To: Mr Wajahat Habibullah Chief Information Commissioner of India Central Information Commission at New Delhi
Sir, Sub: Stay Order of Delhi High Court in WP(C)12714/2009 I refer to the stay order in the above matter. The text of which is below: "IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 12714/2009 and CM No. 13407/2009 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Ajay Verma versus CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: None CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL O R D E R 28.10.2009 Issue notice, returnable on 25.11.2009. In the meanwhile, the operation of the impugned order dated 22.09.2009 passed by the Central Information Commissioner shall remain stayed. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J VEENA BIRBAL, J OCTOBER 28, 2009 dutt " I am extremely concerned that the nominated counsel for CIC ie. Mr K.K.Nigam's junior did not appear in this matter or oppose grant of stay despite the fact that he was served well in advance of the hearing. It seems this is a regular practice of this counsel and his chamber as he considers that he is not paid adequately by the CIC and hence shall only conduct a proforma defence. I am attaching a scanned version of some papers from this Writ Petition (they are not in serial order) as I have not been fully served all the papers. The Commission may kindly consider whether it will continue its ostrich policy of not defending itself, or actually defend the demolition of the powers it has dubiously arrogated to itself including the so-called CIC Management Regulations (2007) which Mr K K Nigam had drafted and which are under strong challenge in this Writ - and where I am the 2nd Respondent and not too well disposed to the CIC either in this matter as you well know from my emails and other communications.. The Hon'ble Commission may also care to consider if it wishes to engage well reputed senior advocates like Mr Harish Salve etc in this matter for the next hearing or persist with part timers like Mr Nigam. I am only sending this communication in the interests of the larger RTI movement as otherwise I am perhaps even more aggrieved than the DDA by the Commission's stayed order and have considerable sympathy with the DDA's grounds. yours faithfully Sarbajit Roy New Delhi
