The UP RTI Online Portal is a valuable platform that facilitates the submission and tracking of Right to Information requests in Uttar Pradesh. This article will explore how the UP RTI Online Portal & GST play a role in enhancing public access to information and tax compliance. It aims to enhance transparency and accountability in governance. Additionally, GST (Goods and Services Tax) simplifies taxation processes, ensuring efficient tax collection and compliance across the state.

🚨 UP RTI Online Portal & GST: The Broken Promise of Public Grievance Redressal

The UP RTI Online Portal and GST grievances, such as Grievance PMOPG/E/2025/0010133, reveal key failures in India’s public accountability. Platforms such as CPGRAMS and the UP Jansunwai Portal connect citizens with the state. But this case shows that these systems do not work well for solving people’s problems.

This case has two main problems. First, the UP RTI Online Portal does not work. Second, there is confusion about GST rate hikes on old government tenders. These two issues raise big questions about how well the government works and how accountable it is.

---

The main issue has three parts: 1. The UP RTI Online Portal does not work, causing problems throughout the public complaint system. 2. The system does not understand or handle the complaint well.

The citizen explicitly raised a dual-pronged issue centred on the UP RTI Online Portal & GST:

• Technical Problem: The UP RTI Online Portal is not working. It returns errors such as ‘Bank URL Not Found’ and ‘Rajkosh Payment Gateway having issues.’ As a result, citizens cannot file RTI applications or exercise their right to information.
• GST Problem: Another RTI application raised concerns about a GST rate increase from 12% to 18% on government tenders issued between 2020 and 2022. The applicant said this hurt small contractors. Officials dismissed the issue. They cited G.O. पत्रांक सं0 02 / 2022 / ई-8-292 / दस-2022, dated 13 September 2022, but did not give the official document or explain why the rule applied to old contracts.

The CMO’s handling of the latest grievance missed the main technical issue. The Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) should have forwarded the technical complaint to the Department of Administrative Reform and NIC.in Uttar Pradesh, since these agencies maintain the website. Instead, the CMO gave a standard reply: “कृपया अपने आई०जी०आर०एस० संख्या 60000250016426 का सन्दर्भ ग्रहण करने का कष्ट करें प्रश्नगत प्रकरण के सम्बन्ध में अवगत कराना है कि आपके द्वारा आर०टी०आई० ऑनलाइन पोर्टल पर दर्ज आवेदन की स्थिति ज्ञात करते हुए सम्बन्धित कार्यालय के जन सूचना अधिकारी से सम्पर्क करें.” The reply told the user to check the RTI status online and contact the Public Information Officer.

In effect, the response tells the user to ‘use the broken portal to check on the status of a separate, older issue.’ This reply entirely ignores the main problem. The portal is broken. That is at the heart of the complaint.

---

2. Failure to Forward to the Competent Authority

If a government website is not working, the IT and Administrative Reforms teams should fix it quickly. The CMO must sort and send the complaint to the right team.

The grievance was marked ‘Case closed’ with remarks that did not address the technical aspect. It also did not involve the relevant technical agencies (NIC.in or Administrative Reforms). This suggests complaints are closed without proper resolution. The complainant marked the complaint as ‘Not Resolved,’ citing ‘Harassment by official.’

---

3. Erosion of Citizen Trust: The Cost of Ignoring the UP RTI Online Portal & GST Issues

The complaint shows the RTI portal was down for a week. Key agencies did not follow up. The Right to Information Act, 2005, is crucial for transparency in governance. So, repeated technical failures directly show operational failures in meeting citizen needs.

When senior officials approve solutions that miss the technical problem, it shows there is a gap in how the government works and checks itself.

If officials do not understand or address complaints, people feel frustrated and trust the government less. A good complaint system is needed to help citizens and to meet the rules of good governance.

