- 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
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'summons'.
Found 3 results
suman_ghosh123 posted a question in Ask for RTI SupportI am married with my wife on 2008 March. Wife had a conjugal life of hardly 3 months with me, sometime in my native and for 1 month with me, left matrimonial house in 2009. Although my native place is in Raiganj, i live in Kolkata. She and her parents use to abuse me althrough-out. My father expired on April'2012. Earlier father has filed general diary against my wife, her parents on 2010 with local police station and again reported the same on 2011 giving all the details that she does not live with me, not returned bacl and I stay far away from kolkata. Wife filed dVA and maintanance case against me on May'2012. Lower district court send notice to me along with my widow mother and my brother. during june'12. My widow mother accepted her but denied to take notice addressed to me and my brother as a reason that she is not in contact with her children. I have not received/accepted court notice/summons till date although a letter basis court ex-parte judgement on monthly maintanance of 20K and arranging her to stay in my native house was shared to me via protection officer on July 2013. I handed the same to local lawyer. Now court has ordered warrant against me whose executing order is still pending. My wife with help of protection officer brought police along with protection officer, broke lock and keys of my native home last week where nobody stayed. Wife started living along with her mother regularly. Local lawyers told me that there is nothing to worry as because summons/notice were not sent to me through proper channels. Pasting in my residential place, court did not accept the same. No publication in newspaper as well. Although a court record exists that they have sent the same to my kolkata adrress. But I did not acknowldege the same at any stage nor did I recieve. Local Lawyer has done a RTI to get top of it as how the summons were served Particulars of Information to be sought are:- a) To which address the summary of Mr. Suman Ghosh S/O Late Suprabhat Ghosh the O.P No 1 of case no CR 292/2012 of Ld Addl J.M was sent by the protection officer? b) By which process the summons were sent? c) Whether any summon/notice was sent to the address of working place of the O.P No1 Mr. Suman Ghosh of case no C.R.292/12 by the protection officer before 18-12-2012? If so by what mode? d) Whether any summon or notice of case no C.R 292/12 was served upon O.P Suman Ghosh S/O Late Suprabhat Ghosh personally? e) Was there any impediment/objection to serve the summon on him personally? If so what was the reason? Kindly let me know what may be the outcome and how many days does it take to get informations on RTI. I shall be waiting for expert input on the same. Regards Suman
MYSORE: The State Information Commission has issued a summons notice to the Police Commissioner of Mysore for not providing the requisite details to the Mysore Grahakar Parishat under the RTI Act. According to Mysore Consumer Forum president SP Thirumala Rao, a notice was issued to the Commissionerate Office for failing to give details on the decision to effect and withdraw one-way rule on many roads. Rao had submitted an application under Right To Information Act questioning the Police Commissionerâ€™s office on the withdrawal of the rule. The notice was issued to the Information Officer of the Police Commisionerate. The office did not reply to Thirumala Rao even after three months. Rao, then moved the petition to the State Information Commission. The Commission called for a hearing on the case on Aug 29 at 11.30 am at its office in Bangalore. It has the powers to impose penalty upto Rs 25,000, Thirumala Rao said. RTI Act: Summons to Mysore police chief - Newindpress.com
karira posted a topic in RTI in MediaIn the first summons ever to a Supreme Court official, the Central Information Commission has asked the senior functionary to explain his failure to respond to a Delhi resident's plea for information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Chief Information Commissioner Wajahat Habibullah issued directions April 2 to the apex court's administrative registrar for a personal appearance at the commission at 12 noon on May 25. Habibullah asked the official to explain why he should not pay a penalty of Rs.250 for each day of denying the requisite information to Zilley Singh. According to the RTI, a maximum penalty of Rs.25,000 can be imposed. The official was asked to provide the requisite information to Zilley Singh within 10 days of the order. Zilley Singh had filed an application before the apex court in a case related to perjury and wanted to know its status. He complained to the commission Sep 22 last year that his request submitted to the administrative registrar, also functioning as chief public information officer under the RTI Act, had not been responded to. He had applied for the information May 10, 2006. An administrative registrar's post is equivalent to that of a district court judge. After promotion as registrar general of the apex court, the official could be elevated to high court judge. This is the second time the CIC has come out with a ruling against the Supreme Court in its bid to infuse more transparency in the administrative functioning of the court. In a path-breaking order March 23, the commission had directed the department of justice under the law ministry to make public a file on the appointment of Justice Vijender Jain as chief justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The order has given the department of justice a month's time till April 22 to disclose to Aggarwal 'all file notings and opinion of the Supreme Court Collegium's member judges on the appointment file'. President A.P.J Abdul Kalam had in October last year returned the file for Jain's appointment to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh raising some queries. Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan, at a press meet Sunday, refused to answer IANS' queries on the CIC orders, saying that they were not on the agenda of the conference. Information commissioner summons apex court official