PIO may provide following information pointwise as sought. 1-Provide feedback if in the context of attached reference how Lucknow police have the power of a competent court to provide a civil remedy. 2-If High court decided for civil remedy subsequently the police can provide a criminal remedy in the reference matter by misleading the court . Provide feedback if any in support of police.
It is a fact that the judiciary always culminates into the anarchy and same thing is happening in this largest democracy in the world which is quite obvious from the post. They are neither providing information under right to information act 2005 nor redressing the grievances by adapting logistic approach.
Right to Information act 2005 was introduced by the government of India to promote transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities so that corruption may be controlled in the public offices. In order to strengthen this August act, transparency ombudsman was appointed but it seems that all the efforts of our public functionaries are gone in vain. If everything is ok why concerned public functionaries are not providing information?
When Lucknow development authority has no records concerned with the allotment of the plot then on what basis registry was carried out by the Lucknow development authority if police is saying that opposition party has registry paper second thing is important that title suit must be decided by the appropriate court. Here this question arises that if registry was executed by the Lucknow development authority then who decided the title suit and where is the order passed which decides the title suit in the matter
PIO may provide following information pointwise as sought.
ReplyDelete1-Provide feedback if in the context of attached reference how Lucknow police have the power of a competent court to provide a civil remedy.
2-If High court decided for civil remedy subsequently the police can provide a criminal remedy in the reference matter by misleading the court . Provide feedback if any in support of police.
It is a fact that the judiciary always culminates into the anarchy and same thing is happening in this largest democracy in the world which is quite obvious from the post. They are neither providing information under right to information act 2005 nor redressing the grievances by adapting logistic approach.
ReplyDeleteRight to Information act 2005 was introduced by the government of India to promote transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities so that corruption may be controlled in the public offices. In order to strengthen this August act, transparency ombudsman was appointed but it seems that all the efforts of our public functionaries are gone in vain. If everything is ok why concerned public functionaries are not providing information?
ReplyDeleteWhen Lucknow development authority has no records concerned with the allotment of the plot then on what basis registry was carried out by the Lucknow development authority if police is saying that opposition party has registry paper second thing is important that title suit must be decided by the appropriate court. Here this question arises that if registry was executed by the Lucknow development authority then who decided the title suit and where is the order passed which decides the title suit in the matter
ReplyDelete