1) The NMIMIS decision is easily disposed of, it is clearly not drafted by IC(SG), but the thrust of the decision betrays SD's ignorance (and incompetence to be a IC). It is a poor decision because he has CONFUSED "recognition" as a deemed university with "constitution" of the university. He has also failed to appreciate clause 2(f) of the UGC Act which says that Universities may be est/cons "by" or "UNDER" an Act of legislature. A comparison with cause 2(h) of RTI Act shows that only "BY" is allowed for inclusion as P/A. It is precisely because IC(SG) is SCARED of being exposed that he does not allow third parties to sit in his so called "open chamber" and participate in what is required to be "open proceedings". What is IC(S) saying about NMIMS ? - that "recognition" by UGC equates to establishment or constitution of that University. Excuse me.
2) To obtain a Court Order via RTI, the RULES "prescribed" by the SC or HC (incl for subordinate courts) apply. This is because as "competent authorities" they are allowed to prescribe their own fee/ cost rules. Usually they are the same as the High Court Rules. 3) Court decisions are judicial pronouncements with the Court having the power to specify if it may be published / reported. There are many classes of litigation where publication is ordinarily proscribed - such as matrimonial matters etc. RTI Act does not over-ride these laws to force publication. 4) Decisions of ICs are only quasi judicial for Complaints under section 18. Decisions in Appeals are neither quasi-judical nor adminstrative but delivered in "Appellate" jurisidiction per the Act . It may be kept in mind that the CIC is a creature of the RTI Act and is constrained to act within the 4 corners of the Act. In Appeals only the parties are entitled to receive a copy of the decision. Hope this is helpful Sarbajit --- In [email protected], "abhi987" <abhi...@...> wrote: > > Dear Sarbajit, > > Thanks so much, I much appreciate that. > > In the same breath, I completely agree to disagree with what you have written > about both the IC's - but I also appreciate your right to criticize IC(SG) > and appreciate IC(MLS). > > Have you read IC(SG)'s recent decisions on: > > 1) NMMIS? http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/SG-31032009-13.pdf > > 2) One's right to obtain a copy of Court order under RTI apart from the > Court's own prescribed procedure? > > What is your opinion on that? > > Moreover please elaborate and justify the stand taken by IC(MLS) that no > decisions of IC's should be henceforth uploaded on Internet and his decision > are not subject to questioning under sec. 4(1)(d) of the act, because they > are neither quasi - judicial nor administrative in nature: > > 1) Apart from Information Commissions, the decisions/ judgments of all the > Courts are regularly uploaded on Internet. > > 2) Moreover the decisions /judgments of an IC are uploaded and not the > information provided to the applicant/appellant. > > 3) The decisions of IC's are quasi-judicial in nature and that is the reason > court fee stamps are accepted for filing RTI applications and appeals in some > states. > > 4) Hence IC's decisions are subject to sec. 4(1)(d) of the act, RTI is in > it's nascent stage, let us wait and watch and time will tell.... > > 5) If his decisions are neither administrative nor quasi-judicial and of > course they are not judicial in nature, then what is the nature / definition > of his decisions? > > Warm Regards, > >
