Report submitted by Deputy Secretary State Information Commission Uttar Pradesh regarding recovery of penalties is frustrating
Grievance Status for registration number : GOVUP/E/2023/0086770
Grievance Concerns To
Name Of Complainant
Mahesh Pratap Singh alias Yogi M. P. Singh
Date of Receipt
30/12/2023
Received By Ministry/Department
Uttar Pradesh
Grievance Description
The matter concerns the lack of transparency and accountability in the working of the public authority Uttar Pradesh state information commission which is resulting in non-recovery of penalties imposed by the commission on the wrongdoer public information officers. The job to ensure transparency and accountability in the working of public authorities vested to the Uttar Pradesh state information commission but its function itself is not transparent and accountable then how can it ensure transparency and accountability in the state? In my individual view, the Uttar Pradesh state information commission has completely failed to provide information and justice to the people in state. There is a complete constitutional crisis in the state of Uttar Pradesh and constitutional functionaries have been made toothless by overlooking their orders.
Nowadays instead of redressing the grievances of the citizenry, e-mail of public spirited persons are spammed by the accountable public functionaries in the state of Uttar Pradesh as well as in PMO.
वर्ष २०१७ में अधिरोपित कुल शास्ति संख्या ७०९ है विस्तृत विवरण के लिए संलग्नको का अवलोकन करे
Merely in the year 2017, Honourable commission imposed 709 pecuniary penalties and concerned district Magistrate were directed to recover the imposed penalties but the government of Bharatiya Janata Party did not recover the imposed penalties as it has no regard for the rule of law. Only those personnel are posted at the post of district magistrate who are really incompetent for the post and blindly follows the dictates of local political masters without thinking about the pros and cons.
In the year 2018 from January to December, number of public information officers penalised by Uttar Pradesh state information commission and recovery of these penalties was not made by concerned district magistrates is 729 which is showing that this number has increased from the year to 2017. Whether such a lackadaisical approach is not causing high damage to the public exchequer and increasing a trend in the government machinery not to provide information to the information seekers. This information is available on the website of Uttar Pradesh state information commission that must be perused by competent authorities of the government of Uttar Pradesh. It seems that the government of Uttar Pradesh has put the right to information act 2005 into a dustbin.
In the year 2019 the Uttar Pradesh state information commission managed this number. The number of public information officers whose penalties were imposed by the Uttar Pradesh information commission decreased to 124 which was not recovered yet. Now this signal has gone into the public domain that not a single information is being provided by the public information officers in the state of Uttar Pradesh and people were frustrated with the consequent of right to information act 2005.In the year 2020 the Uttar Pradesh state information commission could not manage this number. The number of public information officers whose penalties were imposed by the Uttar Pradesh information commission increased to 292 which was not recovered yet.
Since the publication of the information was degrading the image of good governance pseudo-claimed by political masters in Uttar Pradesh so in the year 2021, 2022 and 2023 reports were not published on website of Uttar Pradesh state information commission Whether it is not reflecting rule of anarchy in the government of Uttar Pradesh which is falsely claimed by our political masters as good governance. How can a district magistrate overlook order of commissioner of Uttar Pradesh state information commission which is a constitutional post? There is no transparency and accountability in the working of Uttar Pradesh state information commission which is the Root Cause not a single information is being provided by public information officers in Uttar Pradesh and there is rampant corruption in the public offices because there is no rule of law.
Grievance Document
Current Status
Case closed
Date of Action
12/02/2024
Remarks
report inclosed
Reply Document
Rating
1
Poor
Rating Remarks
Think about the deep-rooted anarchy in the working of the government that state information commission government of Uttar Pradesh has been impotent before this anarchy ipso facto. From the list it is quite obvious that large number of public information officers were punished by state information commission and pecuniary penalty was imposed on them by state information commission, but it is most unfortunate that government could not ensure recovery of these penalties from the wrongdoer public information officers. Moreover, it is not only the fault of the accountable government functionaries of government of Uttar Pradesh, but it is also fault of the constitutional functionaries of the Uttar Pradesh state Information Commission who could not ensure compliance of their orders. Undoubtedly, chief information commissioner and his company equipped with extra ordinary powers, but they failed to enforce their powers regarding the compliance of their orders, it is itself a matter of concern.
Appeal Details
Appeal Number
Date of Receipt
Appeal Text
Current Status
Officer Concerns To
Officer Name
Shri Bhaskar Pandey (Joint Secretary)
Organisation name
Government of Uttar Pradesh
Contact Address
Chief Minister Secretariat , Room No. 321, U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow
Email Address
bhaskar.12214@gov.in
Contact Number
05222226350
Reminder(s) / Clarification(s)
Reminder Date
Remarks
30/12/2023
Uttar Pradesh state information commission is not interested in developing e-filing mechanism in its working even after the order passed by the most respected Supreme Court of India.
E-filing facility is not available in UPIC is violation of order passed by apex court of India in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 360 of 2021
Please provide the latest status regarding the compliance of the order passed by the Supreme Court of India.
New Delhi October 09, 2023, CJI. Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, JudgeJ B Pardiwala and Judge Manoj Mishra passed the order to ensure compliance by 31st December 2023. The communications Regarding digitalisation of the second appeal by the state information commission exchanged with the state information commission, government of Uttar Pradesh is attached to this representation in pdf format.
The matter concerns the working of the state Information Commission of the government of Uttar Pradesh regarding SICs must ensure that e-filing of complaints and appeals. An application under article 51 a of the Constitution of India to make inquiry regarding the order passed by the constitutional bench of most respected Apex Court of India regarding hybrid mode of hearing and digitalization of process of inviting appeals in the state information commission of Uttar Pradesh.
That apart, there can be no gainsaying the fact that e-filing provides round the clock access to courts, and in the process, facilitates convenience of lawyers and litigants.18 We direct that all SICs must ensure that e-filing of complaints and appeals is provided in a streamlined manner to every litigant. Steps should also be taken having regard to the provisions of Section 26 of the RTI Act to ensure that service is effected on Public Information Officers through electronic mode. This shall also be implemented by 31 December 2023.
Accordingly, we direct that all SICs across the country must provide hybrid modes of hearing to all litigants for the hearing of complaints and appeals.
There is no fear of penal action in PIOs because of such approach of Uttar Pradesh state information commission.
ReplyDeleteThink about the gravity of situation that Uttar Pradesh state information commission has been handicapped before the wrongdoer public information officers. Non recovery of the penalties imposed by the information commissioners reflect such signals.
ReplyDelete