A Request to ascertain the published news
To
Date:
29-10-2012
Thiru. K.S. Sripathy
Chief Information Commissioner
Theynampet
Chennai- 600018.
Sir,
Your kind attention is drawn to the news column published in the
Times of India dt. 22-10-2012. Especially the first para needs more
attention.
The real intention of the CIC is exposed to the effect that he is more
interested to protect and safeguard the stained interests of the PIO
who fails to honour the RTI Act. Also the CIC is seemingly more
concerned with the difficulties faced by the PIOs.
On the other hand, in the curiosity to give undue protection to the
PIO, the CIC has miserably failed to see sub sections (4) & (5) of
sec. 5 of the Act. A little diligence on the part of the CIC would
have saved such awkward situation emanated from the above news.
Already a complaint made against you in the matter of getting
allotment of flat at Nerkundram scheme of TNHB, the office of the
Governor has denied the receipt of our complaint dt. 17-1-2012.
Subsequently, the receipt of complaint was admitted and the same was
reportedly forwarded to P & AR Dept. vide letter of Secretary to
Governor dt. 22-5-2012. Here also the office of the governor has
pathetically failed to see the various sub sections of sec. 17 of the
RTI Act. The Governor is not empowered to delegate to anybody the
power exclusively vested with the Governor under the Act.
Recently there was a news column reportedly given by the CIC,
justifying the use of red beacon light by the SICs in their official
cars, claiming that they are equal to the Chief Secretary of the
State. The red beacon lights are not meant to be used by individuals
but it is intended for the usage of that particular post mentioned in
the G.O. It is a quiet unfortunate calamity to see the CIC is
seemingly unable to distinguish between individual and post.
In the light of some of many such inconsistencies pointed out above,
it has become an absolute necessity on the part of CIC to ascertain
the truthfulness of the news items published above. Accordingly we
remain with anticipation of a just and fair response from the CIC.
C. Selvaraj
********************************************************************************
Remarks on the reply of PIO in Case No. 27299/C/2012- dt. 13-8-2012
To
Date: 29-10-2012
The State Information Commission
2, Thyagaraya Road
Theynampet
Chennai- 600018.
Sir,
Sub:- RTI Act 2005- certain information on the action
taken against Thiru.
K.S. Sripathy TNCIC- denial of information by
PIO of Governor of
Tamilnadu - first appeal not responded- remarks
on reply to 2nd appeal- reg.
Ref:- 1. RTI application dt. 30-3-12
2. PIO letter dt. 16-4-12
3. email to Governor dt. 21-4-12
4. POD of India post
5. 1st appeal dt. 7-5-12
6. 2nd appeal dt 13-6-2012
7. reply of PIO dt. 24-9-2012.
In the above mentioned case, the PIO of Governor has given his remarks
as directed by the Commission.
It was claimed that my complaint dt 17-1-2012 was not received in U3
section. But the reply is silent on whether the complaint was received
in the office of Governor or not. POD has already been sent to the
PIO.
The reply goes to proceed that the complaint has nothing to do with
the Information Commission by stating that the complaint is against
Thiru. K.S. Sripathy, CIC. It is not a disputed fact in the 2nd
appeal. It is an irrelevant narration.
Not stopping with this irrelevancy, the reply proceeds to say that the
appointment of Information Commissioner is being dealt with by P & AR
Dept. It is also not a matter in the 2nd appeal.
My complaint specifically deals with removal of CIC by the Governor
u/s. 17 of the Act, which power could not be delegated to anybody by
the Governor. It has also nothing to do in the 2nd appeal.
What I have sought for in my RTI application was to supply copy of the
file which dealt with the complaint. If for the sake of argument that
the complaint was forwarded to the P & AR Dept, then there must be
some file containing the action of forwarding the complaint. This too
was denied to me, though I am entitled to receive the same.
Accordingly I request the Information Commission to kindly order an
enquiry for enabling me to get the information remain denied to me.
C.
Selvaraj
No comments:
Post a Comment