Hey only haraami can tell oathers haraami. Bhaskar
On 10/27/09, sroy1947 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI > which included ALL the following pre-requisites > > a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary, > > b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's > proactive disclosure (especially on their website), > > c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest, > > d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the > PIOs potential exemptions / tactics, > > e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of > honest officers by RTI etc. > > This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis' > of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie, > > a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act > > b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres > (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from > "them"). > > c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality, > Police, service matters etc etc. > > d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions", "queries" > etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be penalised. > > e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to identify > the dishonest and corrupt officers. > > The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late Prakash > Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed an > RTI in his life). > > At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you wish > to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made my > choice a long time back. > > Sarbajit > > >
