Dear Shri Suresh Nagia In practice ICs are not acting on complaints u/s 18 (1), the meaning of "shall" they are taking as discriminatory powers. What is remedy? S.K.Kapoor
--- On Thu, 3/5/09, suresh nangia <[email protected]> wrote: From: suresh nangia <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Complaint is not an efficacious remedy? To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, March 5, 2009, 11:49 AM The returning of a complaint by an IC and / or his refering it to FAA for its hearing is NOT IN ORDER, provided the complaint relates to matter(s) described under Section 18(1)(a to f) of the Act. A reading of Sec 18(1) of the Act, which reads as "it shall be the dutly of the CIC or SIC as the case may be, to receive and inquire into a complaint from any person" . The usage of "shall" in the direction as contained in this Section of the Act makes it mandatory for an IC to have the complaints received looked into. --- On Wed, 4/3/09, C K Jam <rtiwan...@yahoo. com> wrote: From: C K Jam <rtiwan...@yahoo. com> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Complaint is not an efficacious remedy? To: rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com Date: Wednesday, 4 March, 2009, 10:42 PM Maybe IC SG should read the Allahabad High Court judgement on the import of Sec 18. RTIwanted --- On Wed, 3/4/09, sroy1947 <sroy1...@yahoo. com> wrote: In a slew of decisions, IC(SG) has also been taking the view that Complaint is not as efficacious a remedy as a First Appeal under the RTI Act. http://cic.gov. in/CIC-Orders/ SG-02032009- 29.pdf In fact he has been dismissing complaints filed u/s 18 while remanding them to First Appellates for consideration as an "alternate remedy". . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Go to http://in.webmessen ger.yahoo. com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
