Below are given some feed-back responses given to media publications.

dr.pkaditya 15/09/2012 - 06:19pm to Deccan Chronicle

1. It is an extremely well intended judgment to stop the rot in RTI Commissions.
2. That some Judges or advocates of 20 year registration may not have experience of RTI, was the experience of the Secretaries and Chief Secretaries ever checked.
3.The experience of instant appointees is in fact anti-RTI, as they were votaries of the Official Secrets Act (OSA), trained in its requirements, completely anti RTI.
4. Had a period of three months for compliance not been given, it could have meant complete shut-down.

Dr. P.K. Aditya (Chandigarh) replies to rikon riki 20 hrs ago  (Times of India)

Functional crises is being caused by the present commissioners not working. The Order is prospective, has outlined 3 month and six month period for processes to be streamlined. Wherever there is vacancy of posts, persons with judicial background should be appointed to enable two-member benches to be constituted. Judges are not required in all posts. Commissions must ensure full information on websites. It is the IAS lobby which is root cause of downfall of RTI. That is the view of one who believes in the RTI Act and has seen orders being passed in complete defiance of the Act. Thanks.


dr.pkaditya (chandigarh) replies to HOMIE 21 hrs ago        (Times of India)

RTI is a quasi-judicial process, hence there has to be participation by persons with judicial background, jointly with so-called experts. Mere executives trained under Official Secrets Act have played havoc. Information is neither diaplayed on websites, nor sincerely given upon request. Except for age of 65, every word in the ruling is per law. Only half of the Commissioners have to be judicially inclined. The officer-class has gone on strike to save the ill-gotten chairs. Those not happy must quit.   Thanks.   p.k.aditya

As put in google plus on 8-10-2012.

“Statements to the effect that even some RTI activists have  views different from rulings in the 13-09-2012 order, is both disappointing  as well as shocking, if the Order is seen literally being as per law. Except from the age clash at 65 years appearing in media reports, not a single fact can be contradicted legally. That the present structure has been so, arose from the view of keeping the Act simple, shows without any doubt that the bureaucrats maneuvered what the order has decried in paras 27-28, in respect of the training and experiences under the Official Secret Act 1923. The will of the legislature was opposed before implementation could be started. At the same time as the Government goes to the Apex Court for 'Oral hearing', prepared by the top ranking Civil Services, in support of their brethren, the RTI crusaders should be ready to seek equal opportunity to be heard by the Court. This is my humble suggestion to all friends of RTI”.