Mr. Sarbajit,

Now here is a very difficult choice for you !
Whose side are you on?

Your "smarter", "painstaking" and "properly standing" IC MLS

OR

Your much admired (I am just too lazy - just like IC MLS - to scroll back and 
find the adjectives you initially showered on her) IC AD

IC MLS says that publishing his decisions is prohibited under the RTI Act but 
IC AD says that all documents which form the part of the RTI process are 
disclosable (subject to severability under 10. Please see:

http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/AD-15042009-03.pdf

This being the voting season, make your choice. Hopefully Rule 49(O) does not 
apply to this group.

By the way, please convey to your friend and much admired IC MLS that before 
passing any order, he should at least painstakingly read the "title page" and 
the "prayer" of the appellant/complainant, specially since your other best 
friend, CIC WH, has withdrawn Item 23 and this lesser mortals Right of Review.

But alas, since IC MLS does not believe in uploading his orders on the CIC 
website and your Chinese friends being at work in IC MLS's office, you will 
never get to read at least one piece of brilliance.

RTIwanted






--- In [email protected], "sroy1947" <sroy1...@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Abhi
> 
> 1) IC(MLS) is one of the smarter ICs - and very painstaking - so far. Quite 
> unlike IC(SG). In fact MLS's views on 4(1)(d) are very well researched and 
> not without basis.


> > >
> > >On the other hand, IC(MLS) has now taken a very proper stand that 
> > >publishing his decisions on the internet is prohibited vide RTI Act - 
> > >information is only to be given to the citizen who requested it and the 
> > >P/A (ie. the parties). He has also taken the stand (again quite properly) 
> > >that section 4(1)(d) doe not REQUIRE him to publish details of his 
> > >decisions - which in his learned view are neither administrative nor 
> > >quasi-judicial.
> > >
> > >I do wish C'IC Habibullah would follow the sterling example of this bold 
> > >and dynamic IC - ie IC(MLS) and stop wasting the limited computer 
> > >resources of NIC by publishing IC(SG)'s garbage orders.
> > >
> > >Sarbajit



Reply via email to