Hi ">I too find it curious that employees of Ms Maja Batliwala, daughter of the great Sam Bahadur, are seeking information about the Army which has been upheld to be anti-national on the basis of newspaper reports,"
It is Maja "Daruwala" at CHRI, her sister is Sherry "Batliwala" Ms. Daruwala is on this mailing list. Sarbajit --- In [email protected], ashish kr1965 <ashishkr1...@...> wrote: > > Dear Mr Naik > > This is not a court of law where I must prove anything, nor am I a PIO > on whom the onus of proof is placed. Since you repeatedly deny that > you have plagiarised the document in question, perhaps you can > enlighten us on why your document was circulated to the Information > Commissioners as the legal opinion of the CIC's legal branch ? > > You are quite confused, where have I claimed that you are "anti-national"? > FYI, neither had Mr Sharma claimed that you were anti-national. As the > decision of Ms Singh records, the CPIO of the MHA classified you as an > anti-national to whom the information could not be given. As the Delhi > Hig Court recently held, the C.I.C is not a "court", so it equally laughable > for you to claim you are fighting a "case" at CIC (perhaps you meant > "cause"). It is as laughable as when you claim that you were "litigating" > before the CIC to be provided information from the DDA in RTI. > > Your understanding of the RTI Act is pitiful. > > -Ms Singh has already found your knowledge about RTI Act to be > deficient, as Mr Sharma had set out from that order. . > > - Section 28 does not contain a clause analogous to 27(2)(e) > for the procedure to be adopted by the Central Information Commission or > State Information Commission, as the case may be, in deciding the appeals > under sub-section (10) of section 19;" > > It is this clause which enables fees to be charged for appeals to the CIC/SIC, > > Unlike Mr Sharma I do not believe in personality oriented discussion. But I > too find it curious that employees of Ms Maja Batliwala, daughter of > the great Sam Bahadur, are seeking information about the Army which has > been upheld to be anti-national on teh basis of newspaper reports, and also > that > you are assisting under-trials like Brigadier Ujjwal when the matter is > already > before the court and as an accused he has every legal avenue open to know > the evidence against him under the criminal procedural laws once charges > are framed / submitted. > > As Mr Sharma had posted, what is the state of RTI when an appellant > is denied such information on sub-judice matters say Mr Tiwari or > Mr Mishra but granted it by Mr Gandhi ? > > Ashish >
