Dear Col Kurup, This group has only 941 members which is a very small number for a country like India. As I mentioned earlier, I do not know Shailesh Ji at all. I am complimenting him for his initiative to hire staff at his own expense to improve the efficiency of his office. If the list of the pending cases becomes unmanagable at this stage, the RTI act shall die its natural death after some time. I am NOT commenting on individual cases where Shailesh Ji may not have performed as per your expectations. I may like to add that as a parent one has full powers over a child. But one does not punish the child for the very first offence. Our aim, in this group, is to make the information, asked under RTI act, available in time and correctly. I do not wish to discuss each and every section of the act but, if the end result is achieved, we all should be happy. Let's help Shailesh Ji in whatever way we can so that he is successful in his endeavour. regards Col Shivraj New Delhi
On 3/18/09, Col NR Kurup <[email protected]> wrote: > > Col Shivraj Kumar, > > Nice to know other soldier's view on same issue. It give a feeling that I > am not alone. May I request you to go through the old posts of all these > RTI > forums. You may find it difficult to believe that the present IC > Sri.Shailesh Gandhi is the same person who was our old friend maintaining > more or less same views as ours (I mean old Rtians), We find it difficult > to agree with the new found wisdom of Mr.Gandhi. He is at liberty to do > whatever he wish as an IC, But it pinches people like me who are on this > field since 2005 when the present Shailesh Gandhi project his new found > views as that of RTI Activists and those who are not aware of the > happenings > of last 3 years support him considering him as the same old RTI Activist. > For your information we are not prepared to accept any excuses with regard > to Section 20(1) & 20(2) of the Act.Myself in particular is an admirer of > Sections 2(f), 2(i), 2(j) , 6(2), 19(5) and 19(8)(b) too. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
