pawan sharma
15 December 2009 at 10:40
Pl, provid full coments on Art-233 of the contitutino of India.
Anonymous
14 December 2009 at 23:48
hello sir
Respected sir
,myself dr sagar , a veterinary doctor (Maharashtra state veterinary counsil ).I am partialy deaf candidate of open catogory
.In advertisement of Livestock development officer advertisement no-103\2009 (under backlog vacancy )there are 10 seat for physiclly handicap candidate, out of 10 seat, 4 seat for partially deaf.(plz see file attached) as in this backlog seat there was no seat for OPEN. catagory
advertisement given below
Advertisement Number – 103/2009, Item No. 01 File No. 186(1)(2)(42)/7217-SD/XV-A
Applications are invited for filling 51 posts of Live Stock Development Officer, Maharashtra Animal Husbandry Service, Gr-A
(Post Under Backlog)
Details regarding vacancies are as below :-
1) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled
Castes converted to Buddhism - 3
2) Scheduled Tribes - 19+9*+1ô€€»
3) Denotified Tribes (A) - 6+2*
4) Nomadic Tribes (B) - 1+1*
5) Special Backward Class5+2*
6) Other Backward Classes - 2
( * Indicates posts reserved for ladies, if available)
(Out of 51 posts, 4 posts are reserved for Physically challenged for Partially Sighted, 4 posts reserved for Physically
challenged for Partially Deaf and 2 posts reserved for physically challenged for Locomotor Disability- One leg affected)
(ô€€» Indicates post reserved for Meritorious Sportsmen, if available)
[ The reservation specified for the D.T.(A) & N.T.(B) shall be intertransferable. If suitable candidates for the posts
reserved for D.T.(A) & N.T.(B) are not available, the posts shall be filled by suitable candidates form any of the other
categories amongst D.T.(A), N.T.(B), N.T.(C) & N.T.(D) as per Govt. orders/Act.]
2. RESERVATION FOR PHYSICALLY CHALLENGED PERSONS :
2.1 As per G.R., Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development and Fisheries Department, No.2404/C.R.97/ADF-
1, dated 10th February, 2005 amongst physically challenged candidates only partially sighted, partially deaf and
one leg affected (only those who can walk properly) candidates are eligible for this posts and candidates who
submit the certificate mentioning clearly such type of disability will only be considered for the post.
2.2 The reservation for Physically Challenged persons is as per Government Circular, Social Justice and Special
Assistance Department No. Apang-2007/C.R.61/Sudhar-3, dated 20th April, 2007y.
sir plz see file attached
(As per goverment rule for filling backlog vacancy which is given in office memorandum of no 36035\3\2004\esst(res)of goverment of india ministry of personnel ,public grievances and pensions Department of person training New delhi 29th dec 2005 which is avalible on internet.In ths document on page no 7 to 8, in heading of Horizontal Reservation for person with disabilities, as per this para if physically handicap post for open catagory if not availble ,it should abjusted in future vacancy. )
please give early reply that my application is accepted or not?
Rajneesh Madhok
14 December 2009 at 19:56
To The Honourable Chief State Information Commissioner (Punjab),
SCO 84-85, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh Phone: 0172-4630054,
SCO 32-34, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh, Phone: 0172-4630074
Chandigarh-160017
E-mail: scic@punjabmail.gov.in
SUB: REQUEST TO DESCRIBE THE PUNJABI FONT IN WHICH ORDERS HAVE BEEN MADE ON SICP WEBSITE
Sir,
The State Information Commission Punjab has started making orders in Punjabi Font. Sir, there are 184 Punjabi fonts. No body has downloaded all the available fonts. As you know in Punjabi fonts the orders can be read in the particular font in which it has written if you have downloaded the specific font on your computer. I took the professionals help to read the order made by Hon’ble commissioner S. Darbara Singh Kahlon, and continued to download all the available fonts. Up till 60 fonts I could not read the order. As in English language, the order can be read in whatever font it has been loaded. The type of different fonts may be different but in Punjabi language one can not read the document, secondly if one can read in other fonts one can not understand the meaning if it is in different font. So, kindly go through Anmol lipi, amarlipi, anmol true type font, Amrlipi, gurblib font, gurbib_ font, LMP_TARA font, Amar LIP_L, AMR-Heavy, Anmol_l, anmol_t, anmol_s, anmol_K, gur_rais and so on the names are in 184. Unless and until You have downloaded all those fonts and then keep on searching in which font it has been loaded. Then only you can be successful in reading not like English. As it can be read in any one font it has been loaded but should be in English.
Sir, it is a tedious problem for every citizen of Punjab to view the orders. Though it is loaded on the internet but kindly let us know how one can read unless one don’t know in which font it has been loaded.
Sir, it is very disgraceful for all the RTI activists of Punjab to go through such a hardship to read the orders. I would like to brought the matter in your knowledge to kindly describe in the website of the State Information Commission Punjab that the orders will be downloaded in the specific Punjabi font and the persons who like to view the orders can download the specific font and kindly make it mandatory to load the orders in the specific font only. Sir, we are information seeker so the decisions should be provided to the public.
