Hi, Section 19(8)(b) "require the public authority to compensate the complainant for any loss or other detriment suffered;"
As the intention of this provision is clearly to compensate a complainant for any "loss suffered", it follows, as night follows day, that Ms Raghunandan had paid Shekhar Singh his consultation charges. BTW why is the group's POSTING CONTENTS Rule not being enforced by the moderators? QUOTE: "We must reiterate that we are not in the least interested in knowing what your **cause** is or how **justified** it is." Ashish --- In [email protected], "sroy1947" <sroy1...@...> wrote: > > Dear Krish > > 1) The thing with RTI_India is "you can checkout any time you want but you > can never leave". > > 2) The order on CIC's website {page 8 at > http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-26062009-01.pdf} clearly records that Ms > Raghunandan own claim that she paid Rs.10,000 to Mr Shekhar Singh for > "consultations". That the CIC (and the reading public) was clearly under the > impression that she had already paid this money to Mr Singh is clear from the > next lines ... > > "There is no ground given against any of the headings as to why such > expenses were forced on her as a result of the delay in processing of the RTI > application. The expenses submitted would be the normal expenses required to > be incurred in pursuance of an RTI application for which economies can > certainly be considered but cannot be construed as suffering detriment or > loss." > > Sarbajit > > --- In [email protected], jai krishna <greenkrish@> wrote: > > > > Dear members of this group and to Sarabjit roy, veeresh, kalia and ashish, > > > > This clarification should have come earlier- a month earlier to be > > precise- but since i thought i had unsubscribed from this group 8 months > > ago- i never saw the mails that ended up in the spam folder. > > > > Firstly, i clarify on behalf of Ms.Divya Raghunandan, Greenpeace that we > > had paid no consultation fee to _anyone_ on this case. Mr. Shekhar Singh > > has been helpful to us and to the cause of exposing the truth about > > unsafe GM crops for the last 2 years on this case and has never asked or > > been given any consultation fee. > > > > Secondly, I would like to tell that that the compensation we had > > claimed( but not provided as yet) was a intended to be a contribution > > to the works of NCPRI and not for Mr. Shekhar Singh. > > > > Thirdly, for people who are not clear of the facts of this case- this > > is about denial of safety data about GM crops developed by a company for > > public introspection. The entire fight started in 2006 march and > > continued till 2007 November at the CIC where the decision was to > > provide the data and we were also offered an oppurtunity to claim for > > compensation. > > > > The PIO and the appellate authority of the department of biotechnology > > has successfully confused us, disobeyed orders, deliberately kept the > > industry out of the loop for 20 months and made it impossible to get the > > data for a public introspection. The data(part of it) was finally > > forced out of the clutches of the government when a independent case in > > the SC ordered its disclosure. the data is available on the government > > site- igmoris.nic.in. > > > > The safety of GM crops are debated worldwide and EU and many other > > countries have entire bans on their commercialisation. In India as well, > > there are strong lobbies to permit these crops which are moslty promoted > > for corporate profits. I request any one who needs to know the > > underground realities of the issue of GM crops to write to me personally > > so that i can prove that how, scientifically, gm crops are a harm to the > > human health, and to farmers livelihoods. > > > > regards, > > jai > > > > in tune with nature, > > > > Jai krishna.R > > Campaigner- Sustainable Agriculture > > Greenpeace India > > No. 60 Wellington street, Richmond Town > > Bangalore - 560025 > > Tel: 080-41154861 > > Fax:080-41154862 > > Mobile:+91 9845591992 > > www.greenpeaceindia.org > > > > > > Greenpeace is an independent, campaigning organisation that uses > > non-violent, creative confrontation to expose global environmental > > problems, and force solutions for a green and peaceful future. For > > more information and support go to www.greenpeaceindia.org > > > > > > > > pasting the thread for your reference: > > > > > > Re: NCPRI and RTI "touts" > > > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/message/4206;_ylc=X3oDMTJyc2RlaG5qBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE3MjkzMDUwBGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTIzOTY0MwRtc2dJZAM0MjA2BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzEyNDc5MDQ0MDg-> > > > > > > > > Posted by: "ashish kr1965" ashishkr1965@ > > > > <mailto:ashishkr1...