Fwd: To direct C.P.I.O. Supreme Court of India to made available complete and point-wise information as sought by your applicant under subsection 1 of section 6 of R.T.I. Act 2005 through application dated 4.5.2011. Applicant is Yogi M. P. Singh Moh-

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M. P. Singh" <myogimpsingh@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:23:16 -0700
Subject: Fwd: To direct C.P.I.O. Supreme Court of India to made
available complete and point-wise information as sought by your
applicant under subsection 1 of section 6 of R.T.I. Act 2005 through
application dated 4.5.2011. Applicant is Yogi M. P. Singh Moh-
To: urgent-action@ohchr.org

Hon'ble Sir. With due respect your applicant wants to
draw the kind attention of Hon'ble Sir towards following submissions
as follows. 1-It is submitted before the Hon'ble
Sir that India is a member country of UNO and right to justice is the
fundamental and human right of an individual . Whether Government of
India is not violating provisions of UN charter , UDHR and others
framed law for international community by depriving oppressed and
downtrodden section of society from their right to justice.
2-It is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that whether a
common man has no locus standi to raise the voice of poor and
downtrodden against their exploitation if he has then why did the
government of india supress the voice of your applicant on filmsy
ground? This is humble request of your applicant to you
Hon'ble Sir to consider my e-mails and after taking perusal if Hon'ble
Sir deem fit to direct the member country for appropriate action then
your applicant shall ever pray you Hon'ble Sir. Yours
sincerely Yogi M. P. Singh Moh-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road,
Dist-Mirzapur State-Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001 , Country-INDIA.
To: acph-rb@rb.nic.in

Hon'ble Sir. With due respect it is submitted before
the Hon'ble Sir that judgment delivered by division bench of Justices
Doraiswami Raju and Arijit Pasayat of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
published in the times of india, New Delhi with title "Court has to
give reasons for verdict" explicitly quoted that "Right to reason is
an indispensable part of sound judicial system" Here this question
arises that on one side Hon'ble Supreme Court of India consider even a
letter as writ petition under article 32 of constitution to provide
right to Justice to oppressed and downtrodden class in order to curb
the violation of their fundamental rights on the other hand registry
of Hon'ble Highest Court of India decide the fate of a PIL without
revealing the facts that "how and why" Hon'ble registrar of court
reached on the conclusion. Yours sincerely Yogi M. P.
Singh

To: secypg@nic.in

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M. P. Singh" <myogimpsingh@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:21:52 -0700
Subject: Fwd: To direct C.P.I.O. Supreme Court of India to made
available complete and point-wise information as sought by your
applicant under subsection 1 of section 6 of R.T.I. Act 2005 through
application dated 4.5.2011. Applicant is Yogi M. P. Singh Moh-
To: shaileshgandhi@nic.in

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M. P. Singh" <myogimpsingh@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 02:09:42 -0700
Subject: Fwd: To direct C.P.I.O. Supreme Court of India to made
available complete and point-wise information as sought by your
applicant under subsection 1 of section 6 of R.T.I. Act 2005 through
application dated 4.5.2011. Applicant is Yogi M. P. Singh Moh-
To: s.mishra@nic.in

An appeal under subsection 3 of section 19 of R.T.I. Act 2005.
To Hon'ble Chief Information
Commissioner/Companion Commissioners, Government of India, New Delhi
Subject- Judgement order passed by first appellate
authority of Supreme Court of india delivered on 18.7.2011 in appeal
No. 222 of 2011 is arbitrary, against the spirit of R.T.I. Act.
2005. Hon'ble Sir. With due
respect Your appellant wants to draw the kind attention of Hon'ble Sir
towards following submissions as follows. 1- It
is submitted before the Hon'ble Sir that First Appellate authority
quoted in its judgement that evidently, the CPIO has furnished the
information to the extent held by CPIO. This implies that there is
some one else who held the information in its capacity and not bound
by provisions of R.T.I. Act 2005. Your appellant wants to draw kind
attention of Hon'ble Sir that sought information can only be denied
under section 8 & 9 of R.T.I. Act 2005. 2- It is submitted
before the Hon'ble Sir that F.A.A. quoted in its order that in the
appeal memorandum, the appellant has challenged the reply of CPIO
essentially on merits touching upon the merits of his letter
petitions. Your appellant wants to draw the kind attention of Hon'ble
Sir when queries made under R.T.I. Act is concerned with the merits
of letter petitions then why your appellant will not touch the merits
of letter petitions. Here this question arises that why CPIO is not
revealing the facts which caused the rejection of your appellant's
letter petition under transparency law? The matter is absolutely
concerned with the poor and downtrodden section of Society.
3