Sir one keep on tossing that the matter will be loaded in this font or that font. It is a matter of ethics and should be decided in public’s favour due to the responsibility of the State information commission to provide the information without any sort of hassles. The system adopted to provide decisions by the State Information Commission Punjab is not fair and irresponsible to maintain the people friendly decisions. The simple Punjabi language font in which the particular decision has been made kindly search by yourself without going to the particular font. I am sure you will face the same problem which I got. I got successful after loading all 184 fonts of Punjabi language and then move to one by one to read the matter. It took continuous labour of 8 hours without fail.
Kindly look in to the matter and do the needuly.
Rajneesh madhok,
B-xxx/63, Nehru Nagar,
St. No. 2, Railway Road,
Phagwara-144401 (Pb)
Ph: 01824-262569 (O), 268210 (R), 094173-06415
Tele-fax: 01824-262569, E-mail: rajneesh_madhok@yahoo.com
ashok kumar jain
13 December 2009 at 23:58
Sir , I have been duly appointed Notary by Govt of Rajsince 1992. My certificate of Notary was to be renewed from 21.07.2007 for which I duly applied to the Govt. but the matter was pending. It is disclosed to me that The Govt of Raj decided not to renew the certificate of all the Notaries pending since 2007 on the ground of certain amendment in the Notaries Rules and consequently rejected the Renewal applications of about 600 Notaries of the State, including me, without assigning any reason . is the Govt of Raj is empowered to do so? Is the decision of the Govt is legal and Constitutional. If not what remedy is available to me? I have file a Writ in HC Raj which is pending.
venkatesh Rao
13 December 2009 at 12:39
Sir/Madam,
let me know whether a subordinate judge (say, a magistrate) in Karnataka in bound by a single judge's judgment of Delhi High Court when no contradicting judgments of either the Karnataka High Court or The Supreme Court is available?
Whether a High Court can strike down any provisions of the Central Acts?
Whether slighting the judgments of persuasive value by a subordinate judge amounts to contempt?
venkatesh Rao
13 December 2009 at 12:38
Sir/Madam,
let me know whether a subordinate judge (say, a magistrate) in Karnataka in bound by a single judge's judgment of Delhi High Court when no contradicting judgments of either the Karnataka High Court or The Supreme Court is available?
Whether a High Court can strike down any provisions of the Central Acts?
Whether slighting the judgments of persuasive value by a subordinate judge amounts to contempt?
ss
12 December 2009 at 21:20
An official who had served in para-military force in Delhi and permanent resident of Kolkata(West-Bengal) wrongly removed from service. The official now wants to file a Writ in Kolkata High Court. Pl. clarify the following:-
1. Whether any time limit is prescribed for filing Writ in the High Court?
2. Can the official concerned file the Writ in the State of West-Bengal i.e.his permanent residential address?
3. What are the main condition for filing such service matter Writ?
pratik
11 December 2009 at 19:50
Prevention Of Money Laundering Act WIth the lastest amendements required .please in this query at least.
forwrad the act to by email id : vyas_pratikca@yahoo.com
thanking u all experts in advance.
Anonymous
11 December 2009 at 16:05
Respected sir
,myself,sagar a veterinary doctor (Maharashtra state veterinary counsil ).I am partialy deaf candidate of open catogory
.In advertisement of Livestock development officer advertisement no-103\2009 (under backlog vacancy )there are 10 seat for physiclly handicap candidate, out of 10 seat, 4 seat for partially deaf. as in this backlog seat there was no seat for OPEN. catagory.
for this post i applied allready,at that time of submitting form i made contact in mpsc office on number given on informatiom bulletin, but according to them my form will be rejected.
for this i request you to sir to Please go through this matter which i attached to this mail.Give reply as early as possible.that my application form will be accepted or not?
Thanking you.
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Plot resumed by Improvement Trust in 2005/ Cancelelled resum
Today was the hearing before State Information Commission, Punjab regarding resumption of my plot by Improvement Trust, Phagwara. Kindly suggest the way out. Department resumed plot in 2005 and canceled resumption order within days by passing resolution. But the department has not approved so far the resolution
Present: Rajneesh Madhok Complainant in person.
*******, for PIO, for the respondent- department.
MY VERSION:
1. The contents of the case is that the Improvement Trust, Phagwara had resumed my plot due to non construction made on it, whereas I had been paying Non-construction charges leviable by Improvement Trust time to time.
2. My plea is that because of lack of clarity by the Improvement Trust Phagwara, the information demanded by me regarding the action taken on my appeal to the Deputy Director, Local Government, Punjab and two reminders sent by the Hon’ble Deputy Director and the correspondence made in this regard has been declared by the PIO that the said information is not traceable.
3. The Information Commissioner has not listened to my pleadings though dictated that you have asked so many irrelevant questions. I said Sir, the questions are concerned with my plot.
