Appeal against the Public Information Officer (PIO) in Prayagraj Nagar Nigam by Indradev Yadav has been filed to address concerns regarding the lack of transparency and timely responses to information requests.
This appeal highlights various instances where necessary details were either withheld or inadequately addressed, hindering the pursuit of accountability within the local governance framework.
Indradev Yadav aims to ensure that citizens’ rights to access information are upheld, thereby encouraging a more open and responsible administration that prioritizes the needs and concerns of the community.

---

RTI Appeal Highlights Administrative Apathy in Prayagraj Nagar Nigam

Welcome Appeal Number: UPICR20240008831
Second Appeal Registration Number: A-20250101887
Filed by: Indradev Yadav, Village Chilh, District Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh.
The appeal has been initiated to address a pressing concern that has arisen in our community.
As a dedicated resident of Village Chilh, I, Indradev Yadav, am committed to ensuring that the voices of our people are heard and considered in decision-making processes that affect our lives and environment.
This appeal seeks to provide clarity and resolution regarding the issues at hand, reflecting the needs and aspirations of our village, and fostering a sense of unity and hope amongst the residents.

Introduction

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, was enacted to promote transparency and accountability in the functioning of public authorities, allowing citizens to obtain information regarding the operations and decisions that affect them.
In the case of Indradev Yadav’s second appeal, the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission conducted a thorough investigation and identified officials of Prayagraj Nagar Nigam who were found to be disregarding these principles of openness and accountability, ultimately undermining the purpose of the RTI Act.
This is particularly concerning as it raises questions about the efficacy of public institutions and the accessibility of information that citizens have a right to know, emphasizing the need for stricter adherence to the guidelines laid out in the Act and advocating for a culture of transparency within governmental bodies.

Background of the Case

To begin with, Indradev Yadav submitted an RTI application on 6th October 2024 (Application No. NGNPR/R/2024/60143), seeking detailed posting information of employees in Prayagraj Nagar Nigam, a significant body responsible for civic administration in the region.
In his application, he aimed at shedding light on employee placement and roles to promote transparency within this governmental organization. The application was received in the office of public authority on the same day, indicating a swift acknowledgment of the request.
However, no response was provided within the stipulated time frame, which is typically set at thirty days according to RTI guidelines. This lack of communication not only frustrated the applicant but also raised concerns about the adherence to transparency norms mandated by the act, thus violating Section 7(1) of the RTI Act.
Such delays can hinder the public’s right to information and diminish trust in governing institutions, underscoring the need for timely responses to such inquiries.

Subsequently, on 9th December 2024, the appellant filed a first appeal (Appeal No. NGNPR/A/2024/60070). Unfortunately, First Appellate Authority, Mr. Arvind K. Rai, overlooked this appeal. Surprisingly, he also serves as the Public Information Officer.

Key Issues Raised

1. Non-Compliance with RTI Timelines
   Clearly, the PIO failed to respond within the mandated 30-day period. The FAA did not act on the first appeal. This dual negligence reflects a systemic failure in ensuring transparency.
2. Violation of Administrative Norms
   Moreover, the RTI portal did not list the details of the First Appellate Authority. This omission is a breach of administrative guidelines . Department of Administrative Reforms, Government of Uttar Pradesh has issued guidelines for portal.
3. Nature of Information Requested
   The appellant sought information of significant public interest, including:
   • Posting details of Class I to IV employees.
   • Transfer history and origin districts of transferred staff.
   • Compliance with the new transfer policy issued by the state government.
4. Demand for Accountability
   In light of the above, the appellant has made a justified request. They have sought action under Section 20 of the RTI Act against the PIO. This is due to the willful denial of information. Additionally, The appellant sought disciplinary proceedings against the FAA for collusion and failure to uphold the law.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this case exemplifies the challenges faced by citizens in accessing information from public authorities, highlighting a systemic issue that affects many individuals seeking transparency in governance.
The deliberate withholding of information not only undermines the RTI Act, which was established to promote transparency and accountability, but also erodes public trust in governance by fostering an environment of suspicion and skepticism.
Without timely and accurate information, citizens are unable to make informed decisions or hold officials accountable for their actions.
Therefore, the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission must take strict action against the erring officials who contribute to this culture of secrecy.
This proactive stance will not only reinforce the rule of law but also uphold democratic values, ensuring that citizens can expect a certain level of transparency and responsiveness from their government.
Ultimately, empowering citizens through accessible information is essential for a flourishing democracy where the voices of the public are heard and respected.

Final Appeal

The appellant, Indradev Yadav, humbly urges the Hon’ble Chief Information Commissioner and Companion Information Commissioners to intervene decisively in this matter of significant importance.
There exists a pressing need for robust measures, as only through firm action can the sanctity of the RTI Act be preserved and the confidence of the citizenry restored.
The right to information is not merely a statutory obligation but a fundamental right that ensures transparency and accountability within our democratic framework.
The current circumstances, rife with delays and obstructions, jeopardize the core principles of this legislation, leading to disillusionment among the public.
By taking decisive action, the Hon’ble Commissioners can reaffirm their commitment to upholding these values, thereby enhancing trust in public institutions and empowering citizens to seek the truth without hesitation.