Dr pavani reddy pingle reviews
![dr pavani reddy pingle reviews dr pavani reddy pingle reviews](https://d3avoj45mekucs.cloudfront.net/ulagam/media/ulagam/pavani-reddy-remariage.png)
On 2 September 2009, a single-judge Bench comprising. The Supreme Court's CPIO challenged this CIC order in the Delhi High Court (HC). Agarwal sought to find out if Supreme Court justices had declared their assets to the Chief Justice of India. On 6 January 2009, the Supreme Court to disclose information regarding judges' personal assets, putting into effect Subhash Chandra Agarwal's RTI request. The legitimacy of a similar CIC order had come before the Delhi High Court. On 4 December 2009, the Supreme Court The stay order is still in-effect. The Supreme Court appealed the November 2009 CIC order to itself. The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok SabhaĪ Union Cabinet Minister appointed by the Prime Minister The Prime Minister (who is also the Chairperson of the CIC) Section 12(3) stipulates that the CIC members are appointed by the President on the recommendation of: The CIC comprises a Chief Information Commissioner and up to 10 Information Commissioners. Note that the CIC is a legislative body constituted by, designed to autonomously ensure the execution of the RTI Act. At the time of appointment, these three judges were less senior than Justices AP Shah, AK Patnaik and VK Gupta. In particular, the CIC ordered the Central Public Information Office (CPIO) of the Supreme Court to disclose correspondences between the Collegium and the government regarding the appointment of Justices HL Dattu, AK Ganguly and RM Lodha. The CIC order pertains to a Right to Information request made by activist Subhash Chandra Agarwal. In November 2009, the Supreme Court of India to disclose information regarding the Collegium's decision making. The Supreme Court held that the need for judicial independence does not stand in contradiction with that for transparency. Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India v.