Dear sarbajit, The Karnatka IC's are only getting the information to the applicant after filing the complaint/second appeal, in one case, I was representing an applicant, the IC Dr. H.N. Krishna didn't hear my plea at all and closed the case, stating that the information is provided(the information was provided only after second appeal filed before the commission and on direction of the Commission after 5 months, the information was not received by the applicant but the deemed PIO shows document stating that the same was posted under certificate of posting to the applicant, all the letters sent by the Commission and authorisiation to represent the PIO was received by the applicant by post except the reply to the RTI application, (the copy of the reply was sought and the same was provided in the court hall. I didn't given time to check the reply in the courthall). IC had not recorded any of my submissions in the final judgment. I don't know about other cases where the applicant is absent(some applicant can't attend the commission hearing since they reside in far off places in the state), when applicant is absent the PIO's submit the copy of the information and showing the certificate of posting record and cases are closed. In these cases we don't know whether the information provided by the PIO is correct. With regarads, Anil
--- In [email protected], "sroy1947" <sroy1...@...> wrote: > > For all its lofty pretensions, the CIC is one of the most inefficient > Information Commissions. > > Mr Habibullah would like to note that even in BJP ruled Karnataka's KSIC its > 4 ICs dispose of around 20 cases each daily. For example in Feb 2009 the 4 > ICs of KSIC heard and disposed of almost 1400 cases. Importantly, almost 80% > of their cases are less than 3 months old. > > Our Karnataka members may kindly inform us about the QUALITY of KSIC's orders > / disposal rate. > > Sarbajit > > --- In [email protected], "sroy1947" <sroy1947@> wrote: > > > > http://cic.gov.in/Reports/MPR-Apr09.htm > > > > If 8 ICs dispose of 1500 cases in a month that translates into a mere 9 > > cases disposed of per day per IC. This is pathetic (and also INCOMPETENT)!!! > > > > What makes the situation worse is that most of these orders are of the "No > > First Appeal has been filed so remanded to FAA" or "there is no question of > > denial of information to applicant hence appeal dismissed" variety. > > > > The ICs at CIC are evidently so brain dead (benumbed) by these orders > > (which in any case are drafted by their stenos / approachable personal > > consultants) that they could not write a reasoned order if their life > > depended on it. > > > > Sarbajit > > >
