Responsible Use of RTI - Part 1

[sarbajitr]

For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
which included ALL the following pre-requisites

a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,

b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
proactive disclosure (especially on their website),

c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,

d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,

e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
honest officers by RTI etc.

This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,

a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act

b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from "them").

c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality, Police, service matters etc etc.

d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions", "queries" etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be penalised.

e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to identify the dishonest and corrupt officers.

The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late Prakash Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed an RTI in his life).

At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you wish to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made my choice a long time back.

Sarbajit

[Trivendra]

Dear Mr Roy

I would like to bring to your kind notice

(1) Should one not ask for salary through RTI paymant which is pending for
last 3 years (this fact is relivent in reference to 32000 teachers appointed
in primary education department in uttar paradesh and every teacher in
his/her personal capacity).

(2) The teacher after retirement above 10 years has not got service period
benefits as he/she could not grease the palm of officers.

(3) Illegal construction done by few on the greasing some govt officials,
should one not file an RTI application.

(4) recently UP govt has a derive for increasing power load to public but
not for its officials should it not be asked in personal capacity under RTI
on account of which there is frequent power cut.


Precisely speaking I mean to say that there are many topics which seem us to
be of personl nature on sitting in New Delhi; use of RTI is such cases is
suggested to be not preferred, but how the people get relief from miseries
they suffer so economicaly.

People of the country need much more speedy relief from their suffering than
envisaged in RTI (30 days). I have alredy written in my previous mail that
the time of 30 days allowed for reply be reduced gradully to 15 days. In
case it is reduced to 10 days I shall welcome that day with firm belief that
most of the information by that day shall be in public domin instead of
files in bookselfs.

Regards

Trivendra




On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:40 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:

>
>
> For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
> which included ALL the following pre-requisites
>
> a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
>
> b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
> proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
>
> c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
>
> d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
> PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
>
> e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
> honest officers by RTI etc.
>
> This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
> of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
>
> a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
>
> b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres
> (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from
> "them").
>
> c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality,
> Police, service matters etc etc.
>
> d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions", "queries"
> etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be penalised.
>
> e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to identify
> the dishonest and corrupt officers.
>
> The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late Prakash
> Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed an
> RTI in his life).
>
> At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you wish
> to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made my
> choice a long time back.
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
>

--
Try to be part of solution. It will add your value

[sarbajitr]

This refers to your queries, answered in seriatim :-

1) You should NOT use RTI to ask for salaries pending for 3 years. You SHOULD use your alternate remedies instead.

2), 3) RTI Act is NOT to be used to fight corruption DIRECTLY. Corruption is a fact of life, and corruption is a necessary evil - I stress "necessary". Using RTI Act to "fight" corruption will only encourage it and make you a frustrated person.

4) When you joined public service you took an oath to serve the public. When there is power shortage, you should remember that you are a public "servant" and should be content with what you have.

5) Regarding time periods, I say that that you Sir are impractical. When even after 4 years the Hon'ble CIC cannot ensure that public authority provides me copy of its governing an Act of Parliament you can be sure that RTI is dead. All "we" are doping is poking the corpse and stripping it bare.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india@..., Trivendra <trivendra.sharma@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Mr Roy
>
> I would like to bring to your kind notice
>
> (1) Should one not ask for salary through RTI paymant which is pending for
> last 3 years (this fact is relivent in reference to 32000 teachers appointed
> in primary education department in uttar paradesh and every teacher in
> his/her personal capacity).
>
> (2) The teacher after retirement above 10 years has not got service period
> benefits as he/she could not grease the palm of officers.
>
> (3) Illegal construction done by few on the greasing some govt officials,
> should one not file an RTI application.
>
> (4) recently UP govt has a derive for increasing power load to public but
> not for its officials should it not be asked in personal capacity under RTI
> on account of which there is frequent power cut.
>
>
> Precisely speaking I mean to say that there are many topics which seem us to
> be of personl nature on sitting in New Delhi; use of RTI is such cases is
> suggested to be not preferred, but how the people get relief from miseries
> they suffer so economicaly.
>
> People of the country need much more speedy relief from their suffering than
> envisaged in RTI (30 days). I have alredy written in my previous mail that
> the time of 30 days allowed for reply be reduced gradully to 15 days. In
> case it is reduced to 10 days I shall welcome that day with firm belief that
> most of the information by that day shall be in public domin instead of
> files in bookselfs.
>
> Regards
>
> Trivendra
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:40 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
> > which included ALL the following pre-requisites
> >
> > a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
> >
> > b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
> > proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
> >
> > c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
> >
> > d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
> > PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
> >
> > e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
> > honest officers by RTI etc.
> >
> > This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
> > of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
> >
> > a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
> >
> > b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres
> > (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from
> > "them").
> >
> > c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality,
> > Police, service matters etc etc.
> >
> > d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions", "queries"
> > etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be penalised.
> >
> > e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to identify
> > the dishonest and corrupt officers.
> >
> > The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late Prakash
> > Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed an
> > RTI in his life).
> >
> > At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you wish
> > to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made my
> > choice a long time back.
> >
> > Sarbajit
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Try to be part of solution. It will add your value
>

[Trivendra]

Dear Mr Roy,

To some extent you are right. But unfortunately, not fighting corruption
through RTI, I do not agree with you.

My Regret.

Trivendra

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:19 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:

>
>
> This refers to your queries, answered in seriatim :-
>
> 1) You should NOT use RTI to ask for salaries pending for 3 years. You
> SHOULD use your alternate remedies instead.
>
> 2), 3) RTI Act is NOT to be used to fight corruption DIRECTLY. Corruption
> is a fact of life, and corruption is a necessary evil - I stress
> "necessary". Using RTI Act to "fight" corruption will only encourage it and
> make you a frustrated person.
>
> 4) When you joined public service you took an oath to serve the public.
> When there is power shortage, you should remember that you are a public
> "servant" and should be content with what you have.
>
> 5) Regarding time periods, I say that that you Sir are impractical. When
> even after 4 years the Hon'ble CIC cannot ensure that public authority
> provides me copy of its governing an Act of Parliament you can be sure that
> RTI is dead. All "we" are doping is poking the corpse and stripping it bare.
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
> --- In rti_india@... <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, Trivendra
> <trivendra.sharma@...> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mr Roy
> >
> > I would like to bring to your kind notice
> >
> > (1) Should one not ask for salary through RTI paymant which is pending
> for
> > last 3 years (this fact is relivent in reference to 32000 teachers
> appointed
> > in primary education department in uttar paradesh and every teacher in
> > his/her personal capacity).
> >
> > (2) The teacher after retirement above 10 years has not got service
> period
> > benefits as he/she could not grease the palm of officers.
> >
> > (3) Illegal construction done by few on the greasing some govt officials,
> > should one not file an RTI application.
> >
> > (4) recently UP govt has a derive for increasing power load to public but
> > not for its officials should it not be asked in personal capacity under
> RTI
> > on account of which there is frequent power cut.
> >
> >
> > Precisely speaking I mean to say that there are many topics which seem us
> to
> > be of personl nature on sitting in New Delhi; use of RTI is such cases is
> > suggested to be not preferred, but how the people get relief from
> miseries
> > they suffer so economicaly.
> >
> > People of the country need much more speedy relief from their suffering
> than
> > envisaged in RTI (30 days). I have alredy written in my previous mail
> that
> > the time of 30 days allowed for reply be reduced gradully to 15 days. In
> > case it is reduced to 10 days I shall welcome that day with firm belief
> that
> > most of the information by that day shall be in public domin instead of
> > files in bookselfs.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Trivendra
> >
> >
> >
> >
>  > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:40 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
> > > which included ALL the following pre-requisites
> > >
> > > a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
> > >
> > > b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
> > > proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
> > >
> > > c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
> > >
> > > d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
> > > PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
> > >
> > > e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
> > > honest officers by RTI etc.
> > >
> > > This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
> > > of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
> > >
> > > a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
> > >
> > > b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres
> > > (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from
> > > "them").
> > >
> > > c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality,
> > > Police, service matters etc etc.
> > >
> > > d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions",
> "queries"
> > > etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be
> penalised.
> > >
> > > e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to
> identify
> > > the dishonest and corrupt officers.
> > >
> > > The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late
> Prakash
> > > Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed
> an
> > > RTI in his life).
> > >
> > > At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you
> wish
> > > to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made
> my
> > > choice a long time back.
> > >
> > > Sarbajit
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Try to be part of solution. It will add your value
> >
>
>  
>