4. The Information Commissioner said that the information has been provided the points asked by you.
5. The information commissioner provided me the date of inspection pertaining to the file and directed the PIO to provide me the required papers.
6. The PIO has sent me uncertified copies of the documents.
WRITTEN SUBMISSION BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER:
Before State Information Commission, Punjab
Rajneesh Madhok Versus Executive Officer
Ref: Second Appeal under Section 19 of R.T.I. Act., 2009
Written Submissions on behalf of Public Information Officer, Improvement Trust, Phagwara
Preliminary Objections
1. That the present appeal is not maintainable as the detailed information has already been provided to the appellant.
On Merits
1. That Para No. 1 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. The complainant/ appellant is not owner of plot No. 683, situated at Guru Hargobind Nagar, Phagwara. However, it is admitted that complainant was owner of plot No. 683, but the said plot has been resumed by the Improvement Trust, Phagwara due to non-construction. It is admitted that complainant had approached Deputy Director, Local Government, Jalandhar regarding his plot, but before approaching Deputy Director, the resolution regarding cancellation of resumption of plot has been passed by the Improvement Trust regarding the plot of the complainant on 14.02.2005 and has been forwarded to the Local Government. It is pertinent to mention here that Local Governement has not approved the resolution of Trust till date.
2. That Para No. 2 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect., hence denied. Appellant had sought information from our department vide Letter Dated 29.08.2009 and all informations was given to the complainant vide Letter No. 1023, Dated 25.09.2009, Point wise reply is given here as under:-
2.1 That in reply ot Para No. 2.1 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that the reply has been given to the Deputy Director, Jalandhar regarding the references made in the appeal.
2.2 That in reply to Para No.2.2 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that the reply/ information has been provided to the appellant.
2.3 That in reply to Para No. 2.3 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that the detailed reply and information has been provided to the appellant regarding resumption of plot and other proceedings.
2.4 That in reply to para No. 2.4 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that photocopies of correspondence between Improvement Trust, Phagwara and Deputy Director, Local Governement has been provided to appellant.
2.5 That in reply to para No. 2.5 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that the answering repondent is not having any final decision passed by the Hon’ble Deputy Director.
3. That Para No. 3 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. The appellant has not asked for any information regarding inward letters & reply made at the time of first appeal, so he is not entitled for the same in second appeal. However, it is made clear that appellant can take all necessary documents and information by filing fresh representation.
4. That Para no. 4 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. All information has been provided by P.I.O. to the appellant.
5. That para No. 5 of the Ground of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. The complainant is not entitled for any compensation. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant has moved an application for information under the act on 29.08.2009 and detailed reply was given to the complainant regarding his 22 queries along with documents. Appellant has not came before this commission in appeal on that very questions and is misleading this Hon’ble Commission by varying the form of questins mentioned in the application datd 29.08.2009.
6. That in reply to Para No. 6 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that answering P.I.O. can produce the original record before this commission if directed by this Hon’ble Commission.
7. That Para No. 7 of the grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied, Necessary information required has already been provided to the complainant.
8. RgR oe Bi, 8 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied, the Appellant is not entitled to demand any Affidavit from the answering respondent.
9. That Para No. 9 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied, The detailed record and information has already been provided to the complainant.
10. That Para No. 10 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. There is no negligence on the part of P.I.O. and no action is to be required to be tken against the P.I.O.
11. That Para No. 11 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. The complainant has no locus standi to demand the departmental action against the P.I.O.
12. That in reply to Para No. 12 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that the photocopies have already been provided to complainant. It is pertinent to mention here that no certified copy has been demanded by the complainant in question No. 18,19,20 and 22.
13. That Para No. 13 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. The detailed reply has been given to the complainant.
14. That Para No. 14 of the Grounds of Appeal is incorrect, hence denied. All information has been provided to the complainant, so there arises no questin of deemed denial of information.
15. That in reply to Para No. 15 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that the information has been provided to the complainant within one month from the date of application.
16. That in reply to Para Np 16 of the Grounds of Appeal, it is submitted that the information has been provided to the appellant within stipulated period and the same does not amount to deemed refusal.
Reply to Prayer Clause in Second Appeal
That in reply to para No. 1 to 14 of the prayer Clause, it is humbly submitted that complainant/ appellant is misusing the rights provided under the information act. The detailed reply to all questions have already been given to the appellant. The appellant has filed the present second appeal by changing the nature of the questions in application and in first appeal. The Second Appel filed by the appellant/ Complainant may kindly be dismissed with some special heavy cost.
Datd. 16.12.09 Submitted By,
………………Respondent
Public Information Officer,
Improvement Trust, Phagwara
====================================================
Rajnesh madhok,
B-xxx/63, nehru nagar,
St. No. 2, Railway Road,
Phagwara-144401 (Pb)
Ph: 01824-262569 (O), 268210 (R), 094173-06415
Tele-fax: 01824-262569; E-mail: rajneesh_madhok@yahoo.com