RTI Act -Se. 19 First Appeal: Advocate not allowed to represent

[Joshi NM]

Hello,

Request for information was made u/s 6 properly.

Information was public record and no difficulty for giving it.

Time limitation is well over.

No information is provided or no reason is given for refusal to provide information.

In fact, no reply was given by PIO.

First Appeal u/s 19 is filed properly.

Appellate officer has granted hearing with clear instruction that: Appellant has to personally remain present and advocate will not be allowed to appear/represent the Appellant.

Questions are:

1.can Appellant be compelled to appear in person to conduct appeal?

2.can advocate be disallowed to represent on record the appellant by rejecting Vakalatnama filed with appeal memo.

3.if formal rejection of Vakalatnama is issued in writing, what recourse is advisable?

--
Best Regards,
-Joshi NM

[Sarbajit Roy]

Since advocates (legal practitioners) are prohibited (by duly notified
Rules) from representing
either side at the 2nd Appeal stage, there can be no objection to
their being disallowed at lower proceedings.

Sarbajit

> *Best Regards,*
> -Joshi NM
>

[capt beniwal]

Roy sir, three defense services are almost every time is represented by the legal officers(JAG branch because( cleverly) they have been appointed as PIOs) at CIC hearing. if the advocates are prohibited then these  JAG officers  must not be allowed in  CIC- 2nd appeal. can an applicant ask for their removal for hearings at CIC. advise pls. rgds. beniwal  --- On Mon, 20/8/12, Sarbajit Roy <sro...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Sandeep gupta]

you send your submissions to the appellate authority with request to
allow exemption from physical presence and also decide while taking
note of your submissions and documents on record.
Let him decide whatever he wishes. He is required to take note of your
submissions.
Also send me details of the PIO and public authority if it is central
government related PA.

--
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Gupta
1722, Sector 14, Hisar-125001, INDIA
Phone: 91-99929-31181

[suresh nangia]

Shri Joshi       It is legally not a  must for Appellant to be present for the appeal hearing, nor is there any bar for appellant being represented by and/or  accompanied by a representative. But taking an Advocate for the appeal hearing, in my view,  is  taking things too far. There is hardly any need for a professional advocate to be taken for the first appeal hearing.      Many FAAs dispose of the appeals (in cases where appellant is not present for the hearing) based on what is stated in the formal appeal submission. In case appeal submission is made out properly, there is every chance of getting a proper response as well. In any case, if appellant is not satisfied with the Order passed by FAA, 2nd Appeal channel with Information Commission is always open.    S K NANGIA   --- सोम, 20/8/12 को, Joshi NM <naisha...@gmail.com> ने लिखा: द्वारा: Joshi NM <naisha...@gmail.com> विषय: [HumJanenge] RTI Act -Se. 19 First Appeal: Advocate not allowed to represent To: humja...@googlegroups.com दिनांक: सोमवार, 20 अगस्त, 2012, 9:19 AM

[Joshi NM]

Hello Sarabjit Ji,

 

Thank you for your prompt reply, which I quite appreciate.

 

Some supplementary facts:

 

1.      The request for information was made to State PIO in Gujarat.

2.      State has issued to all its PIOs, translation (from English to vernacular state language) of various communications received from central Govt., under RTI Act. State by itself has not issued any notification or circular or G.O. with respect to permitting/rejecting representative/s on behalf of applicant/appellant in First or any subsequent appeal.

3.      As seen from previous experiences, Advocates were permitted to file formal appearance in many cases in First as well as all subsequent stages of appeal so far. Vakalatnama in these cases were approved.

 

Therefore, questions are:

 

A.     In absence of state notification, considering previous departmental practice in general in state, can State First Appellate authority reject a vakalatnama (r.w. sec. 30 of Advocates  Act, 1961) filed in First Appeal? What about permitting representation through power of attorney issued under Powers Of Attorney Act, 1882?

B.     In your reasoned opinion, do you think a notification disallowing advocate / authorised representatives under RTI is ultra-wires; as PIOs are legally trained whereas illiterate citizens cannot individually match dominance & legal skill of PIOs. More so, when provisions of Act are attempted to be controlled/restricted through notification.

with all the best regards,

-Joshi

[Vikram Simha]

In the matter of Advocate Not allowed in first appeal I just read in an Delhi high court order The court said petitioner has not been given oppurtunity to defend himself in the matter The request of the petitioner was rejected without assining any reason adding that he be provided with a defence assistant was twice rejected by the inquiry officer . Well this calls for action at the relevant forum  N vikramsimha , KRIA Katte , #12 Sumeru Sir M N Krishna Rao Road , Basvangudi < Bangalore 560004. --- On Mon, 20/8/12, Joshi NM <naisha...@gmail.com> wrote:

From: Joshi NM <naisha...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [HumJanenge] RTI Act -Se. 19 First Appeal: Advocate not allowed to represent To: humja...@googlegroups.com

[Sarbajit Roy]

That Lawyers cannot represent before the CIC is duly notified by Central Govt
in form of RTI Rules

The counter of the CIC (by way of Regulations) that Lawyers could
represent before CIC has been struck down by a Division Bench of Delhi
High Court in my case, and Rules are very much in force since there is
no stay on this by the Supreme Court - time period allowed for appeal
/ SLP is over and it is hence FINAL.

On 8/28/12, Bhaskar Prabhu <mahitiadh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Can send the copy of this notification.
>>
> Bhaskar

[M.K. Gupta]

Ol. inform the name of the authority before whom the false affidavit has been submitted., it is court, CIC or SIC.

[Dipak Shah]

In my own case of a civil suit Advocate filed a wrong reply by Affidavit. Not only this but the details were also untrue wholly !!! It ( Reply )was not served upon to me and a wrong representation was filed , stating that Plaintiff's Advocate was not available in Court Compound!!! Copy of reply was not served upon to me!!! Against the process of Civil Procedure Code!!!!!!!! N M was dismissed in my absence!!!!!!!!!
What should I do for all wrong process.

C A Shah D J

USA

---

From: M.K. Gupta <mkgup...@yahoo.co.in>
To: "humja...@googlegroups.com" <humja...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 28 August 2012 2:54 AM

[prasad vaidya]

indian democracy and indian judiciary are issue of concern.In Indian democracy fundamental rights are conferred by the very constitution and all courts are constituted under and these courts are not empowered to take away rights conferred under Article 14 R/W Article 19 and Article 21 but it appears your case court itself has infringed your fundamental rights conferred by the very constitution to which the High court and supreme court are to subordinate.This is insult of democracy and 100 crore peoples in country having faith on judicial system prasad vaidya viadya --- On Tue, 28/8/12, Dipak Shah <djsha...@yahoo.com> wrote: