Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(iv) Appeals can be rejected
5. I would like to invite your kind attention towards your honor decision dated 21.11 .2017 in case no. CIC/POSTS/A/2017//160940. In your comprehensive decision reference had been made to approximately 251 RTIs (which involves this RTI also in which my explanation is sought) filed by the applicant and Commission mentioned clear findings in Para no. 11 to 17 which inter alia upheld the fact that applicant had been involved in misuse of RTI Act and Public authority cannot waste public money by responding to repeated RTIs through registered, filed with malicious intention. The commission also held that the appellant does not deserve any information from the Public authority under RTI Act on these aspects. The Hon'ble CIC had also mentioned findings of Hon'ble Bench of Supreme Court comprising Justice R.V. Raveendran and justice A.K. Patnaik held in the landmark judgment of CBSE & Anr. v Aditya Bandopadhyay and ors: "Indiscriminate and impractical demands or directions under the RTI Act for disclosure of all and sundry information (unrelated to transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities and eradication of corruption) would be counter- productive as it will adversely affect the efficiency of the administration and result in the executive (government) getting bogged down with the non-production work of collecting and furnishing information.

It is also pertinent to mention here that commission vide para no. 17 had recommended the Public Authority to explore the possibility of initiating legal action against Mr. J.P. saini though he is a retired Class-I officer to free the public Authority from unreasonable wastage of public time and money.

Similarly case no. CIC/POSTS/A/2017/149122, your good self vide orders dated 24.11.2017 disposed off the appeal of the appellant (Sh. J.P. Saini) with finding that public authority cannot waste public money by responding to repeated RTIs through registered, filed with malicious intention. The appellant does not deserve any information from the Public Authority under RTI Act on these aspects. Therefore, your good self had opinioned that said Sh. J.P. Saini had misused the RTI Act and department of Post has enough evidence to act against this appellant who made the Public Authority to waste most of its time on his frivolous applications and recommended the Public Authority to explore the possibility of initiating legal action against Mr, J.P. Saini.

6. It is submitted that RTI platform is for seeking information and not for raising any grievance or personal allegation. The applicant is misusing the Act and imposing false and baseless allegation upon me without any evidence. The applicant without any right or authority is trying to be in the shoe of CIC/POSTS/A/2017/108815 Page 7 Hon'ble judiciary by passing his own judgment regarding one's character or integrity. It is highly objectionable and apparently a matter of defamation. It is beyond my senses how the Hon'ble CIC can rely on false version of the applicant and allow him to misuse the RTI Act. It is submitted that while the said Sh. J.P. Saini had been working as SPOs Bhiwani, I had worked as ASPO (Hq) Bhiwani. As I am not in habit of doing any wrong things under pressure, I did not to be his line of, action and kept his mind for settling score with me in future with the motive of quidproquo he made abortive attempt to defamed me in one way or the other. Similarly he made futile efforts to let me down in other many cases. There is nothing truth in allegation and completely devoid of any genuineness of facts. It is submitted that no employee/person is superior to the System. There is dedicated authority for each matter and any individual cannot consider himself over and above from the system. I have been retired on superannuation on28.02.2017 with full of respect without any allegation of any type of corruption by the competent authority which itself speaks that all the allegations of the applicant are motivated by his revengeful attitude towards me as I did not bow to his supremacy. When he did not succeed in malafide tactics of defaming me, he has opted the mean of RTI.