There are four steps to get the compensation from Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited in the cases of burning of crops due to short circuit.
1- An inquiry conducted by Tehsil is initiated to assess the situation and gather initial information about the incident.
2- Following this, a first information report is registered by the concerned police, documenting the occurrence and laying the foundation for any legal actions that might be necessary.
3- An internal inquiry by Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited takes place, wherein officials inspect the circumstances surrounding the incident to determine the extent of the damage and the culpability of the power supply.
4- Finally, after obtaining approval from the electrical safety department, the application is meticulously processed by the Department of Electricity to ensure that all aspects are duly considered.
Unfortunately, not anyone of them wants to proceed without taking a bribe, creating a pervasive culture of corruption that significantly complicates the process.
This is the root cause of the delays; it took a staggering four years for the compensation to be provided by Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd.
Throughout this arduous journey, the applicant faced hindrances at every step, leading to an overwhelming sense of frustration and helplessness.
More than 50 applications have been submitted in this matter, showcasing not only the persistence of the applicant but also highlighting the systemic failures that plague this compensation process, leaving many farmers in distress.

Introduction

The grievance portal and its management are currently in a dilapidated state, which is causing significant harm to Dayanand Singh.
This unfortunate situation not only hampers his ability to voice concerns and seek redress but also undermines the credibility of the entire system designed to address grievances.
As a result, individuals like Dayanand are left feeling neglected and frustrated, unable to navigate the labyrinth of bureaucracy that was meant to support them.
The lack of effective management and maintenance of the portal further exacerbates these issues, leading to a breakdown in communication and trust between the authorities and the very citizens they are meant to serve.

The grievances filed by Dayanand Singh against the administrative machinery in Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, reveal a significant problem. They highlight bureaucratic incompetence and misdirection. This case shows that a complaint about one department—the revenue administration—was illogically forwarded to a completely different one. It was sent to the electricity department. This led to a dead end and immense frustration for the applicant.

---

The Heart of the Grievance: A Tale of Two Departments

The core issue, as stated in the grievance (60000240256694), concerns the Tehsildar Sadar and Sub-Divisional Magistrate Sadar in Mirzapur.
The applicant, Dayanand Singh, claims that these officials are not taking any significant action despite the pressing nature of the situation.
The matter was initially referred to them by the Executive Engineer of Electricity Distribution Division 2nd, highlighting the urgency and importance of addressing local grievances related to electricity supply and crop damage.
The Executive Engineer had sent a letter (पत्रंक 6482) to the Tehsildar’s office, urging them to conduct a thorough inquiry into a specific matter that demands immediate attention.
Still, despite the clear directives and the expectations for prompt action, the revenue officials are allegedly “procrastinating” without justification.
They have continually delayed in submitting their report, which not only undermines the authority of the executive engineer but also leaves the applicant and other affected parties in a state of uncertainty and frustration, as they await resolution of their concerns regarding unfair practices and a lack of accountability.

---

The Bureaucratic Blunder: Misdirection by the Chief Minister’s Office

Here’s where the administrative process breaks down entirely. Dayanand Singh submitted his grievance to the District Magistrate, hoping that his concerns would finally be acknowledged and addressed. The subject line was clear: “dereliction of duty by sub-divisional magistrate Sadar,” which signaled the seriousness of his complaint and his expectation for timely action.

Nevertheless, the grievance was forwarded by the Chief Minister’s Office to the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited (UPPCL). This transfer is the central point of the applicant’s complaint. He argues that this action is a prime example of “anarchy.” It demonstrates the incompetence of the officials who forwarded the complaint. They either failed to understand the contents or did so deliberately to promote corruption.

---

The Predictable Outcome: A Closed Case with No Resolution

The grievance reached UPPCL, a significant governmental body tasked with managing power supply and related issues. It then transferred down the chain of command, reflecting the bureaucratic processes that often characterize such organizations.

As a result, the applicant’s problem remains unresolved. They closed the case with the remark that it was a “suggestion.” The applicant rated the response as “poor.” They noted that the root cause of the problem—the procrastination by the Tehsildar—never addressed.

---

A Systemic Problem of Mismanagement

Dayanand Singh’s experience underscores a critical flaw in the online grievance redressal system. A complaint clearly expressed its concern about the revenue department, detailing specific issues that required urgent attention and resolution. Nonetheless, they sent it inexplicably to the electricity department, which was not even remotely related to the matter at hand.
This department had no authority to act on it, leading to unnecessary delays that compounded the original issue. This misdirection not only wasted time and resources, disrupting the flow of effective communication and resolution, but it also demonstrated a profound lack of accountability and understanding by the officials handling the complaint.
Such incidents highlight systemic inefficiencies that can be detrimental to the public’s trust in government services. It raises serious questions about the effectiveness of public grievance portals.
Do these portals truly serve their purpose of providing a transparent and responsive government, or are they merely symbolic gestures, failing to deliver the expected outcomes that the public deserves?

The implications of such failures are far-reaching, as they not only undermine the operational integrity of governmental institutions but also erode citizen confidence in the frameworks designed to facilitate their voices and concerns.

Surekapuram Colony, Teliyaganj, Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, India  • Update location

SDM Sadar presented report of sanction of compensation in non-prescribed format