--
Try to be part of solution. It will add your value

[sarbajitr]

Dear Trivendra,

You posed me 3 examples and asked for my opinion. Now I shall in turn pose 3 queries /examples:

1) A project to provide safe/clean drinking water to 10,000 persons in arsenic affected region is sanctioned for say Rs. 10 crores with foreign aid routed through a Central Ministry. Even the foreign donor knows very well that Rs.3 crores is going as bribes to all concerned. Now along comes a "honest" and "upright" officer and he delays the project for 1 year citing rules and regulations. The foreign donor is fed up, he has already paid 1 crore in bribes with no progress so he cancels this project's aid. Result: No water and thousands of people get even more affected. This is a true account affecting one of our group members.

2) A foreign aid agency wants to donate 10,000,000 good quality condoms Free of Charge to any aid agency /NGO who wants it. The concerned Minister demands Rs 1 crore from one of this group's members to facilitate it and suggests that it could be routed through her relative's NGO.

3) Today in almost every State, the Constitutional system of "checks and balances" has totally broken down. IAS baboos are now acting as middlemen to broker deals for politicans and vice-versa. The top judiciary is routinely factored into every deal roughly in the ratio 15% to Mantri/netas, 10% for babus and 5% for Judges. So straightaway 30% of every project is allotted as speed money / chai paani. And 30% is a conservative estimate  In a recent deal under process involving purchase of fighter aircraft - everyone knows that the Scandinavian co - Viggen is the best fighter and the cheapest, but the order is probably going to the USA or France who are 90% more expensive.

So where in these examples would RTI help you UNLESS you are an insider. RTI is only a diagnostic tool - it has no curative value.

