Sir, You wrote ".. now we are trying our best to keep him out of J&K."
And we are trying our best to get him out of CIC !!! Although I daresay the alternative is likely to be much worse. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], "S.D. Sharma" <anonsha...@...> wrote: > > Dear Sarbjit > > As always your facility with words is right on target. This man > Habibullah is a deliberate bungler of the > first order. All he is concerned about is ensuring his own comfort and > saving the skin of his political > masters (Gandhi parivar) and all their cronies who are similarly > sponging off the nation. > > Habibullah is a professional boot licker and a disgrace to his father > Major General Enayat Habibullah > who was the compleat gentleman. Wajahat was always a mamma's boy and > is following in the footsteps > of his notorious mother who got him into the IAS. The people of Jammu > are delighted that he has been > exposed on all fronts at RTI-India group, now we are trying our best > to keep him out of J&K. > > S D Sharma > > --- In [email protected], "sarbajitr" <sroy1947@> wrote: > > > > http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-07122009-03.pdf > > > > Dear Mr Habibullah, > > > > In the above order you seem to have overlooked the fact that only a PIO can > > seek assistance of another officer u/s 5(4)/5(5). > > > > In http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-06032009-02.pdf you clearly recorded > > that the applicant Aftab Ahmed "applied to the PIO, SHO, Thana Paschim > > Vihar, Delhi" > > > > You also recorded > > > > "However, he (FAA Rajesh Kumar) took serious note of the failure to respond > > by the SHO as follows: > > > > "The appellant had sent his RTI request sent by the appellant to > > SHO PS Paschim Vihar because the information sought by him > > relates to PS Paschim Vihar. In this case, the SHO/ PS > > Paschim Vihar was required to transfer/forward the said RTI > > Application to the competent authority i.e. PIO (DCP)/WD > > immediately along with his reply/ comments on the RTI request, > > in question and concerned record so that the appellant could be > > informed in time under the provisions of the Right to Information > > Act, 2005. But, instead of doing so the SHO/ PS Paschim Vihar > > on 1.9.2007 marked the said RTI request to ASI Ram Phal for > > necessary action. ASI Ram Phal had also not taken any action > > on the said RTI request till 1.11.2007 and kept the paper (S) > > with him unnecessarily for about two months."" > > > > After the High Court ticked you off and remanded the case back to you for > > reconsideration you found > > > > "In this case, however, the reference to the then SHO and then ASI can be > > made by the CPIO, u/s 5 (4) which reads as follows:" > > > > Unfortunately your recent decision was drafted by Mr Pankaj Shreyaskar and > > completely ignores the fact that the SHO Paschim Vihar was not a PIO at any > > point of time. The Delhi Police PIOs have always been DCPs or Addl CPs (see > > http://www.delhipolice.nic.in/home/rti/rtipio.pdf) > > > > It is clear from your own orders that the PIO DCP/SW never received the RTI > > application to utilise 5(4). > > > > This GROSS INCOMPETENCE is going to lead to another round of litigation in > > the High Court which shall be paid for by us poor suffering taxpayers as > > usual. > > > > I also hope that you will resolve the long pending penalty matter of SI > > S.Narinder Singh in http://cic.gov.in/CIC-Orders/WB-29092008-03.pdf and all > > the connected matters. I need hardly remind you that it is simply not fair > > that you sit on SI Narinder Singh's penalty matter (in which he is > > completely innocent and not liable to penalty) where I assisted him simply > > to shield a Jt. Commissioner of Police Dipender Pathak from penalty > > especially after Pathak and his brother officer gheraoed your office and > > threatened to bash up / arrest your staff. > > > > I must voice that you may be a very high person but it is unworthy of a > > gentleman to squeeze the small people like SI Narinder Singh, Sanjiv > > Tomar, Ram Phal etc to allow their bosses to get away scot free. > > > > I must also voice that your pernicious habit of allowing outside > > interference in your "reserved" decisions behind the backs of the parties > > is completely corrupt and opposed to the letter and spirit of RTI Act. > > > > Yours faithfully > > > > Sarbajit Roy > > >
