Since everyone agrees on one thing - that this is the first time that CIC has issued such a notice, then why doesn't it start issuing such notices to PIO/FAA/PAs who do not comply with its orders. Surely that also constitutes contempt ?
RTIwanted --- On Sat, 8/28/10, ashish kr1965 <[email protected]> wrote: From: ashish kr1965 <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [rti_india] Re: Another Major Threat to RTI Applicants- "Notice of CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS BY C To: [email protected] Date: Saturday, August 28, 2010, 3:38 AM Dear moderators I think it is appropriate to reply "parawise" ;-) to Mr Umathi 0. As previously explained by moderator The CIC is well within its powers to approach the High Court to uphold its authority from contemnors. 1. It is immaterial if CIC is a court, or not, for purposes of criminal contempt. As the CIC's proceedings involve the appreciation of evidence, these are judicial proceedings within the scope of the offence. 2. It is very well settled in law that notice may be given to the opposite parties. 3. The observations of the High Court is a concise summation of what is stated in the law. 4. The show cause notice referred to in the High Court judgment is where the subordinate court intended to prosecute the contemnor before itself. In your case, the notice clearly indicates that it is a preliminary to moving a motion to the High Court. 5. It matters if this group is private or public. As has been repeatedly clarified, every message posted here may be publicly accessible over the internet. As a consequence the moderators are required to firmly expel all members who persistently invite legal action by their intemperate posting. 6. Agreed. You are the first such person I am aware of such notice being issued to. You should therefore avail services of competent counsel immediately or apologise to Mr Tiwari as he has kindly offered. 7. Agreed. Mr Tiwari is evidently considering such drastic action to uphold the dignity of the Central Information Commission. 8. It is incorrect Your contemptuous publication was prior to publication of the Commission's decision. You have also requested Chief Information Commissioner to transfer other matters pending before Mr Tiwari. 9... 11. No comment 12. Your complaint to President of India is replete with defamatory statements concerning Mr Tiwari. I again suggest that you either engage competent counsel or apologize uncondtionally. The option suggested by Mr Leslie Almieda (arguing in person) is not advisable considering your past performance. Regards Ashish >
