Jump to content
  • 0
wagh7

File Notings REFUSED

Question

wagh7

Respected Sirs,

 

One Pio Refused File Notings Tellings They Are Exempted From Information To Be Provided.

 

When Informed To Him About The Many Decisions Of Cic, He Says He Is Not Suppose To Know All The Decisions Of Cic, He Told That He Referred The Gazette He Is Having And Refused The File Notings.

 

In My Appeall To Appallet Authority I Mentioned That The Pio Or The Information Providing Authority Is Not Knowing The Act Fully And Mentioned That Many Decisions Were Given By Cic Over File Notings.

 

Whether It Is Ok.

 

Rakatkam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 answer to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
mpai
Respected Sirs,

 

One Pio Refused File Notings Tellings They Are Exempted From Information To Be Provided.

 

When Informed To Him About The Many Decisions Of Cic, He Says He Is Not Suppose To Know All The Decisions Of Cic, He Told That He Referred The Gazette He Is Having And Refused The File Notings.

 

In My Appeall To Appallet Authority I Mentioned That The Pio Or The Information Providing Authority Is Not Knowing The Act Fully And Mentioned That Many Decisions Were Given By Cic Over File Notings.

 

Whether It Is Ok.

 

Rakatkam.

 

Rakatkam, you havent mentioned the identify of the PA. Hope its not one of the those like DRDO, RAW etc. who come in the exemption list.

 

If not, you are right, file notings has been classified as information by the Full Bench CIC decision last year. However, please decide, if the file notings is really important to you? In most cases notings, though form a part of the file, may not be useful. Ask for the notings only if you feel there is some cases of unfair practices or something like that involved.

 

Since you have already filed an appeal, you have done the right thing. Please keep the forum updated on this matter.

 

Manoj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • karira
      By karira
      In a recent order (interim) the CIC has issued a "Show Cause Notice" for penalty to two DoPT officers and also threatened action under Sec 166, 187 and 188 of the IPC.
       
      The matter involves the removal of the controversial statement in the FAQ available on DoPT website regarding file notings. Based on the said statement, DoPT denied file notings to an applicant. CIC ordered disclsoure. DoPT ignored it. The appellant complained about non compliance. DoPT stated that the matter was put up before the committee of secretaries and under their consideration. CIC has come down heavily on DoPT. The full order is attached to this post.
       
      NOTE - Sections of IPC being invoked:
       
      166. Public servant disobeying law, with intent to cause injury to any person
      Whoever, being a public servant, knowingly disobeys any direction of the law as to
      the way in which he is to conduct himself as such public servant, intending to cause,
      or knowing it to be likely that he will, by such disobedience, cause injury to any
      person, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to
      one year, or with fine, or with both.
       
      Illustration
      A, being an officer directed by law to take property in execution, in order to satisfy a
      decree pronounced in Z's favour by a Court of Justice, knowingly disobeys that
      direction of law, with the knowledge that he is likely thereby to cause injury to Z. A
      has committed the offence defined in this section.

      187. Omission to assist public servant when bound by law to give assistance
      Whoever, being bound by law to render or furnish assistance to any public servant in
      the execution of his public duty, intentionally omits to give such assistance, shall be
      punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or
      with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both;
      and if such assistance be demanded of him by a public servant legally competent to
      make such demand for the purposes of executing any process lawfully issued by a
      Court of Justice, or of preventing the commission of an offence, or of suppressing a
      not, or affray, or of apprehending a person charged with or guilty of an offence, or of


      having escaped from lawful custody, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for
      a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five
      hundred rupees, or with both.
       
      188. Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant
      Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully
      empowered to promulgate such order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or
      to take certain order with certain property in his possession or under his
      management, disobeys such direction, shall, if such disobedience causes to tender to cause obstruction, annoyance or
      injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury, to any person lawfully employed,
      be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or
      with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both;
      and if such disobedience causes or trends to cause danger to human life, health or
      safety, or causes or tends to cause a not or affray, shall be punished with
      imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or
      with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
       
      Explanation- It is not necessary that the offender should intend to produce harm, or
      contemplate his disobedience as likely to produce harm. It is sufficient that he knows
      of the order which he disobeys, and that his disobedience produces, or is likely to
      produce, harm.
       
      Illustration
      An order is promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such
      order, direction that a religious procession shall not pass down a certain street. A
      knowingly disobeys the order, and thereby causes danger of not. A has committed
      the offence defined in this section


      WB-02062009-01.pdf

Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy