Shri M Rajamani
JS (UD) / JnNURM Mission Director / CPIO MoUD
Dear Sir,
I have received by post on 14-Jan-2005 copy of MoUD
letter dated 09-Jan-06 (text included at end of
message) from which it appears that my RTI request of
21-Dec-2005 to you has been transferred to MCD
Commissioner because of mention in it of high-level
meeting (convened by Delhi Chief Secretary at which
former MCD Commissioner had reportedly said that Delhi
byelaw-reform / MCD Bill underway since 2003 had
ensued only from some oral order and 1 cr support from
USAID).
Permit me to clarify that I have NOT sought from MoUD
information about that meeting. As brought to your
attention in my e-mail of 03-Jan-2006, for that I have
made on 21-Dec-2005 an RTI request to Chief Secretary,
copied also to MoUD-JS(DD&L) and MCD Commissioner,
since it was made in context of my communication dated
17-November-2005 to MoHA JS(UT) with copies to Chief
Secretary, MCD Commissioner and MoUD JS(DD&L). As also
brought to your attention in my e-mail of 03-Jan-2006,
the copy dated 17-Nov-2005 to Chief Secretary was
forwarded to MCD Commissioner and the copy to MCD
Commissioner was forwarded to the USAID Consultants. I
have not heard about the copy to MoUD JS(DD&L). Since
the RTI request of 21-Dec-2005 to Chief Secretary was
made under s.4(1)(d), anyone to whose attention the
fact of my being affected person has been brought can
provide to me the information if in possession of it
(ie, reasons for decision to call that meeting and for
decisions taken therein). As such, it was hardly
necessary for MoUD to write to MCD Commissioner in
this regard and I appreciate that it has done so
nevertheless.
MoUD letter of 09-Jan-2006, however, is silent on the
information that I have sought from MoUD under
s.4(1)(c), s.4(1)(d), s.4(4), etc, viz:
* publication of specified details for MoUD tender
inviting EoI for CDPs for JnNURM (eml of 05-Dec to
yourself) (infructuous)
* list of names, etc, of firms that responded to MoUD
tender for EoI for CDPs (eml of 21-Dec to yourself
with copy to JS(DD&L))
* MoUD observations on Delhi byelaw-reform and how
they informed MoUD formulation of JnNURM (in effect,
reasons for MoUD decision to replicate the Delhi case
in JnNURM) (eml of 21-Dec to yourself with copy to
JS(DD&L))
* MoUD decisions in course of Delhi byelaw-reform (eml
of 21-Dec to JS(DD&L) with copy to yourself)
* MoUD decisions about Board of Enquiry & Hearing for
MPD-2021 (eml of 21-Dec to JS(DD&L) with copy to
yourself)
* all of the above, with reference to appointment of
CRISIL Ltd for Pune CDP and conflict therein with GATS
offer (eml of 28-Dec to yourself)
* all of the above and copies of MoUD communications
to Deptt of Commerce about GATS (eml of 03-Jan to
yourself with copy to JS(DD&L))
* all of the above and publication of JnNURM
communications about Delhi (eml of 09-Jan to yourself
with copy to JS(DD&L) and Director JnNURM)
I again reiterate my RTI requests to MoUD. I also seek
information of status / outcome of consideration of
suggestions made in my e-mail of 09-Jan-2006 (viz,
designating DDA as SLNA in Delhi and modifying JnNURM
*discussion-forum* link/page on MoUD website).
Yours sincerely
Gita Dewan Verma, Planner
cc:
* Mr AK Nigam, MCD Commissioner
* Mr PK Pradhan, JS (DD&L) & JnNURM Coordinator (incl
Delhi)
* Mr AK Mehta, Director assisting JnNURM Coordinator
* az plan
=======My emls linked from:
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg00785.shtml
=======Text of MoUD letter:
No.K-11013/29/2005-DDIB
Government of India
Ministry of Urban Development
Delhi Division
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi
Dated the 9th January, 2006
To
Commissioner, MCD
Town Hall
Delhi
Subject: Information under Right to Information Act.
Sir,
I am directed to send herewith an e-mail dated
21.12.2005 received from Ms.Gita Dewan Verma in which
she has mentioned about a high-level meeting regarding
municipal law / building-bylaw reform. As this
Ministry has no information on this subject, you are
requested to take appropriate action in the matter in
accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act.
2. This issues with approval of concerned Central
Public Information Officer.