Sarbajit

--- In rti_india@..., Trivendra <trivendra.sharma@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Mr Roy,
>
> To some extent you are right. But unfortunately, not fighting corruption
> through RTI, I do not agree with you.
>
> My Regret.
>
> Trivendra
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:19 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > This refers to your queries, answered in seriatim :-
> >
> > 1) You should NOT use RTI to ask for salaries pending for 3 years. You
> > SHOULD use your alternate remedies instead.
> >
> > 2), 3) RTI Act is NOT to be used to fight corruption DIRECTLY. Corruption
> > is a fact of life, and corruption is a necessary evil - I stress
> > "necessary". Using RTI Act to "fight" corruption will only encourage it and
> > make you a frustrated person.
> >
> > 4) When you joined public service you took an oath to serve the public.
> > When there is power shortage, you should remember that you are a public
> > "servant" and should be content with what you have.
> >
> > 5) Regarding time periods, I say that that you Sir are impractical. When
> > even after 4 years the Hon'ble CIC cannot ensure that public authority
> > provides me copy of its governing an Act of Parliament you can be sure that
> > RTI is dead. All "we" are doping is poking the corpse and stripping it bare.
> >
> > Sarbajit
> >
> >
> > --- In rti_india@... <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, Trivendra
> > <trivendra.sharma@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Mr Roy
> > >
> > > I would like to bring to your kind notice
> > >
> > > (1) Should one not ask for salary through RTI paymant which is pending
> > for
> > > last 3 years (this fact is relivent in reference to 32000 teachers
> > appointed
> > > in primary education department in uttar paradesh and every teacher in
> > > his/her personal capacity).
> > >
> > > (2) The teacher after retirement above 10 years has not got service
> > period
> > > benefits as he/she could not grease the palm of officers.
> > >
> > > (3) Illegal construction done by few on the greasing some govt officials,
> > > should one not file an RTI application.
> > >
> > > (4) recently UP govt has a derive for increasing power load to public but
> > > not for its officials should it not be asked in personal capacity under
> > RTI
> > > on account of which there is frequent power cut.
> > >
> > >
> > > Precisely speaking I mean to say that there are many topics which seem us
> > to
> > > be of personl nature on sitting in New Delhi; use of RTI is such cases is
> > > suggested to be not preferred, but how the people get relief from
> > miseries
> > > they suffer so economicaly.
> > >
> > > People of the country need much more speedy relief from their suffering
> > than
> > > envisaged in RTI (30 days). I have alredy written in my previous mail
> > that
> > > the time of 30 days allowed for reply be reduced gradully to 15 days. In
> > > case it is reduced to 10 days I shall welcome that day with firm belief
> > that
> > > most of the information by that day shall be in public domin instead of
> > > files in bookselfs.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Trivendra
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >  > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:40 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
> > > > which included ALL the following pre-requisites
> > > >
> > > > a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
> > > >
> > > > b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
> > > > proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
> > > >
> > > > c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
> > > >
> > > > d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
> > > > PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
> > > >
> > > > e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
> > > > honest officers by RTI etc.
> > > >
> > > > This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
> > > > of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
> > > >
> > > > a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
> > > >
> > > > b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres
> > > > (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from
> > > > "them").
> > > >
> > > > c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality,
> > > > Police, service matters etc etc.
> > > >
> > > > d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions",
> > "queries"
> > > > etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be
> > penalised.
> > > >
> > > > e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to
> > identify
> > > > the dishonest and corrupt officers.
> > > >
> > > > The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late
> > Prakash
> > > > Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed
> > an
> > > > RTI in his life).
> > > >
> > > > At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you
> > wish
> > > > to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made
> > my
> > > > choice a long time back.
> > > >
> > > > Sarbajit
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Try to be part of solution. It will add your value
> > >
> >
> >  
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Try to be part of solution. It will add your value
>

[S.D. Sharma]

Dear Mr Sharma,

Mr Roy is expert in fighting corruption. You people may not know but
our moderator got information in RTI from central body the TRAI using
Delhi RTI Act in 2003 (2 years before the RTI 2005) after which
penalty was put against Reliance of more than 3000 crore rupees and he
was instrumental to get a corrupt minister Parmod Mahajan of BJP to
resign in that telecom scandal.

So when Mr Roy says that RTI is now not useful for fighting corruption
you should listen carefully.

S D Sharma

Re: [rti_india] Re: Responsible Use of RTI - Part 1

Dear Mr Roy,

To some extent you are right. But unfortunately, not fighting
corruption through RTI, I do not agree with you.

My Regret.

Trivendra

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:19 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:



    This refers to your queries, answered in seriatim :-

    1) You should NOT use RTI to ask for salaries pending for 3 years.
You SHOULD use your alternate remedies instead.

[Bhaskar Prabhu]

Hey only haraami can tell oathers haraami.
Bhaskar


On 10/27/09, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
> which included ALL the following pre-requisites
>
> a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
>
> b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
> proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
>
> c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
>
> d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
> PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
>
> e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
> honest officers by RTI etc.
>
> This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
> of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
>
> a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
>
> b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres
> (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from
> "them").
>
> c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality,
> Police, service matters etc etc.
>
> d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions", "queries"
> etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be penalised.
>
> e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to identify
> the dishonest and corrupt officers.
>
> The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late Prakash
> Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed an
> RTI in his life).
>
> At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you wish
> to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made my
> choice a long time back.
>
> Sarbajit
>
>
>

[Satish Kumar Kapoor]

Hi All

I do not think words like "haraami" should be used any member, it is indecent.

All officers are not corrupt, but it is also true that all officers are not honest, Victimisation of honest officers is must.

Filling of RTI application depends upon circumstances, if some dishonest officers do not respond in ordinary way or in way they are supposed to preform, RTI application to seek information is must, whether it is in larger public interest or in invidual'sinterest.

Satish




________________________________
From: Bhaskar Prabhu <mahitiadhikarmanch@...>
To: rti_india@...
Sent: Wed, October 28, 2009 3:42:15 AM
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Responsible Use of RTI - Part 1

 
Hey only haraami can tell oathers haraami.
Bhaskar

 
On 10/27/09, sroy1947 <sroy1947@yahoo. com> wrote:
 

>For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
>which included ALL the following pre-requisites
>
>a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
>
>b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
>>proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
>
>c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
>
>d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
>PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
>
>e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
>>honest officers by RTI etc.
>
>This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
>of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
>
>a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
>
>b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from "them").
>
>c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality, Police, service matters etc etc.
>
>d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions", "queries" etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be penalised.
>
>e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to identify the dishonest and corrupt officers.
>
>The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late Prakash Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed an RTI in his life).
>
>At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you wish to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made my choice a long time back.
>
>Sarbajit
>
>

   


     

[Satish Kumar Kapoor]

Dear All

Sorry, by mistake I have mention that victimisation of honest officers is must, WHAT I MEAN IS PREVENTING VICTIMISATION OF HONEST OFFICERS IS MUST.

I AM SORRY  FOR MISTAKE.

SATISH

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Satish Kumar Kapoor <kapoorsatish@...>
To: rti_india@...
Sent: Wed, October 28, 2009 10:49:04 AM
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Responsible Use of RTI - Part 1

 
Hi All

I do not think words like "haraami" should be used any member, it is indecent.

All officers are not corrupt, but it is also true that all officers are not honest, Victimisation of honest officers is must.

Filling of RTI application depends upon circumstances, if some dishonest officers do not respond in ordinary way or in way they are supposed to preform, RTI application to seek information is must, whether it is in larger public interest or in invidual'sinterest.

Satish




________________________________
From: Bhaskar Prabhu <mahitiadhikarmanch@ gmail.com>
To: rti_india@yahoogrou ps.com
Sent: Wed, October 28, 2009 3:42:15 AM
Subject: Re: [rti_india] Responsible Use of RTI - Part 1

 
Hey only haraami can tell oathers haraami.
Bhaskar

 
On 10/27/09, sroy1947 <sroy1947@yahoo. com> wrote:
 

>For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
>which included ALL the following pre-requisites
>
>a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
>
>b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
>>proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
>
>c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
>
>d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
>PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
>
>e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
>>honest officers by RTI etc.
>
>This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
>of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
>
>a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
>
>b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE from "them").
>
>c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against Municipality, Police, service matters etc etc.
>
>d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions", "queries" etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be penalised.
>
>e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to identify the dishonest and corrupt officers.
>
>The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late Prakash Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have filed an RTI in his life).
>
>At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI you wish to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have made my choice a long time back.
>
>Sarbajit
>
>

   


     

[Trivendra]

Dear Mr Roy

Now I conclude that the my views are due to limited vision. Responsible use
of RTI is a must for me too. I shall be more careful in future.

