My dear Dr Arun Agarwal and Sarabjit, I agree, but our problem is, that he was also an activist like u and me.
Should we start agitation against such decision or should we have patience for some. However my own opinion is to start. Your comments please. N.N.Kalia On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Arun Agrawal <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > I do not share the opinion that IC(SG) is a joker . This would > tantamount to abusing his Office publicly . He is a very knowledgeable > person on RTI issues and is disposing off appeals pretty fast . > > Although in one of my 2nd Appeals, he did do a great deal of injustice > to me . I had proposed that the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, > Delhi appoint a single point CPIO in terms of DoPT directions, instead > of me chasing and getting varying response on the same RTI application > from a dozen PIOs . That was not considered worthy of being taken note > of. > > I had also urged that the PIOs had stated that they did not have the > required information, but had asked me to come and collect the > information by myself by inspecting hundreds of files . > > He took no note of that either, refusing to take my argument as to how I > was to know which PIO had responded and which one had not , and that the > response was evasive. > > Another IC , Ms Annapurna Dixit on 16.6.2009 dealt with a similar case , > Bimal Khemani v/s BSNL in a different manner . She directed that BSNL > collate the information asked for by the appellant from different > Circles/Training Centres and then forward it to the appellant in one go > instead of asking the Training Centres/Circles to provide the > information to Mr Khemani directly . > > Dr Arun Agrawal > > In this decision, IC(SG) proceeds to make a series of ignorant boo-boos > concerning third party rights. > > Now the RTI Act clearly specifies that third parties are to be allowed > opportunity of hearing at every stage. For example > > "19(4) If the decision of the Central Public Information Officer or > State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, against which an > appeal is preferred relates to information of a third party, the Central > Information Commission or State Information Commission, as the case may > be, shall give a reasonable opportunity of being heard to that third > party." > > > > Instead this corrupt idiot (we all know now why he is an I.C.), > proceeds to opine that third parties like Co-op Societies should be shut > out of appeal hearings. > > > > "The FAA's practice of calling societies during hearings is completely > undesirable and must be stopped immediately..." > > > > Why oh why does Mr Habibullah assign such important P/As to this > joker? Give him Agriculture and Fisheries instead. > > > > Sarbajit > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
