The latest FULL BENCH takes this anti-citizen concept even further !!! http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/FB-22092009-01.pdf
"Appeal No. CIC/AT/A/2008/01280 dated 29.09.2008 Right to Information Act 2005 Section 19 PARTIES TO THE CASE: Appellants : Shri Ketan Kantilal Modi Public Authority : Central Board of Excise & Customs Date of Decision : 22.09.2009" If CPIO transfers u/s 6(3) an RTI to a "subordinate PIO" than each such transfer shall be treated as a fresh RTI application and application fees charged accordingly. Does anyone here STILL BELIEVE that Shailesh Gandhi is an RTI activist crusader ??? Now let us wait and see what happens in K.K.Kishore. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], "sroy1947" <sroy1...@...> wrote: > > Mr Habibullah addressed a meeting of CEOS on PSUs and PSEs on 9th July 2009 > under the aegis of SCOPE. Mr Satyanand Mishra was also present. > http://www.scopeonline.in/lprog.htm > > A report of the COMPLETE official proceedings of this conference has been > published (in a magazine) recently and has come into my possession, and what > is published here is very different to what was PRed in the national media. > (Thanks Satpal !!) > > For example, it is SHOCKING to know that Mr Habibullah had clarified there > that an applicant in RTI is only entitled to ask one question for the > prescribed Rs.10 (application fee) and that the PIOS of these PSEs may be > advised to demand Rs.10 for each additional query asked. > > Will Mr H have the decency to admit / deny that he said this, AND will he > publish a further clarification on the CIC website so that RTI users are not > harmed by such disinformation. > > Sarbajit > > PS: For all the corruption fighters on this list, the SCOPE link above has > this to say:- > > "Allaying the fears of the PSEs' regarding CVC, Mr. Sinha said the CVC is not > a fault finding Commission and should not be feared. Instead of starting with > a premise of an intentional mistake, CVC presumes no willful mistake > committed while examining a case. Earlier, presenting his observations and > suggestions, Mr. Arup Roy Choudhury appreciated CVC's interactive approach > towards CPSEs' concerns and issues. As CPSEs are open to many kinds of > scrutiny including the RTI, CVC should not give cognizance to the motivated > and pseudo complaints, he said." > > I daresay next year we can safely substitute "CVC" by "CIC" for PSEs. >