@?subject=%20re%3a%20ncpri%20and%20rti%20%22touts%22> > > ashishkr1965 <http://profiles.yahoo.com/ashishkr1965> > > > > > > Fri Jul 17, 2009 1:47 am (PDT) > > > > > > > > Sarbajit > > > > You might want to check these out > > http://www.genecampaign.org/home/Reports/Workshop%20I%20.pdf > > <http://www.genecampaign.org/home/Reports/Workshop%20I%20.pdf> > > http://www.genewatch.org/uploads/f03c6d66a9b354535738483c1c3d49e4/Workshop_I__Delhi.pdf > > <http://www.genewatch.org/uploads/f03c6d66a9b354535738483c1c3d49e4/Workshop_I__Delhi.pdf> > > > > It is "Ms. Suman Sahai" and not "Mr. Suman Ahai" of Gene Campaign and > > Ms Divya Raghunandan has quite a bit to say about RTI too here :-) > > > > "In the discussion following the three presentations on the Right to > > Information > > Act, Mr. Shekhar Singh of the NCPRI (National Campaign for People’s Right > > to > > Information) while praising the three efforts, spoke about using the > > RTI to solve > > systemic issues." > > > > "From a campaign perspective, it would be best if a legal position could be > > advocated which requires government to collect this information. In such > > a case, > > government would be bound to give the information as it would be > > collected using > > the taxpayer’s money. Unless there are very good reasons, the very fact > > that the > > public wants certain information, should be reason enough for the public > > authorities to start collecting the information. > > " > > > > rgds > > Ashish > > ==Sent from my Blackberry== > > --- In [email protected] <mailto:rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, > > "sroy1947" <sroy1947@> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Ashish, > > > > > > My specific objection in that reported CIC decision was that Mr > > Habibullah had seen fit to get Ms Raghunandan's case assigned to a > > double "bench" including Mr Shailesh Gandhi and that Mr. Gandhi DID NOT > > RECUSE HIMSELF from this matter despite knowing the facts!!! > > > > > > Was Mr Gandhi unaware that Mr Shekhar Singh was his predecessor as > > NCPRI convenor and that Mr Suman ahai of Gene Campaign is also a NCPRI > > W.Committee member? > > > > > > Was Mr Shailesh Gandhi (or for that matter also Mr Habibullah) > > unaware that Mr Gandhi CONTINUES TO BE NCPRI CONVENOR as per the NCPRI > > website? > > > http://www.righttoinformation.info/member_working.htm > > <http://www.righttoinformation.info/member_working.htm> > > > > > > Is Mr Habibullah communicating to us that this is not his decision > > but Mr Gandhi's (a-la Pontius Pilatus)? > > > > > > I shall comment on the "fee" vs "cost" aspect you have raised in a > > separate post. > > > > > > Sarbajit > > > > > > "LIST OF MEMBERS > Working Committee Members > > > > > > 1. Ajit Bhattacharjea > > > 2. Anjali Bhardwaj > > > 3. Aruna Roy > > > 4. Arvind Kejriwal > > > 5. Bharat Dogra > > > 6. Harsh Mander > > > 7. Maja Daruwala > > > 8. Nikhil Dey > > > 9. Prabhash Joshi > > > 10. Prakash Kardaley > > > 11. Prashant Bhushan > > > 12. Shailesh Gandhi (Convenor) > > > 13. Shekhar Singh > > > 14. Suman Sahai > > > 15. Vishaish Uppal > > > 16. Angela Rangad > > > 17. V. Suresh > > > 18. Jagdeep Chhokar > > > 19. Trilochan Sastry > > > 20. Samir Acharya > > > 21. Balraj Puri > > > 22. Manesh Kumar Gupta > > > 23. Venkatesh Nayak > > > 24. Jagmohan Singh > > > 25. P. Wangchuk > > > 26. Debu Bandhopadhya > > > 27. Jean Dreze > > > 28. Harivansh > > > 29. Sandeep Pande > > > 30. Vinay Mahajan > > > 31. S. R. Sankaran" > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > <mailto:rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1965@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Virresh Kumar > > > > > > > > you wrote: > > > > "> Sh Sekhar Singh is pioneer of RTI in India. There is nothing > > wrong in > > > > > it if he helps people to file RTI or is charging fees for giving > > > > > professional services for RTI." > > > > > > > > I find your approach to be quite pragmatic. Shekhar Singh is > > undoubtedly > > > > a man with many talents, not limited to RTI - being a former member of > > > > the Planning Commission and also on an Supreme Court Environmental > > > > Committee. etc. > > > > > > > > I suspect that the 10,000 rupee "fee" he took from Greenpeace actually > > > > represents the "cost" of filing and succeeding in a Second Appeal > > before > > > > India's highest appellate body for obtaining information. > > > > > > > > best wishes > > > > Ashish > > > > > > > > == sent from my Blackberry === > > > > --- In [email protected] > > <mailto:rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, veeresh kumar <v4veeresh@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Roy, > > > > > > > > > > Sh Sekhar Singh is pioneer of RTI in India. There is nothing wrong in > > > > > it if he helps people to file RTI or is charging fees for giving > > > > > professional services for RTI. > > > > > > > > > > veeresh > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > <mailto:rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, sarbajit roy <mail.sarbajitroy@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Mr Kalia > > > > > > > > > > > > I presume that when a responsible activist like Ms Divya > > Raghunandan > > > > > > of Greenpeace avers that she had paid the Big Daddy of RTI (ie Mr > > > > > > Shekhar Singh) Rs.10,000/= to "assist" her in her RTI 2nd > > appeal, that > > > > > > she has actually done so. If this statement (which is duly > > recorded in > > > > > > the CIC's order) is false, then Mr Singh or any of his well wishers > > > > > > would have denied it by now. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not the first time Mr Singh has lent his weight to such > > > > > > "public spirited" citizens who are saving Indian farmers. I > > recall his > > > > > > "assistance" to Ms Aruna Roy (on behalf of Ms Medha Patkar) to > > > > > > "procure" within 48 hours official GoI documents marked > > "Secret" and > > > > > > "Confidential" by using the good offices of the CIC. It is not > > > > > > pertinent that they already had illegal copies of those > > documents but > > > > > > required to show that it was legally obtained in RTI. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sarbajit > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 12:29 AM, nripinder kalia <nnkalia@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My dear Roy, > > > > > > > If it is true,then it is really shamefull.The activist at the > > level of > > > > > > > Mr.Shekhar is,did it.I doubt. > > > > > > > N.N.Kalia. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 9:10 AM, sroy1947<sroy1947@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-26062009-01.pdf > > <http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-26062009-01.pdf> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In this decision at page 9, Ms Divya Raghunandan of > > Greenpeace claims to > > > > > > > > have paid Mr Shekhar Singh Rs.10,000 as "consultation fees". > > > > > > > > The CIC has observed thereafter that these are "normal > > expenses" incurred in > > > > > > > > the course of pursuing an RTI 2nd appeal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mr Habibullah (in his capacity as CIC Vigilance head) may > > also explain > > > > > > > > (preferably publicly) why Mr Shekhar Singh's colleague at > > NCPRI - IC Mr > > > > > > > > Shailesh Gandhi was on this bench, and how much was paid to > > him to get the > > > > > > > > decision in favour of Ms Divya Raghunandan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sarbajit Roy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > in tune with nature > > greenjai > > > > > > > > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > > signature database 4321 (20090810) __________ > > > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rti_india/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
