Jump to content
News Ticker
  • NPAs under PM Modi's Mudra scheme jumped 126% in FY19
  • shows RTI
  • RTI query reveals banking frauds of ₹ 2.05 Trillion reported in the last 11 years
  • 509 per cent rise in cases under child labour law: Study
  • The Central Information Commission has allowed disclosure of file notings on the mercy petition of a rape and murder convict, rejecting the government's contention that the records cannot be disclosed as these are privileged documents under Article 74(2) of the Constitution.
  • Electoral bonds worth over ₹5,800 crore were bought by donors to fund political parties between March 1, 2018 and May 10, 2019, a Right to Information reply has said.
  • Don't pay 500/- for answer sheet now- Supreme Court says if Answer sheet is asked under RTI, RTI Fees will be governed
  • 0
R.P.Venkataraman

State Spins A Long Yarn

Question

R.P.Venkataraman

From

Dr.(Ms.)Rhama P.Venkataraman,

H36/A,Parvathi Street,

Kalashektra Colony,

Beasnt Nagar,

Madras 600090.

 

Tel.:43504770

 

 

 

Dear Sir,

 

I lived in different rooms for over four years from 9th April, 1992 in P.G.K.Mansion,78, L.B.Road, Adyar, Madras, 600020. 5th Sep., 1996 I left for New Delhi to attend an interview at Miranda House for the post of lecturer in physics. In my absence the drunken landlords Mr.Ramesh Menon and Mr.Suresh

Menon broke open the lock and took away ALL my possessions.

 

The writ petition(W.P.1170, 27th Jan., 1997) I filed was dismissed as the Home department misled the court saying that an inquiry was conducted at Adyar police station in the presence of the petitioner on the very SAME DAY WHEN I WAS AT DELHI AT MIRANDA HOUSE. Had the landlords alone been guilty of misrepresentation of facts I would have filed an appeal as Miranda House also issued a letter stating I was at Delhi when the inquiry was purported to have been conducted.

 

Earlier befor September 1996 during MsJ.Jayalalitha's regime when the landlords locked me out, the then D.G.P. Mr.W.Dawaram got the room opened for me. The landlords waited for Mr.M.Karunanidhi to take over and broke open my room. The then Home Secretary Mr.Ashoke Joshi told me "I am sorry. I know your case." My father a retired Headmaster who worked at Tiruvarur also said "Shall I write to Karunanaidhi? He is my student." I said "Let me see how far an honest, educated common man like me can get seeking justice." Needless to say I am diappointed with the judiciary and the country. My well wishers have warned me that my detractors have enough man power and money power and ......power to get me implicated in false cases!!!

 

Could you help me take the case to its logical conclusion?

 

Yours faithfully,

 

R.P.Venkataraman

 

_________________________________________________________________

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
Shrawan

I am not sure, what are you aiming through this letter by the application of RTI Act? Could you be more elaborate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
R.P.Venkataraman

Dear Sir,

Respondent landlords mirepresenting facts and misleading court is not unexpected. I would have appealed against the verdict. The other respondent Home department had said that neighbourhood police conducted an inquiry in the presence of the petitioner(myself) on the very day when I was away at Delhi attending an interview at Miranda house and settled the (civil) dispute. The petition was dismissed. Miranda house sent a letter saying I was AT DELHI at the time quoted. My well wishers said and still say that Mr. Karunanidhi's government has ... and that I should not appeal. According to me my landlords had committed a crime and I want them to go to jail. I want the state records examined by a neutral party. I would like the state brought to book at least by God.

Unofficially I have sent word I am a distant relative of an ex-president of India.

I do not know what RTI can do. I am disgusted with the country. I have posted another letter to RTI before this on Duplicate Ph.D degree .... My ex-landlords sent their servant to rob me at Central railway station many years after winning the petition. The railway police was a witness to it and refused to entertain any complaint.

Please advise me and tell me what step I should take next.

Best regards.

Yours faithfully,

R.P.Venkataraman

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

    • crusader
      By crusader
      I want to know that I have got information from Nagar nigam, Can I use it as an evidence in the court of law? What are the provisions related to that?
    • Shrawan
      By Shrawan
      Central Information Commission


       
       

      Decision No.292/IC(A)/2006
      F. No.CIC/MA/A/2006/00588


       

      Dated, the 21st September, 2006


       
       

      Name of the Appellant : Sh. Sharabh Dubey, 11/7 Civil Lines, Kanpur –208 001. (U.P.)
      Name of the Public Authority: The British India Corporation Limited, 14/136 Civil Lines, P.B. 77, Kanpur-208 001.
      DECISION
       
      Facts of the Case:
       

      The appellant is an employee of the respondent. He was transferred to another Unit of the company. The office order was challenged by him in the Court, which adjudicated on the matter. Subsequently, he has filed a few more petitions on service related matters in the Court. In this backdrop, he has sought documents relating to the legal opinion obtained by the respondent, file notings by the senior officials on the issue of transfer, letters/correspondence with other officials, etc.
      The CPIO has denied the information and sought exemption u/s 8(1)(d) & (g) of the Act.
      The case was heard on 12.9.06. The appellant could not be present. The CPIO and the appellate authority were present. In the course of hearing, the CPIO showed a copy of the petition filed by the appellant in the Court, whic hcontained almost all the documents asked for by him. The CPIO contended that the documents asked for by the appellant relate to the various petitions filed by him in the Court. He, therefore, pleaded that the disclosure of the documents might adversely affect the disputed cases. Hence, the relevant documents are treated as confidential.
       
      Commission’s Decision:
       

      There is a dispute between the appellant and the company on service matters, including transfer of the appellant to another unit. The matter is pending before the Court for adjudication. There is every possibility that the appellant would get opportunity for his effective defense. The information sought is in the interest of the seeker. And, as such, there is no overriding public interest, u/s 8(1)(j) of the Act, for disclosure of the information.
      The appeal is therefore dismissed.
       

      Sd/-
      (Prof. M.M. Ansari)
      Information Commissioner


Announcements

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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