Hi Mohammed (and everyone else who is contributing on this thread), Consider these 2 indisputable propositions
A) Every citizen of India (including public servants and NRIs) has the right to file an RTI request, B) The State has every right to take suitable action against its citizens for perceived infractions of law. If you combine and confuse these 2 propositions, the result is what is known as a "logical fallacy" which takes many forms - like "Questionable Cause". (see this: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ and particularly this http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/confusing-cause-and-effect.html ) <quote> "Confusing Cause and Effect is a fallacy that has the following general form: 1. A and B regularly occur together. 2. Therefore A is the cause of B. This fallacy requires that there is not, in fact, a common cause that actually causes both A and B. This fallacy is committed when a person assumes that one event must cause another just because the events occur together. More formally, this fallacy involves drawing the conclusion that A is the cause of B simply because A and B are in regular conjunction (and there is not a common cause that is actually the cause of A and B). The mistake being made is that the causal conclusion is being drawn without adequate justification." </endquote> This sort of fallacy regularly takes place when NGOs and RTI activists get involved and takes the form "Its OK to bend the truth and distort facts for a "good" caus". ie. the end justifies the means. We can clarify this with an small example, A1 - RTI Activists have the right to personally represent their RTI complaint to Suresh Joshi SCIC of Maharashtra. B1 - SCIC Suresh Joshi and his colleagues have other rights to call the police and get the complaining activists arrested. The fact that both occurred together neither proves "cause and effect" nor does it reduce / abrogate the rights of either party. If both parties are adamant on enforcing their rights - the best place to settle these matters (eventually) is in a court of law / police thana. A few random observations which I need to reiterate 1) What "sroy1947" posts to this group is not necessarily what "Sarbajit Roy" personally believes in. Very often I am "channeling" what other people I trust are communicating to me. In real life I am (as people tell me) quite different from my "moderator" role. 2) I have assisted many Govt servants to get info using RTI which they would not have got otherwise. Equally, I have assisted many PIOs successfully escape penalties under RTI Act. 3) The ground reality is that RTI Act is an inherently adversarial enactment which pits ordinary citizens against junior officer of the State. Thereby the "superior" people - citizens and officers/netas are allowed to carry on business as usual. 4) The only RTI law is Sarbajit's law - "RTI is not to used, it is to be misused". Sarbajit --- In [email protected], Afzal Mohammed <mohdafzal1...@...> wrote: > > Hi, > > RTI Act 2002/2005 was enacted for all citizens across the country to > exercise their right to information irrespective whether who he is or where > he is placed. As a citizen of this country nobody can stop him from > exercising this right. One maybe working for the Govt, Coop Hsg Society, NGO > etc, but as an individual and as a citizen of this country nobody can > sabotage his fundmental rights. > > *Thanks and best regards - Mohammed Afzal.* > > > _________________________________________________________________________ > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 9:37 AM, kamramk8 <kamra...@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Sh.Sarbajit Royji and all, > > > > From two years old post, it is still not clear whether govt servents can > > use RTI against their own employer about their own routine matters > > (like transfer,promotion etc.). > > > > This matter is similar to the benifits of reservations of SC/ST enjoyed by > > the already priviledge class as govt servents already having several > > channnels of their grievences redressal.Unfortunately, this RTI act have > > been over-overused by govt employees for their own routine grivences . I > > know serveral govt(including bank) employees having filed more than 50 > > applications after being transferred to rural area. > > > > Kindly suggest current status of CIC stand on RTI use by govt servents > > against their own employers. > > > > With regards > > Manoj K.Kamra > > > > --- In [email protected] <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, > > MALLAPRAGADA RAMARAO <srammitra@> wrote: > > > > > > No doubt that we have to wait for the exact decision. but in case, such a > > decision was indeed given, we have to act. > > > > > > > > > > > > Manoj Pai <manojpai@> wrote: > > > I too did a search and found just one link to a file > > > concerning Muzibur Rahman, in a form of a letter. > > > > > > http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/Decision_14112006_4.pdf > > > > > > This letter addressed to Secretary, Ministry of Coal, > > > New Delhi the CIC has stated "He was within his right > > > to seek information under RTI Act from the > > > Commission." > > > > > > Supposing the contents of the original post by > > > rtiexpert is indeed true, then what can be the > > > consequences? > > > > > > i) In the days when he lived out of a suitcase, IC > > > (OPK) had to file an RTI Application to gain > > > information on the Staff Quarters. Would he allowed to > > > do it again? > > > ii) MP/MLA are also Govt. Servants. Would the > > > Parliament come out with an amendment to allow these > > > elected representatives apply under RTI Act? > > > iii) What about the employees of those entities like > > > Societies, Charitable Institutions, Trusts etc. which > > > the CIC has now declared as PA? Would they also be > > > exempt? > > > > > > This is indeed taking an interesting, edge of the seat > > > experience. Let not apply a knee jerk approach. We > > > will have to wait for the exact decision. > > > > > > Manoj Pai > > > Ahmedabad > > > > > > --- anonsharma <anonsharma@> wrote: > > > > > > > This is wonderful news. As I did not believe it at > > > > first, I browsed > > > > CIC website and confirmed that the hearings were > > > > scheduled at 1500 hrs > > > > as claimed. > > > > > > > > 4 CIC/AT/A/2007/00756 29/05/2007 MUZIBUR RAHMAN, > > > > 5 CIC/AT/A/2007/00756 29/05/2007 MUZIBUR RAHMAN, > > > > 6 CIC/AT/A/2007/00757 29/05/2007 MUZIBUR RAHMAN, > > > > 7 CIC/AT/A/2007/00758 29/05/2007 MUZIBUR RAHMAN, > > > > > > > > Also, CIC website is now flashing that there is a > > > > new CPIO at CIC in > > > > place of Pankaj (Shreyaskar). > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, > > "rtiexpert" > > > > <rtiexpert@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In a major victory for bureaucracy in India, a > > > > Federal Information > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > > > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. > > Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center. > > > http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > > Why delete messages? Unlimited storage is just a click away. > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > >
