Dear Guptaji,
The point is ONUS.
I am putting the onus on Sarbajit to elicit the specific provisions of the Constitution of India which contravenes (overrides) the provision of section 6(2) of the RTI Act.
Best Regards,
Sunil.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 4:50 AM, M.K. Gupta <mkgupta100@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Information is Fundamental Right. Tomorrow, some body will advise that there should not be any suo-motu disclosure u.s. 4 of the RTI Act as these are un-constitutional, Why there should be any need to give reason in an open government?. Act has enought safe guards under section 8, 9 24 (exempted organisation).I have read the Constituion fair enough, not only India Constituion but all the leading Constiutution like USA, UK and other as an student of Pol. Sciene. In our Constitution, there is no such thing but on the reverse, many articles in Fundamental Rights supoort providing information and not unnecessary secret/ confidential working . Britisher brought Official Secret Act to deprive us from participating in the governance for their own interest but RTI Act override that Act and all other such Acts etc. too.Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] Centre must add purpose clause to RTI Act
To:
Date: Monday, 21 February, 2011, 9:41 PM
Dear Sarbajit,As mentioned in your post (quoted below) about there being specific existing provisions in the Constitution which overrides section 6(2) of the RTI Act, can you please specify those relevant provisions (Articles) of the Constitution, to substantiate your claim?Quote from your post:In any case there are specific Constitutional provisions requiring reasons for seeking info to be mandated and which over-ride 6(2) of the RTI Act. FYI,, 6(2) is actually unconstitutional and it is better that the Act be amended otherwise it would be struck down by some court.UnquoteBest Regards,Sunil.
__._,_.___
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment