Da case
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 09 November 2017
This query is : Resolved
In initial stage of a DA (Rs.40.00 lakhs) case against me, I requested Govt. for withdrawal of the same (2004-05). In the process Govt. (probably Law Depatt.) sought views of Prosecution (Home Depatt.) and PP. Home Depatt. basically said they have nothing to add. The PP wrote a long note in my favour advising Govt. that the case has no merits and it would be waste of time and money to pursue the case. But the case being politically motivated, it was re-investigated and second time, the DA case ( for Ra.21,000/-) was filed against me. Finally, the case was dismissed by the High Court, but the Govt. went for appeal (2007) in the Supreme Court (presently pending).
The PP had initially recommended that the case should not be pursued by the Govt. (when the DA amount was Rs.40/- lakhs). But in the second charge sheet, he changed his mind. My question is (1). Can I obtain by RTI PP’s initial note from the Home Depatt. ? (2). Can this document be useful in the Supreme Court ?
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate 
(Expert) 10 November 2017
legal advise sought by govt is not subject of RTI. It can be validly denied.
You can try luck.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 10 November 2017
No advice to an author who is anonymous.
You can post the query in fresh thread with your identity and material facts.
Guest
(Expert) 10 November 2017
@ Mr. Rajendra K Goyal,
Even otherwise, had the querist introduced himself to you, no advice could be expected from you. So, you should not have pretended like, no advice to an author who is anonymous."
Guest
(Expert) 10 November 2017
@ Mr. Sudhir Kumar,
You may like to review your reply. Legal advice sought by Government is quite subject to RTI. The information can be denied only by the fiduciary (here PP), but not by the Government department, who sought his advice. I have already dealt with such type of cases at the level of the CIC.
Guest
(Expert) 11 November 2017
Mr. Jigyasu has rightly opined. Only the fiduciary is not obliged to share the information pertaining to any issue referred to him for advice by his principal authority, but the concerned authority cannot deny that information, if asked through RTI.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 11 November 2017
JIGYASU - Legal analyst ,
You have claimed much legal knowledge, shown good example.
Posting query on this forum, is asking and invitation to approximately 4 lacks LCI experts to respond / reply / advice..
Continue spreading dirt / pollution on this site also.
Guest
(Expert) 11 November 2017
Childish post of Mr. Rajendra K Goyal just to play a number game, when he did not have to any advice for the querist.
The child also seems to be blind, who could not read my post addressed to Mr. Sudhir Kumar to identify my knowledge.
Instead of making wasteful comments, he could better have given some knowledgeable reply better than that indicated through my post addressed to Mr. Sudhir Kumar and as an indication for the querist to help him use the RTI,
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 11 November 2017
Seems you are very serious to increase your no. of posts through multiple vague / unwarranted / irrelevant / baseless / non related / multiple posts.
Above posts are posted with moto to through mud on others / littering the forum and increasing your no. of posts.
A good method to increase replies without having / using legal knowledge.
Guest
(Expert) 11 November 2017
@ Rajendra K Goyal,
Not me, but you have proved that you are quite serious to increase number of posts merely through shameless, vague and wasteful replies, while my response was only to your post addressed to me.
Mind it, when you are accustomed to make dirty posts instead of any knowledgeable advice, your own mud or dirt is sure to spread over you, may be through anyone, the querist or some expert.
If you don't want any response to your posts, why not put instructions that nobody should respond to your vague posts. BY DOING THIS, AT LEAST YOU WOULD GET LESS EXPOSED TO YOUR INCOMPETENCY AND INCAPABILITY DUE TO LACK OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE.
STILL FURTHER, YOU CAN'T COVER UP YOUR IGNORANCE OF THE SUBJECT MATTER BY MAKING SUCH TYPE OF UNWANTED EVASIVE POSTS.
WHY NOT TAKE THE CHALLENGE TO PROVE MY OBSERVATION WRONG ON Mr. sUDHIR KUMAR'S REPLY, IF YOU REALLY HAVE ANY EXPERTISE ON THE SUBJECT MATTER.