Regards

Trivendra

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 5:14 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:

>
>
> Dear Trivendra,
>
> You posed me 3 examples and asked for my opinion. Now I shall in turn pose
> 3 queries /examples:
>
> 1) A project to provide safe/clean drinking water to 10,000 persons in
> arsenic affected region is sanctioned for say Rs. 10 crores with foreign aid
> routed through a Central Ministry. Even the foreign donor knows very well
> that Rs.3 crores is going as bribes to all concerned. Now along comes a
> "honest" and "upright" officer and he delays the project for 1 year citing
> rules and regulations. The foreign donor is fed up, he has already paid 1
> crore in bribes with no progress so he cancels this project's aid. Result:
> No water and thousands of people get even more affected. This is a true
> account affecting one of our group members.
>
> 2) A foreign aid agency wants to donate 10,000,000 good quality condoms
> Free of Charge to any aid agency /NGO who wants it. The concerned Minister
> demands Rs 1 crore from one of this group's members to facilitate it and
> suggests that it could be routed through her relative's NGO.
>
> 3) Today in almost every State, the Constitutional system of "checks and
> balances" has totally broken down. IAS baboos are now acting as middlemen to
> broker deals for politicans and vice-versa. The top judiciary is routinely
> factored into every deal roughly in the ratio 15% to Mantri/netas, 10% for
> babus and 5% for Judges. So straightaway 30% of every project is allotted as
> speed money / chai paani. And 30% is a conservative estimate In a recent
> deal under process involving purchase of fighter aircraft - everyone knows
> that the Scandinavian co - Viggen is the best fighter and the cheapest, but
> the order is probably going to the USA or France who are 90% more expensive.
>
> So where in these examples would RTI help you UNLESS you are an insider.
> RTI is only a diagnostic tool - it has no curative value.
>
>
> Sarbajit
>
> --- In rti_india@... <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com>, Trivendra
> <trivendra.sharma@...> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mr Roy,
> >
> > To some extent you are right. But unfortunately, not fighting corruption
> > through RTI, I do not agree with you.
> >
> > My Regret.
> >
> > Trivendra
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:19 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > This refers to your queries, answered in seriatim :-
> > >
> > > 1) You should NOT use RTI to ask for salaries pending for 3 years. You
> > > SHOULD use your alternate remedies instead.
> > >
> > > 2), 3) RTI Act is NOT to be used to fight corruption DIRECTLY.
> Corruption
> > > is a fact of life, and corruption is a necessary evil - I stress
> > > "necessary". Using RTI Act to "fight" corruption will only encourage it
> and
> > > make you a frustrated person.
> > >
> > > 4) When you joined public service you took an oath to serve the public.
> > > When there is power shortage, you should remember that you are a public
> > > "servant" and should be content with what you have.
> > >
> > > 5) Regarding time periods, I say that that you Sir are impractical.
> When
> > > even after 4 years the Hon'ble CIC cannot ensure that public authority
> > > provides me copy of its governing an Act of Parliament you can be sure
> that
> > > RTI is dead. All "we" are doping is poking the corpse and stripping it
> bare.
> > >
> > > Sarbajit
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In rti_india@... <rti_india%40yahoogroups.com><rti_india%
> 40yahoogroups.com>, Trivendra
>
> > > <trivendra.sharma@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dear Mr Roy
> > > >
> > > > I would like to bring to your kind notice
> > > >
> > > > (1) Should one not ask for salary through RTI paymant which is
> pending
> > > for
> > > > last 3 years (this fact is relivent in reference to 32000 teachers
> > > appointed
> > > > in primary education department in uttar paradesh and every teacher
> in
> > > > his/her personal capacity).
> > > >
> > > > (2) The teacher after retirement above 10 years has not got service
> > > period
> > > > benefits as he/she could not grease the palm of officers.
> > > >
> > > > (3) Illegal construction done by few on the greasing some govt
> officials,
> > > > should one not file an RTI application.
> > > >
> > > > (4) recently UP govt has a derive for increasing power load to public
> but
> > > > not for its officials should it not be asked in personal capacity
> under
> > > RTI
> > > > on account of which there is frequent power cut.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Precisely speaking I mean to say that there are many topics which
> seem us
> > > to
> > > > be of personl nature on sitting in New Delhi; use of RTI is such
> cases is
> > > > suggested to be not preferred, but how the people get relief from
> > > miseries
> > > > they suffer so economicaly.
> > > >
> > > > People of the country need much more speedy relief from their
> suffering
> > > than
> > > > envisaged in RTI (30 days). I have alredy written in my previous mail
> > > that
> > > > the time of 30 days allowed for reply be reduced gradully to 15 days.
> In
> > > > case it is reduced to 10 days I shall welcome that day with firm
> belief
> > > that
> > > > most of the information by that day shall be in public domin instead
> of
> > > > files in bookselfs.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Trivendra
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 12:40 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > For many years this group has stood for a certain brand of RTI
> > > > > which included ALL the following pre-requisites
> > > > >
> > > > > a) Filing RTIs only if absolutely necessary,
> > > > >
> > > > > b) Filing RTIs only after throughly checking out the PA's
> > > > > proactive disclosure (especially on their website),
> > > > >
> > > > > c) Filing RTIs in the larger public interest,
> > > > >
> > > > > d) Filing RTIs after anticipating and considering all the
> > > > > PIOs potential exemptions / tactics,
> > > > >
> > > > > e) OPPOSING disclosure of "file notings" and victimisation of
> > > > > honest officers by RTI etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > This philosophy was evolved after observing that ALL the 'haraamis'
> > > > > of RTI were proposing the exact opposite ie,
> > > > >
> > > > > a) File as many RTIs as you want - there is no bar in the RTI Act
> > > > >
> > > > > b) Section 4 and section 6 operate in 2 different/ distinct spheres
> > > > > (section 4 is what "they" GIVE you - section 6 is what "we" TAKE
> from
> > > > > "them").
> > > > >
> > > > > c) File RTIs to sort out your private grievances against
> Municipality,
> > > > > Police, service matters etc etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > d) You dont need to read RTI Act, just keep asking "questions",
> > > "queries"
> > > > > etc to the PIO and he must "reply" to you in 30 days or else be
> > > penalised.
> > > > >
> > > > > e) It is only through seeing file notings that you will be able to
> > > identify
> > > > > the dishonest and corrupt officers.
> > > > >
> > > > > The most public proponent of this other brand of RTI was the late
> > > Prakash
> > > > > Kardaley - founder of HJ (who incidentally claimed never to have
> filed
> > > an
> > > > > RTI in his life).
> > > > >
> > > > > At the end of the day - it is upto you to choose what style of RTI
> you
> > > wish
> > > > > to practice - for this reveals what kind of person you are. I have
> made
> > > my
> > > > > choice a long time back.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sarbajit
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Try to be part of solution. It will add your value
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Try to be part of solution. It will add your value
> >
>
>  
>

