Dear Sharmaji Most of us on this group are quite used by now to reading all these funny characters (I clarify that I mean weird non-ASCII characters <wink>)
In view of Mr Vora's "positive" assessment, lets equally critically examine IC(SG)'s 2 latest orders on CIC website (These are dated 24th Dec 2008). http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/SG-24122008-19.pdf http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/SG-24122008-09.pdf In the first decision IC(SG) foolishly dismisses the applicant thus "The appellant is not happy with the reply andd wants the PIO to give a specific provision of the law which would apply to his property. he is effectively seeking an interpretation of the law from the PIO, which is not 'information' as defined under the Act." NOW, what was the PIO's reply - "the requisite information can be had from the website of MCD at www.mcdonline.gov.in"" In these circumstances (and as an Expert on Master Plan of Delhi) I fully agree with "rtiadvice" that IC(SG) has been corrupted by MCD to deny information to a fit applicant / appellant who had posed very specific and very damaging queries against the MCD. My Dear Mr.Gandhi - this applicant is not asking for an interpretation of any law, he is asking for an "extract" from the specific notifications (records) which allow him to continue (or not) his scrap business on a notified street. The information is definitely not on the MCD website but available in the Chief Town Planner's office and the Chief Legal Advisers Office (both of which are located at MCD Kashmiri Gate and not Sadar Paharganj) In the second order in favour of the Respondent: Registrar of Co-Op Societies New Delhi "The respondent states that the information sought does not lie with them nor are they expected to get it under any law or rules. APPEAL IS DISMISSED" IC(SG) should read, say, IC(Tiwari)'s orders against RCS where he rapes them in similar situations. CIC/AT/A/2007/00414 (This is a beauty) -- but I jest CIC/AT/A/2008/00272 (This is another beauty) --but I jest again <rol> CIC/AT/A/2007/01080 (This is a GENUINE beauty) <---- These are the sort of "reasoned" orders we expect out of CIC. It helps that Mr Sanjiv Kumar knows RTI Act fairly well it seems. CIC/AT/A/2008/00106 (This is also GENUINE IC-T beauty) <-- Completely opposite to Shailesh Gandhi's denial.and very hard hitting No wonder RCS is pleased to have a wimp like IC(SG) instead BUT THEN IC(T) then did a neat somersaalt in "Rajinder Goel" delivered in July.2008 CIC/AT/A/2008/101 similar to what he did in M.Lall. <double wink> Conclusion: IS Shailesh Gandhi is either incompetent (not in IC-T's league) or corrupt. Take your pick. Sarbajit On 12/27/08, S.D. Sharma <[email protected]> wrote: > Subject: Re: Observations on CIC-Shailesh Gandhi's Orders. > > Sir > > Before passing comments on other people's orders > kindly clean up your HTML code and resubmit it > properly for our group's consideration. > > S D Sharma > > --- In [email protected], "G R Vora" <frcf_...@...> wrote: >> >> >> >> 27.12.2008 >> >> Dear friends, >> >> Sub.:-- My observations on CIC - Shailesh Gandhi's Orders. >> >> >> In earlier months, I studied about 100 orders of other CICs (passed >> between 1.1.2006 to 30.6.2006), and about 60-70 orders of Maharashtra's >> Chief SIC, to understand the extent of their adherence to the RTI Act. In >> this context, my observations about your orders are as below: >> >> Positive points: >> >> 1. Your orders are much more systematic and transparent. They show better >> adherence to the Act are clearly mentioned. >> 2. Crucial dates are written i.e. date of Application, of PIO's reply, of >> First Appeal, of F-AA's reply, and of filing second appeal. >> 3. Orders are well reasoned. >> 4. Appellant are warned against filing multiple RTI Applications (over 60 >> in nos.) just to 'teach a lesson' to the officers. >> 5. PIOs are frequently given show cause notices for non-compliance to Sec. >> 7 (1). >> >> >> Scope for improvement: >> >> 1. The point "Appellant's Grounds for 2nd Appeal" needs to be inserted >> after the "Appellate Authority ordered". (Your orders are broadly >> divided as: >> a. Info sought & PIO's reply >> b. Appellate Authority ordered >> c. Relevant facts emerging from hearing >> d. Decision. >> If "Appellant's Grounds of 2nd Appeal" is mentioned in your order, then >> you may comment on those grounds of appeal in your order, thus satisfying >> the Appellant and improving the quality of your order, and enhancing >> continuity of the appeals process. >> >> 2. PIO should at least be reprimanded for the following errors: >> (i) giving incomplete reply and disobeying AA's Order. (w.r.t Decision No. >> -----/00221/SG/144 dated 5.11.2008) >> (ii) delayed transfer of Application to another Public Authority. >> (iii) not providing "file notings' (Decision No. ------/01141/SG/119 dated >> 22.10.2008) >> (iv) giving unclear reply. (D.No. ------00921/SG/155 dated 5.11.2008) >> (iii) delay of some days in replying -- say 20 days. >> >> 5. The number of days delay should be explicitly mentioned in your order >> after the date of PIO's reply, along with a reprimand if not penalty. >> >> 8. AA should be reprimanded for passing orders 60 days and 90 days late. >> (D.No. -----/00523/SG/156 dated 5.11.2008 and D.No. -----/01044/SG/0157 >> dated 5.11.2008) respectively. Also in D.No. -----/00932/SG/162 dated >> 5.11.2008). >> >> >> If the above omissions in your orders are corrected, then it would send a >> stronger message to the PIOs and AAs that their callous attitude towards >> RTI implementation shall not be tolerated. >> >> Shaileshbhai, you are already setting excellent precedents in terms of >> expeditious clearing of appeals and complaints, and transparent and >> systematic ways of passing orders for all the Info Commissioners in India. >> We hope you will consider our above suggestions and raise the benchmark >> for RTI implementation even higher. >> >> Our sincere best wishes are with you always. We shall continue to study >> his orders and revert with constructive feedback, and we shall also >> encourage our fellow activists to do so. >> >> Regards. >> >> >> >> WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE, IF WE CARE. >> >> G R Vora >> Plot - 275/3, Gope Nivas, Sion E, Mumbai-22. >> Ph - (022) 24091193 / 9869 195785 >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> >
