Mr Habibullah is either a) an Idiot, or b) Corrupt
I would tend to the 2nd view. This was the case of one Mr Mani Ram Sharma (a serial RTI misuser) who had the CIC on the backfoot. IC(PB)'s PS had accepted a substantial consideration to delay a decision in the matter. The PS was subsequently booted out of the CIC after IC(PB)'s retirement and matter was hushed up. Mr Habibullah also had to use all his evasive skills in this order to save his protege by agreeing to "review" Mr Mani Ram Sharma's case personally. Rule 7(4) which reads as "The appellant or the Complainant, as the case may be, may seek the assistance of any person in the process of the appeal while presenting his points and the person representing him may not be a legal practitioner." simply means that whereas the Appellant can seek the ASSISTANCE of "any person" (which would include advocate) while "presenting his points" he cannot be REPRESENTED (in absentia) by a legal practitioner. The corollary to this is that if the APPELLANT is present in person (or absent) AND is UNREPRESENTED by a legal practitioner, THEN it is INCUMBENT upon the CIC to DISALLOW RESPONDENTS from being represented by legal practitioners in interest of natural justice. On second thoughts perhaps option "a" would fit the description better. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], C K Jam <rtiwan...@...> wrote: > > Sarbajit, > > It is summer season - very HOT - the Asst. Registrar who sent you that Notice > of Hearing must be drowsy ! > > A) Rule 7(4) of the CIC (Appeal Procedure) Rules 2005: > > â7(4) The appellant or the Complainant, as the case may be, may seek the > assistance of any person in the process of the appeal while presenting his > points and the person representing him may not be a legal practitioner.â > > B) Item 15(iv) of CIC (Management) Regulations 2007: > http://www.cic.gov.in/CIC%20Regulations,%202007.pdf > > (iv) The appellant or the complainant, as the case may be, may seek > the assistance of any person while presenting his case before the > Commission and the person representing him may not be a legal > practitioner. > > C) http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-15042009-01.pdf > > On the question of retention of legal Counsel, which has been objected to by > appellant in his Email quoted above and again in the hearing, the exact > wording of rule 7(4) of Central Information Commission (Appeal Procedure) > Rules, 2005 is as follows: > â7(4) The appellant or the Complainant, as the case may be, may seek the > assistance of any person in the process of the appeal while presenting his > points and the person representing him may not be a legal practitioner.â > In other words, it is not mandatory for a party to engage legal Counsel but > it is also not impermissible. > > RTIwanted >  > > --- On Sat, 5/23/09, sroy1947 <sroy1...@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > b through an authorised representative who CANNOT BE A LEGAL PRACTITIONER / > LAWYER, (emphasis supplied by me) or > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