Yours faithfully
(S Mukherjee)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Copy to:
1. Ms Gita Dewan Verma 1365, DI Vasant Kunj, New
Delhi-110070 w.r.t her e-mail dated 21-12-05 addressed
to Shri M Rajamani, CPIO, MoUD
2. SO, PIC, MoUD for information alongwith copy of the
e-mail
(S Mukherjee)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
=======
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
JS (UD) / JnNURM Mission Director / CPIO MoUD
Dear Sir,
I have received by post on 14-Jan-2005 copy of MoUD
letter dated 09-Jan-06 (text included at end of
message) from which it appears that my RTI request of
21-Dec-2005 to you has been transferred to MCD
Commissioner because of mention in it of high-level
meeting (convened by Delhi Chief Secretary at which
former MCD Commissioner had reportedly said that Delhi
byelaw-reform / MCD Bill underway since 2003 had
ensued only from some oral order and 1 cr support from
USAID).
Permit me to clarify that I have NOT sought from MoUD
information about that meeting. As brought to your
attention in my e-mail of 03-Jan-2006, for that I have
made on 21-Dec-2005 an RTI request to Chief Secretary,
copied also to MoUD-JS(DD&L) and MCD Commissioner,
since it was made in context of my communication dated
17-November-2005 to MoHA JS(UT) with copies to Chief
Secretary, MCD Commissioner and MoUD JS(DD&L). As also
brought to your attention in my e-mail of 03-Jan-2006,
the copy dated 17-Nov-2005 to Chief Secretary was
forwarded to MCD Commissioner and the copy to MCD
Commissioner was forwarded to the USAID Consultants. I
have not heard about the copy to MoUD JS(DD&L). Since
the RTI request of 21-Dec-2005 to Chief Secretary was
made under s.4(1)(d), anyone to whose attention the
fact of my being affected person has been brought can
provide to me the information if in possession of it
(ie, reasons for decision to call that meeting and for
decisions taken therein). As such, it was hardly
necessary for MoUD to write to MCD Commissioner in
this regard and I appreciate that it has done so
nevertheless.
MoUD letter of 09-Jan-2006, however, is silent on the
information that I have sought from MoUD under
s.4(1)(c), s.4(1)(d), s.4(4), etc, viz:
* publication of specified details for MoUD tender
inviting EoI for CDPs for JnNURM (eml of 05-Dec to
yourself) (infructuous)
* list of names, etc, of firms that responded to MoUD
tender for EoI for CDPs (eml of 21-Dec to yourself
with copy to JS(DD&L))
* MoUD observations on Delhi byelaw-reform and how
they informed MoUD formulation of JnNURM (in effect,
reasons for MoUD decision to replicate the Delhi case
in JnNURM) (eml of 21-Dec to yourself with copy to
JS(DD&L))
* MoUD decisions in course of Delhi byelaw-reform (eml
of 21-Dec to JS(DD&L) with copy to yourself)
* MoUD decisions about Board of Enquiry & Hearing for
MPD-2021 (eml of 21-Dec to JS(DD&L) with copy to
yourself)
* all of the above, with reference to appointment of
CRISIL Ltd for Pune CDP and conflict therein with GATS
offer (eml of 28-Dec to yourself)
* all of the above and copies of MoUD communications
to Deptt of Commerce about GATS (eml of 03-Jan to
yourself with copy to JS(DD&L))
* all of the above and publication of JnNURM
communications about Delhi (eml of 09-Jan to yourself
with copy to JS(DD&L) and Director JnNURM)
I again reiterate my RTI requests to MoUD. I also seek
information of status / outcome of consideration of
suggestions made in my e-mail of 09-Jan-2006 (viz,
designating DDA as SLNA in Delhi and modifying JnNURM
*discussion-forum* link/page on MoUD website).
Yours sincerely
Gita Dewan Verma, Planner
cc:
* Mr AK Nigam, MCD Commissioner
* Mr PK Pradhan, JS (DD&L) & JnNURM Coordinator (incl
Delhi)
* Mr AK Mehta, Director assisting JnNURM Coordinator
* az plan
=======My emls linked from:
http://mail.architexturez.net/+/MPISG-Media/archive/msg00785.shtml
=======Text of MoUD letter:
No.K-11013/29/2005-DDIB
Government of India
Ministry of Urban Development
Delhi Division
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi
Dated the 9th January, 2006
To
Commissioner, MCD
Town Hall
Delhi
Subject: Information under Right to Information Act.
Sir,
I am directed to send herewith an e-mail dated
21.12.2005 received from Ms.Gita Dewan Verma in which
she has mentioned about a high-level meeting regarding
municipal law / building-bylaw reform. As this
Ministry has no information on this subject, you are
requested to take appropriate action in the matter in
accordance with the provisions of the RTI Act.
2. This issues with approval of concerned Central
Public Information Officer.
Yours faithfully
(S Mukherjee)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Copy to:
1. Ms Gita Dewan Verma 1365, DI Vasant Kunj, New
Delhi-110070 w.r.t her e-mail dated 21-12-05 addressed
to Shri M Rajamani, CPIO, MoUD
2. SO, PIC, MoUD for information alongwith copy of the
(S Mukherjee)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
=======
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com