Go to court.

[digal]

Hello D/Members,

Just coming from hearing.

After waiting years for hearing,

Do u want the PIO to get punished for malafidely denying information?
-----Go to Court.

Did u get FALSE/MISLEADING/INCOMPLETE information, deliberately given by PIO to cover-up corruption?
-----Go to Court.

If u have enough evidence to show that information was denied malafidely & you need compensation u/s 19(8)(b) to compensate for loss or detriment suffered by u.
-----Go to Court.

If u have clearly mentioned in your complaint that u 'DO NOT NEED INFORMATION any more but an ENQUIRY', at most u will b offered for inspection of records. Take the photo copies of the records &
-----Go to Court.

At least i have been told so. Else, u r a very very very..... LUCKY person to get benefits.

Now a days, this is the trend of the decisions of former bureaucrats as present ICs.
They have suffocated the essence of sections 18, 19(8)(b) & 20. Rather, they have painted the lines in BLACK or drained their memory to BLANK.

I had one Appeal & another Complaint; both are self explanatory.

Very shortly, let me describe the situations in this way-:

I was a candidate in departmental exam for Promotion in 2008(Appeal) & in 2010(Complaint).

For both the exams, there were manipulations in written tests, for which i do not have any direct evidence.

In interviews:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2008, i along with many candidates did not face the senior most member of the Interview Board (Total 5 members).

By chasing till CIC level, i got my marks by individual interviewers, where i got to know that i was awarded by All the 5 interviewers!- I know the IC can not do any thing here.

Interview marks of a candidate is the Average of marks given by the interviewers.
My mark was like this: n, n+1, n-1, n, n. Average=n. Since this case (a different recruitment case -read later at your leisure),they stopped assigning all in 'n' to award 'n' as average.

Knowing this, i filed again to know how many candidates got whole numbers as the Average marks by interviewers? And going through the records, how many are awarded by less than 5 interviewers?

Initially, the reply was 'not of public interest' & evading replay as '5 members in board'.

Later by chasing, only 2nd part was cleared by FAA that All the candidates were awarded by all 5 interviewers.

I made a 2nd appeal to know the no. of candidates scored in whole numbers.

In the mean time, i filed the same queries to SAIL corporate office (CO) about All the other Plants/Units of SAIL.
The CO cpio only replied about it's own unit that ALL 31 candidates scored in whole numbers, but refused to share whether they are in average or not.

I made 1st Appeal that, u/s 6(3), within 5 days, the cpio should have transferred my request to all units.

The trick worked. CO cpio immediately transferred my 1st Appeal(!) along with request & it's reply to all the units throughout India.
Replies are pouring in. My unit came to know that CO has already disclosed that All were in whole numbers.

So, it had no other option but to disclose that ALL 496 candidates scored in whole numbers in average of the interview marks-- to which they have been all along denying:"not of public interest". And the hearing was just conducted. Was that not malafide denial without any reasonable cause?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now for 2010, I didn't go for 1st Appeal. The reason as follows:

This was the déjà vu of 2008, but with greater evidence.

Here Two of the Five interviewers attended a Farewell programme simultaneously during the interviews.

I asked some queries mainly on: Q1) Going through records, No. of interviewers marked for each candidate
R1) 5 Members in board (same as 2008 reply).

Q2) Any Farewell Prog. held on ddmm...at .xxyy... R2) Yes, a farewell programme was held on ..ddmm.. at ..xxyy, but it did not coincide with int. timings.

Q3) If so, name of the persons who gave farewell to retiring persons R2) As per practice, senior members.

Q4) If so, how members of the Int. board were present in the Farewell programme. R4) Refer R3

.....etc etc. Don't you feel these are FALSE/MISLEADING/INCOMPLETE (sec18.1.e) replies deliberately given to me to evade corruption?
I made a trick again: Through another citizen, after >1 year, another RTI was filed about the programme for timing, date, copies describing timing, document# containing the information for the farewell programme etc.
Reply to the citizen: As per records there was no farewell programme held on ...ddmm.. at ..xxyy.

Compare with reply for me R2(!!!).

Let's see what happens after 4 weeks.

If Learned members had enough patience to read completely, they are requested to give sugestions/comments for further action.

[dr.s.malhotra]

Sponsorer

You are correct in your observations .
For significant matters one has to approach the Court invariably . It is natural outcome of previous wrong doings by PAs that they will fight tooth and nail to suppress information one way of the other . RTI Act is getting impotent with each passing day . The wisdom in words of out-going IC of CIC is evident .
Your choices are very few as you know .

[sharmajee]

I agree with Mr Malhotra.

Not only petty babus even big babus in our rotten bureaucratic system, pass illegal, undemocratic, illogical,unreasonable and ambiguous decisions and citizens have to fall prey to them as babudom best realize that how many can afford remedy of court. No ordinary, BPL or middle class person can afford costly and time consuming remedy of high court and they cannot dream of approaching supreme court.



The costliest commodity in independent India is thinking and seeking justice in Apex Court. Only very limited persons with abundant, financial resources (Corrupt Politicians, Big Level Criminals, Babus with govt. money, perhaps now list will add to some commissions) with no fear of accountability use it to use various routes of tiring legal process to harass the opponent, as even for them justice comes in last, but by that time "ordinary citizen" has left the battle suffocated by unending legal delay.

[jps50]

At least you can write back to concerned IC with copy to Chief IC of SIC resisting such orders. Please visit:

Not penalized
http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/blogs/...ed-format.html

Not satisfied with IC
http://www.rtiindia.org/forum/blogs/...missioner.html

Remanding of second appeals by gujarat information commission

[digal]

Dear learned Members,

Referring to my post#1, so far i didn't get any reply from CPIO; though two weeks yet to be passed.

I have given the link about the decision of Hon'ble IC in my post#1.

However, I am attaching the same in this post.

Kindly advise me, whether i should initiate the request for inspection or should wait?

I will be thankful for suggestions of learned members.