Sir, thanks lot for your valuable comment on my case. I was primary teacher. as per clause 4 of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan's transfer guideline, only assistant commissioner kvs ro bhopal was compitent authority to transfer me on adminisrativer ground, but he did not use his power and recomended kvs hq to transfer me. i never refuse to go on transfer. the transfer order was issued on may 5, 2008. releiving order was issued on may 6, 2008. the summer vacation was started from may 4 at dewas i strted to enjoy summer vacation there was no indication in transfer order about kargil is a winter vacation place as per joininig time rules the summer vacation would be if it sufix or prefix the joinning time. the vacation ended on 22 june 2009 please see the dates of events on appril 22, the announce its order to provide correct information the cic worned the officers also on aprill 25, the ac bhopal issued charger sheet under rule 14 of ccs(cca) rule 1965. on very same day april 25 he recommended my transfer on april 30 the jc admin received the recommendation on may 2 the concerned secton put the note sheet on the same day all the offiecers signed the note sheet 3 & 4 may were holidays on may 5 the kvs hq issued transfer order on may 6 the principal dewas releived me distance between dewas and delhi is more than 800 kms no officer gave me origanal transfer order till date. sir we have to understand that no officer will say on record that we are victimizing a or b. the circumstances evidence only prove the victimization my demand with govt is that the information seeker should be protected other wise rti will be withdrawn by other hand i have each and every document to prove the victimization but no authority is ready to listen me when the ammir kasab is being listen then why not i going to the court is not possible for every person. it time consuming process and costly too. the authorities are there to listen, is there no system in the govt to rectify the missdid of officer to give justice to a cityzen other court? i feel i am unable to communicate my case to fellow friends like u i have been deprived from my constitutional right and natural right. if officer full filled the proper proces there was no reason to harass me please continue to guide me with thanks and regards kajodia
--- On Sun, 22/11/09, Manoj Pai <[email protected]> wrote: From: Manoj Pai <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Fw: An appeal from a teacher of Kendriya Vidyalaya To: [email protected] Date: Sunday, 22 November, 2009, 10:28 PM Sarbajit is right on several counts. Let me fill in a few blanks. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India had already ruled that transfer is a part of service. Every Government servant is supposed to obey all transfer orders. If he does not join the new station within a fortnight, he is deemed to have been suspended. Further, the SC ruled that the Govt. employee can submit his grievances only after he joined his new place of appointment. This includes pointing out any cases of violation of transfer policy or other wise. So, the minister Kapil Sibal was right, when he said that Mr Kajodia should have joined Kargil. One cannot doubt Sibal's words, as he is also a Supreme Court lawer and is therefore expected to aware of this SC judgement delivered four years ago. Mr Kajodia has not established the fact whether his association is recognized under CCS(Recognisation of Service Association) Rules 1993. He has also not pointed out if it was registered Trade Union either. In both cases, the Chief Executive of the recognised Service Association or Trade Union cannot be subjected to transfer. However, they (office bearers) cannot claim "life time immunity" and have to complete their tenure as an office bearer. Later on completion the tenure they have to again face election, which also includes seeking re-recognisation every two years. Had he completed these provisions as per the laws of our country, his transfer would not have materialized at all. Most associations and unions in our country are letter pad bodies, with the sole object is social status and to cross swords with the management / officers. Very very few such bodies actually focus on the welfare of their staff members. The JCM / Office Councils rules are so strong that an association office bearer does not need to file an RTI Application at all. Statues make it clear, that any communication from association office bearers need to be responded immediately. Office council meetings are held every two months. Any deviations from these rules could mean transfer or discliplinary actions against the staff of management cadre. In cases of victimisation of any office bearers, they could approach the JCM HQ in Delhi which normally takes up this matter with the respective Minstry. Several of the current political leaders are all former office bearers of associations or trade unions. Mr Kajodia, with full respect to him, has also not informed whether he belonged to any reserved cadre, which includes Persons With Disability (Physically Handicapped) or not. If yes, then he could take solaces in certain laws promulgated by the Government. Its true that CIC had decided to with hold the decision, stating that Government servants should not file RTI Application with their parent organisation. However, I would like to bring to your notice on another CIC decision delivered this year 2009, allowing Government Servants, especially officers to use their Governmental official designation, official stationary / letter head, Governemnt office head etc. I took up this matter with the CIC later on, drawing reference to Fundamental Rule 11 of the Government of India Rules etc. I was informed, that CIC took this stand, because the respondents - PA did not take any objection to it. The CIC further continued that somebody has to write to them pointing out this and similar errors in the decision, so that they could take it up in subsequent decisions. Now back to the original issue - how can we help Mr Kajodia? HC of course is the only option. Approaching the Hon'ble President of India at an early stage, by Mr Kajodia, with a petition was the worst thing to do. In every court matter, the respondent would now claim that since the matter was pending with the Hon President, the matter should be adjourned. I know several such instances, where the matter were kept pending till the date of the retirement of the incumbent. He is also at his liberty to change his approach and file RTI applications in his individual capacity and hope for a break through. Manoj Pai Ahmedabad --- On Sun, 11/22/09, sarbajitr <sroy1...@yahoo. com> wrote: How can anyone help Kajodia - he has exhausted his main administrative remedies? His only hope (slim) lies with the High Court. He has made his bed and he will lie in it. Sarbajit The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Yahoo! Homepage. http://in.yahoo.com/