--
Try to be part of solution. It will add your value

[Trivendra]

Dear Sir,

I fully agree with you, I know nothing about this great personality. However
I shall be more careful in future with use of RTI. My views were based on my
limited vision.

Regards
Trivendra



On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 5:34 PM, S.D. Sharma <anonsharma@...> wrote:

>
>
> Dear Mr Sharma,
>
> Mr Roy is expert in fighting corruption. You people may not know but
> our moderator got information in RTI from central body the TRAI using
> Delhi RTI Act in 2003 (2 years before the RTI 2005) after which
> penalty was put against Reliance of more than 3000 crore rupees and he
> was instrumental to get a corrupt minister Parmod Mahajan of BJP to
> resign in that telecom scandal.
>
> So when Mr Roy says that RTI is now not useful for fighting corruption
> you should listen carefully.
>
> S D Sharma
>
> Re: [rti_india] Re: Responsible Use of RTI - Part 1
>
>
> Dear Mr Roy,
>
> To some extent you are right. But unfortunately, not fighting
> corruption through RTI, I do not agree with you.
>
> My Regret.
>
> Trivendra
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 2:19 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@...> wrote:
>
> This refers to your queries, answered in seriatim :-
>
> 1) You should NOT use RTI to ask for salaries pending for 3 years.
> You SHOULD use your alternate remedies instead.
>
>
>

--
Try to be part of solution. It will add your value