Social Welfare Directorate neglected the initial RTI application, followed by a dismissal of the first appeal, prompting the appellant to submit a second appeal in hopes of obtaining the necessary information.
This situation highlights significant concerns regarding the mismanagement of the scholarship portal in Uttar Pradesh, where numerous students are facing obstacles in accessing vital financial assistance.
The lack of attention to the RTI application raises questions about transparency and responsiveness within the Directorate, further exacerbating the difficulties encountered by those seeking support.
Additionally, the mishandling of the online scholarship system not only affects individual applicants but also undermines trust in the state’s educational support initiatives, which are crucial for fostering a more equitable academic environment.

Navigating the RTI Maze: A Citizen’s Fight for Accountability on a Failing Scholarship Portal

In a digital age, a functional government website is not a luxury. It is a necessity. This is especially true when it serves as the gateway for students to access crucial financial aid, enabling them to pursue their educational aspirations without undue financial burden.
Yet, when these digital doors malfunction and the authorities responsible stay silent, what recourse does a citizen have? Frustration and helplessness begin to mount as students, like Yogi M. P. Singh from Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, find themselves trapped in a web of inefficiency.
His quest for answers about a problematic scholarship portal highlights a classic case of bureaucratic runaround, where well-intentioned policies fail miserably in execution. It not only underscores the challenges faced by individuals in navigating such systems but also reflects a broader systemic issue that hinders progress and accountability.
Furthermore, it demonstrates the power of the Right to Information (RTI) Act, which, when utilized effectively, empowers citizens to seek transparent responses from their government, illuminating the path towards resolution and reform.

The First Step: A Simple Inquiry for Information

The journey began on October 18, 2024, when Mr. Singh filed an RTI application (Registration No. DIRSW/R/2024/60139) with the Directorate of the UP Social Welfare Department. His questions were not abstract; they were specific and targeted, crafted with the intent to dive deeply into the operational intricacies of the system.
They aimed at understanding the accountability framework for the state’s scholarship website, which had become an important resource for many students relying on these scholarships for their education. This website was evidently plagued with issues, leading to confusion and frustration among applicants who were seeking clarity and timely updates regarding their scholarship statuses.
In his inquiry, he sought comprehensive information regarding the criteria for eligibility, the processes involved in scholarship disbursement, and the mechanisms in place to ensure transparency and accountability in the handling of these funds, which are crucial for fostering educational opportunities for deserving students.

1. Posting details of staff responsible for the website’s smooth functioning.
2. A clear mechanism to file complaints regarding the website’s poor condition.
3. The defined roles of public staff in the website’s maintenance.
4. The total budget spent on website maintenance for the financial years 2021−22, 2022−23, and 2023−24.
5. Details of the Public Information Officer (PIO) and First Appellate Authority (FAA) connected with the website’s upkeep.

These are fundamental questions of transparency that any citizen has the right to ask.

The First Roadblock: An Incomplete and Misleading Response

Instead of receiving clear answers, Mr. Singh received a reply from the PIO, Shashikant Singh, on December 10, 2024.
The response deflected all responsibility, stating: “We are unable to provide the information requested due to a variety of constraints and limitations that hinder our ability to fulfill such requests in an efficient manner.”
This vague justification left Mr. Singh feeling frustrated and confused, as he had hoped for a straightforward clarification regarding his inquiry.
In a world where communication is paramount, such responses only serve to further alienate those seeking transparency and accountability.
It became increasingly clear to Mr. Singh that navigating the bureaucratic labyrinth would require more than just patience; it would demand resilience and perhaps even an escalation of his request to higher authorities.

“It is to be informed that the scholarship portal is operated by the U.P. I.T. & Electronics Department. The concerned department was informed as soon as the information about the portal being down was received. They resolved the problem. Now, the website is running correctly. Additionally, please note that all the budget details related to the portal are issued by the I.T. Electronics department. You can obtain this information from the said department.

This response was a classic case of “passing the buck.” It not only neglected to handle Mr. Singh’s specific queries but also misleadingly pointed him to another department.

The Bureaucratic Loop: A Tale of Two Departments

Demonstrating due diligence, Mr. Singh followed the PIO’s advice and filed a separate RTI with the Department of Information Technology and Electronics, meticulously detailing his concerns and seeking clarity on critical matters.
In a telling turn of events, on December 18, 2024, the IT Department, in a rather surprising move, transferred his inquiry (New Registration No. DPTSW/R/2024/80120) back to the Social Welfare Department, indicating that this office held the jurisdiction necessary to address his specific questions.
This unexpected circular transfer exposed the first PIO’s effort to evade responsibility, as it revealed a lack of proper communication within the departments involved, raising further questions about the accountability and efficiency of the system.
Mr. Singh, undeterred by the bureaucratic maze, was determined to pursue justice and transparency, realizing that each step he took was crucial in navigating the complexities of his rights and entitlements in the realm of public information.

The Sound of Silence: An Unanswered First Appeal

Frustrated but undeterred, Mr. Singh followed the prescribed RTI procedure. On November 25, 2024, he filed a First Appeal (Registration No. DIRSW/A/2024/60156) with the First Appellate Authority (FAA), Arun Kumar Pandey. The purpose of the First Appeal is to escalate the matter when a PIO fails their duty. Yet, this appeal was met with a wall of silence. The online status remained “RTI APPEAL RECEIVED,” with no action or order from the FAA.

This inaction is a serious breach of the RTI Act. It effectively closes the door on the first level of internal grievance redressal. This forces the applicant to approach the Information Commission.

The Real-World Impact: A Student’s Future at Stake

This is not merely an abstract battle over paperwork. The malfunctioning website has tangible consequences. A letter is dated December 30, 2024. It is from the District Social Welfare Officer of Mirzapur and addressed to the Directorate in Lucknow, which reveals the core of the problem.
It details how Mr. Singh’s daughter, a student at K.B.P.G. College, did not finish her scholarship application (No. 690030502400228) due to a technical issue with NPCI verification, despite her bank records being in order. The officer himself had to write to the directorate to ask for a technical solution.

This letter proves that the website’s “dilapidated state” is directly preventing students from accessing essential educational support.

The Final Step: A Plea for Justice

With all other avenues exhausted, Mr. Singh has now filed a Second Appeal (Appeal Registration No. A−20250100151) with the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission. His prayer is clear and just. He is not only seeking the information he was denied. He demands that the Commission take punitive action against the PIO. This is under Section 20 of the RTI Act for providing misleading information. Additionally, he recommends disciplinary action against the FAA for dereliction of duty.

Mr. Singh’s persistent efforts underscore a larger struggle for transparency. His case is a powerful reminder that the Right to Information is crucial for holding public authorities accountable. It ensures that the services meant for citizens, especially students, are delivered without arbitrary roadblocks and bureaucratic apathy.

Website inviting application for scholarship and fee reimbursement displaying errors

Appeal submitted against PIO directorate women welfare Uttar Pradesh who denied information arbitrarily to conceal wrongdoings