Filing RTI with UPHRC: Citizen Seeks Answers on UP RTI Portal’s Functionality

An individual, Yogi M P Singh, has successfully filed a First Appeal under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, marking a notable milestone in the ongoing quest for transparency and accountability in governance.
This case highlights critical concerns about the availability and management of information on the official Uttar Pradesh RTI online portal, which has faced scrutiny for its user interface and accessibility challenges.
By stepping forward in this way, Yogi has not only initiated a formal process but has also sparked a broader conversation regarding the effectiveness of the RTI mechanism in ensuring that public authorities remain responsive to citizen queries.
If you’re considering filing an RTI, this case provides useful insights into the procedural aspects and challenges one might encounter.
Furthermore, it is especially valuable in shedding light on the intricacies of filing RTI requests with the Uttar Pradesh Human Rights Commission (UPHRC), offering guidance that could empower more citizens to exercise their right to information effectively and confidently.

The appeal, lodged with the Administrative Reforms Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, raises specific questions. It questions the inclusion of key public authorities and the operational management of the portal. This is significant when filing RTI with UPHRC, ensuring full access to public information.

---

Appeal Key Details

Detail	Information
Appellant Name	Yogi M P Singh
Registration Number	DPTAR/A/2024/60026
Date of Filing	18-11-2024
Appeal Filed With	Administrative Reforms Department
Ground For Appeal	Provided Incomplete, Misleading or False Information
Concerned Appellate Authority (FAA)	Dr. Sheel Asthana, Joint Director cum Deputy Secretary

---

Core Issues Raised in the Appeal is Filing RTI with UPHRC and nic.in

The appeal focuses on alleged misleading or incomplete responses received for an initial RTI application (Registration No: DPTAR/R/2024/60109, dated 11/11/2024). The main points of contention and the information sought are: specifically regarding the lack of clarity in the provided data, which not only failed to address the core questions raised but also left several pertinent issues unresolved.
This lack of transparency is particularly concerning as it undermines the very essence of the RTI act, meant to promote accountability and informed citizenship.
Furthermore, the appeal argues that such incomplete responses could hinder the ability to understand the underlying processes and decision-making mechanisms involved, thereby impeding the right to information that every citizen is entitled to.
The appeal seeks a thorough reevaluation of the responses provided, emphasizing the necessity for comprehensive and accurate information to uphold the principles of transparency and public interest.

1. Management of User Details and Portal Content:

• Sought: Information about the sending of User IDs and passwords to the nodal officers. These officers are part of the Uttar Pradesh Human Rights Commission and NIC Uttar Pradesh. The appellant requested communication details, specifically email screenshots if applicable.
• Contention: The starting response claimed that the portal displays the site’s content. This was, deemed Misleading Information. It did not meet the specific demand to send details about the staff to whom it communicated. PIO also not provided communication details with UPHRC made by administrative reform. Filing RTI with UPHRC and nic.in is not possible on RTI portal because of their unavailability.

2. Non-Availability of Key Public Authorities:

• Sought: Why is the Uttar Pradesh State Human Rights Commission not available on the UP RTI portal? Why does the NIC Uttar Pradesh not exist there either? This omission creates a significant barrier for those who need to file RTI requests with UPHRC. The appellant argued that the Department of Administrative Reform supplies crucial content.
• Contention: It flagged the generic response as Misleading Information. Various offices need to send the necessary information to go ‘Live’.

3. Identification of Managing Staff:

• Sought: Name and designation of the public staff in the Administrative Reforms Department. They deal with the management of feeding information on the RTI portal.
• Contention: The Administrative Reforms Department provided the content, and NIC developed the portal. This reply misled by not naming the specific personnel involved in conducting filing tasks with UPHRC. The motive is obvious from fact that Filing RTI with UPHRC is not available RTI portal of Uttar Pradesh.

4. Right to Reason and Public Authority Inclusion:

• Sought: The specific reason for the non-availability of the two set public authorities. These are the UP State Human Rights Commission and NIC UP. They are not available on the portal. This cites the “Right to Reason” as an indispensable part of sound administration.
• Contention: The appellant countered the department’s reply by asserting it as Misleading Information. The reply stated it is the Public Authority’s duty to supply the required information. The department had earlier claimed to send IDs and passwords to Nodal Officers. This implied a more active role in the inclusion process.

5. Information on the State Human Rights Commission Nodal Officer:

• Sought: Details about the Nodal Officer of the Uttar Pradesh State Human Rights Commission. This is particularly important in light of an earlier RTI. The NHRC denied information, stating the matter concerned the State Commission. It is most unfortunate Filing RTI with UPHRC is not available of RTI portal of Uttar Pradesh.
• Contention: The appellant sought information from NHRC . NHRC denied information as it concerned with UPHRC. NHRC is on the RTI portal of central government but UPHRC is not on the RTI portal of Uttar Pradesh. Administrative reform is the nodal department. Its duty is to sent password and IDs to nodal officers of public authorities. It has not sent the password and IDs to UPHRC and nic.in so Public Information Officer is misleading the information seeker.

---

Call for Action as Filing RTI with UPHRC is not available on RTI portal of UP .

This appeal underscores the importance of a fully functional and transparent online RTI system. This reality intensifies when filing through UPHRC. It ensures that all relevant public authorities in the state are accessible to citizens seeking information.

The appellant’s core argument is that the answers provided in the RTI were evasive. They didn’t directly tackle the specific questions of portal management. They also did not discuss user credential distribution. Furthermore, they overlooked the rationale behind the non-inclusion of significant public bodies. This is particularly critical when an individual is dealing with RTI applications and filing at UPHRC.

We encourage readers to follow the progress of this appeal. The Appellate Authority will review the appeal. The outcome will set a precedent for the expected level of detail and transparency. This involves the Administrative Reforms Department’s responses about the operational management of the UP RTI online portal.

https://rtionline.up.gov.in

Essential Guide to Filing RTI in Uttar Pradesh