RTI with High Court Bombay
Although I have been using RTI for a fairly long time , this was my first attempt to ask for info from HC Bombay. The procedure I felt, was cumbersome almost as if to discourage people from asking for info. I finally did so only because someone kept on asking me the action taken by CJ HC Bombay on my letters written to him. In the first attempt the envelope was returned to me with remark ”document not accepted” I personally went to the court and asked the assistant to SPIO the reason for not accepting the document even without opening the envelope. He told me I had addressed it to SPIO & there is no such post, the post is PIO. I told him HC is a state matter , also the envelope clearly had “RTI Matter” remark on the top. I told him I will have no option but to lodge a complaint with SIC about non acceptance of the application. After some resistance he finally accepted the envelope. I had written three letters to CJ HC Bom 1) 17 Senior Police posts remaining vacant ( some for 2 years) – with a prayer that order may please be passed to home dept to fill up these vacancies immediately. 2) I had attached a newspaper cutting showing photograph of an Elephant made to beg at Hiranandani Powai with a prayer that harsh punishment may please be given to Senior Inspector of Police at powai – which will act as a deterrent for any future such cruelty to animals- also pointed out that financial penalty no longer acts as deterrent nowadays. 3) Letter about draught situation in Maharashtra ( & country , in general) attaching newspaper report about people & animals suffering due to shortage of water – with a prayer that state may be directed to minimize water usage for non essential purpose like swimming pool, new construction, car washing, bath tubs in Hotels etc & also to make arrangement for food & water for animals . I had asked steps, taken , if any on these letters. I recd a reply that CJ Bombay’s office have not recd letters no 1 & 2 above, letter no 3 is under consideration. I went into appeal immediately stating that I had recd acknowledgement from CJ HC Bom office about receipt of all my letters. Thus either Deputy Registrar ( Legal) High Court ( who had sent the info to SPIO) is giving misleading info or the CJ HC Bombay office have misplaced my letters no 1 & 2 above, requesting action for the same. I have recd a letter about hearing with Sh. V. K. jadhav Registrar ( inspection) on December 1, 2009. Subsequently I have recd letters 1) Informing me that my letter 3 above was placed before the Administrative Judge for consideration , on due consideration thereof, Her ladyship rejected my prayers mentioned in above said letter. 2) Informing me that my letters no 1 & 2 above have been filed as per the order of the Hon’ble Chief Justice, Hogh Court Bombay. -- Thanks & Rgds Ajay Marathe Vashi, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra
