Dear Sh Kajodia As you would have observed the group has observed your case from several angles. Since, as per you, the information has not been given to you despite the CIC's orders and you have reason to believe that your transfer to hostile environment like Kargil is detrimental to your life as a senior citizen, and also malafide to finish you off so that the information does not come into public domain, you have fresh grounds to approach CIC u/s 18 in Complaint.
Since you have formally sought our group's assistance, what I propose is :- a) you seek assistance of members like Mr Sunil Ahya, Mr J.P. Shah etc to draft a proper Complaint Petition to CIC for you, and post it to this group. b) I will then read and settle the Petition. If we believe that your case has merit and is bonafide, we will suggest you move CIC. c) When the matter comes up before CIC, I (or some other expert member) will assist / represent you. d) Based on CIC's order (and mandatory enquiry report) you will have cause of action to approach suitable court / forum. Doodh ka doodh,paani ka paani. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], mangilal kajodia <mlkajodi...@...> wrote: > > sir, I could not get proper information demanded till date. for only thi > reason I have come in troble. No officer want to open his misdoing. > My demand with the govt. is that I should be given chance of reasonable > opportunity of hearing whic is my constitutional right. > I am very much confident if I get the chance of hearing, I will win the case. > Kajodia > > --- On Mon, 23/11/09, Sunil Ahya <sunila...@...> wrote: > > > From: Sunil Ahya <sunila...@...> > Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Fw: An appeal from a teacher of Kendriya > Vidyalaya > To: [email protected] > Date: Monday, 23 November, 2009, 9:21 AM > > >  > > > > > Dear All, >  > 1) It seems Mr. Kajodia had filed 12 RTI applications and the issues raised > in all the 12 applications were different and hence they required seperate > replies. >  > 2) The Commission found it suprising that the respondents should have clubbed > all the 12 applications as one though they related to different issues. >  > 3) Commission directed the respondents go through the 12 applications and > send 12 separate replies to the Appellant. >  > 4) In case the Appellant finds the attitude of the Respondents unhelpful and > the replies unsatisfactory, he is free to approach the Commission again. >  5) During the hearing, the Appellant said that this was the fourth time he > was coming to the Commission from Devas in the same case and that he had to > spend money for travel and stay in Delhi, adding that resorting to the > RTI-Act had been an expensive experience for him. >  > 6) Since the Respondents have made the initial error of replying to 12 > applications through a common response and thereby creating all the > confusion, the Commission directed them to compensate the Applicant with > Rs.5,000/-. >  > 7) In case the Appellant came to the Commission again with reasons which the > Commission finds were such as not to have necessitated his coming he would be > paid heavy compensation, which would have to be paid of by the individual > Respondent. As for the present amount, this may be paid by the Organization. >  > 8) Commission decided in favour of Mr. Kajodia on 22-04-2008 and his > transfer proceedings started on 25-04-2008 (As per his post). >  > 9) Ever since then, Mr. Kajodia seems to have kept busy resolving his > transfer problem first and as a consequence approached President of India, > Central Vigilance Commission and Sh. Kapil Sibbal to resolve his transfer > issue, which in his opinion was done as a vendetta in response to the RTI > applications filed by him. >  > 10) But it is still not clear whether the information requested in his 12 RTI > applications has been provided to him as per the directions of the Commission > i.e. before 30-04-2008. >  > 11) I would appreciate if Mr. Kajodia can inform the group whether he has > received the information requested in his 12 RTI applications, which seems > to be the bone of contention and crux of the matter. >  > Warm Regards, >  > Sunil. >  >  > >  > > > > Dear Suresh > > I would not go so far out on a limb - or indulge in speculation not borne out > from the facts before us. <sorry> > > While it is possible that Mr Kajodia is indeed as cunning and resourceful as > you describe, it is equally possible that he is a simple, genuine and > dedicated teacher who made the mistake of filing an RTI, and then filed a few > more while under the delusion that RTI Act is a citizen friendly law of a > democratic republic whose officers and institutions would listen to him > fairly. > > The truth probably lies somewhere between these extremes. > > As for our group's response to such situations, > > A) We should certainly try to help / guide genuine people who approach us > well in time. > > B) The Members and Moderators must remain ever vigilant to ensure that our > group's internet resources are not misused as a platform for propaganda. > > Sarbajit > > > --- In rti_in...@yahoogrou ps.com, suresh nangia <sknangia2004@ ...> wrote: > > > >Hi Sarabjit > > > >There have been quite a few mails put up on rti board regarding Mr Kajodia's > >appeal for help. One would wonder what kind of help he is looking up from > >RTI platform. Kajodia seems to be a smart operator, a hard core unionist who > >has locked horns with the managementà over a period of time on a protracted > >basis ostensibly for a union cause and the transfer to Kargil appears toà > >have come as a management response to the kind ofà fight that he must have > >waged by using union platform.and which perhaps made the management to look > >him an undesirable eye sore.à He has already made petitions to The > >President, Prime Minister and has also met the Union HRD Minister Kapil > >Sibal, which in a way speaks of his being a resourceful operator. He has > >already made extensive use of RTI by filing score of applications and having > >taken the matter right upto Central Information Commission level also. > >Although it has not been explicitly indicated in his appeal made to rti > group, he must have made more than adequate use of usual pressure tactics on > union platform alsoà by mobilising support of his colleagues in the Union > and other colleagues. Having exhausted all possible avenues of seeking a > redressal of his grievance over his so stated vindictive action of transfer > to Kargil, he is now looking to RTI activists to take up his cause, whichà > any way, in the given situation, does not appeal to be a just cause worthy of > support. Even Courts have conceded the management's right to transferà its > employees, of course within the framework of laid down established norms, and > office bearers of unions are not immune from transfer rigours. > > > >I AGREE WITH YOUR VIEWS. THIS DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A FIT CASE WORTHY OF AN > >ENLARGED SUPPORT FROM RTI PLATFORM IF THIS CASE IS TAKEN UP BY THE RTIà > >GROUP, IT MAY NOT BE A FAIR AND JUST USAGE OF RTI. > > > >S K NANGIA > > > > > > > > > -- > It is not always the same thing to be a good man and a good citizen - > Aristotle > > > > > > > > > The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Yahoo! Homepage. > http://in.yahoo.com/ >
