealing with complaints against > PIOs/Cpios > > S.K.Kapoor > > --- On Sat, 12/13/08, C K Jam <[email protected]> > wrote: > > From: C K Jam <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [rti_india] CIC's lies exposed in > Parliament > To: [email protected] > Date: Saturday, December 13, 2008, 8:50 AM > > The standard phrase used is because "new facts emerged > or came to > light". > > RTIwanted > > --- On Fri, 12/12/08, Vikram Simha > <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Vikram Simha <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [rti_india] CIC's lies exposed in > Parliament > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, December 12, 2008, 8:07 PM > > > > > > > Under which Section do they Withdraw Penalties ? iF So why > did they Impose > Penalty in the First Instance ? > > N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte & RTI Study Centre , #12 > Sumeru Sir M N Krishna > Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004. > > --- On Fri, 12/12/08, sarbajit roy <sroy1...@yahoo. > com> wrote: > > > From: sarbajit roy <sroy1...@yahoo. com> > > Subject: [rti_india] CIC's lies exposed in > Parliament > > To: rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com > > Date: Friday, 12 December, 2008, 9:12 AM > > Message from C.K.Jam (RTIwanted) > > .PDF File attachment being uploaded separately > > > > PIB Press Release on 11 December 2008: > > PIB Press Release > > > > Lok Sabha > > > > > > Since its inception, the Central Information > Commission has > > received 24145 complaints and appeals upto 30.09.2008. > 8670 > > cases > > were pending for disposal as on 30.09.2008 for reasons > like > > shortage of > > Information Commissioners vis-à-vis the workload. > > > > All cases of appeals and complaints to the Commission > > involve delay or denial of information. Information > about > > number of show cause notices > > issued for imposition of penalties is not maintained. > > Penalties have, however, been imposed in 211 cases.In > seven > > cases financial penalty was withdrawn after > imposition. > > > > Government has recently appointed four more > Information > > Commissioners > > in the Commission with a view to step up the disposal > of > > cases as well > > as for effective implementation of RTI Act. > > > > This information was given by the Minister of State in > the > > Prime Minister’s Office, Shri Prithviraj Chavan in a > > written reply to a question in Lok Sabha today. > > ============ ========= ========= == > > > > From where did the Hon'ble Minister get these > figures ? > > > > Somebody should haul him up for misleading the house ! > > > > Or, has the CIC been displaying incorrect figures on > its > > website and giving misleading and incorrect > information in > > reply to RTI applications ? > > > > As per CIC Web site, as on 30 September 2008: > > Pending : 9183; Minister says 8670 > > Cummulative disposed: 16915 > > Therefore Total: 26098; Minister says 24145 > > As per reply to RTI Application (please see the > attached > > pdf document): > > > > Total Penalties imposed upto 21 August 2008: 131 > > Minister says upto 30 September 2008: 211 > > > > Total Penalties withdrawn upto 21 August 2008: 10 > > > > Minister says upto 30 September 2008: 7 > > > > IC Sailesh Gandhi was administered oath of office on > 18 > > September 2008. Even assuming that he started imposing > > penalties on day 1, > > that is from 18 September itself, he couldn't have > been > > responsible for > > imposing 80 penalties in 12 days. In any case he needs > to > > give a show > > cause notice to the PIO before imposing any penalty. > > Therefore, there is > > no chance of 80 penalties in 12 days especially when > they > > have imposed only 131 Penalties in nearly 33 months ! > > > > So, what are the correct figures ? > > > > RTIwanted > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- ------ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to > http://messenger. > yahoo..com/ invite/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