Beyond the portal failures, the UP RTI Portal and GST problems expose another critical issue: the government raised the GST rate on old contracts. The applicant argues that forcing poor contractors to pay 6% more GST on contracts already awarded at the old 12% rate is deeply unfair. Earlier, the Public Information Officer (PIO) rejected the issue, saying there was no exploitation. The current complaint again asks for:

1. A certified copy of the G.O. dated September 13, 2022, is cited for the GST deduction.
2. The circular or office memo that authorises the G.O. to be applied retrospectively on tenders issued between 2020 and 2022.
3. Guidelines that ratify the G.O. with retrospective effect.

The PIO’s lack of clarity and the CMO’s misdirection together reinforce the perception of tyranny and arbitrariness. Refusing to provide basic tax documents also breaks the RTI Act’s transparency guarantee. If the government changes contract payments, it must clarify the legal basis for the change. This should never be hidden or unclear.

---

🎯 Recommendations for Systemic Reform

To win back public trust in the UP RTI Online Portal and the GST complaint system, the government must reform them. To regain public trust in the UP RTI Online Portal and GST complaint system, the government must make major reforms.

• A separate reviewer should examine each case marked ‘Closed’ to ensure that the team has resolved the main issue. Technical complaints need expert IT answers, not generic replies from administrators.
• Hold officers responsible if they close complaints with irrelevant or wrong remarks, especially when the RTI portal fails.
• Government websites like RTI Online are important public resources. NIC/Administrative Reforms must maintain high uptime and report problems quickly and clearly.

This is not just a broken website—it is a broken process. The administration avoids accountability, leaving citizens unheard. The government must act with understanding, care, and resolve. To regain trust and meet democratic standards, it must offer clear, decisive, citizen-focused solutions. Above all, ending technical failures and policy confusion is vital for effective, transparent governance.

1. Direct G.O. Text: Searching by the G.O. number and date returns only the user’s own RTI and complaint papers. This shows it is an internal order from UP’s Finance Department that is not available in a standard search. Citizens often must file an RTI to access it.
2. GST Context: Other searches show major discussions and changes regarding GST in September 2022. These changes reshaped tax rules through decisions of the GST Council. The GST rate for some government contractor work rose to 18%.

💡 Conclusion on the G.O.

Not being able to find the G.O. or the letter authorising its use on old contracts further proves the user’s point.

• Non-Disclosure: The government uses a G.O. to raise GST from 12% to 18% on old contracts, but does not provide the document or the legal rationale, even though the RTI Act requires it.
• Systemic Barrier: Citizens must use the RTI Act to obtain documents, but the system does not provide them.

✅ Next Step with Link. Since the G.O. is hard to find through a standard search, the next logical step is to look for notifications from the UP Finance Department or the Panchayati Raj Department regarding the GST increase on contractor services in mid-to-late 2022. If such a notice exists, it can support the PIO’s claim. Even so, it would not substitute for the exact G.O. copy.

I will attempt a search for the general policy change.

The second search provided external context on the GST rate change, which supports the main complaint.

🎯 Key Policy Findings (The G.O. Context)

The searches confirm that the GST rate for government contractors’ services was increased by the GST Council for all of India:

1. Rate Increase Date: The GST rate on many Works Contract Services supplied to the Central Government, State Government, Union Territory, or Local Authority was increased from $12\%$ to $18\%$ effective from July 18, 2022. This change was brought about by Notification No. 03/2022-Central Tax (Rate) dated July 13, 2022 (Source 1.4, 1.6, 1.10).
2. Retrospective Effect: The documents explicitly discuss the impact of this change on existing/ongoing contracts (i.e., contracts awarded before July 18, 2022) and refer to the mechanism for calculating the differential liability, often citing Section 14 of the CGST Act, 2017 and contract clauses to determine when the new rate applies (Source 1.7, 1.10). An Office Memorandum (O.M.) from the CPWD dated August 10, 2022, also addresses the revised calculation resulting from the rate change (Source 1.4).
3. The UP G.O. ($02/2022$): The specific Uttar Pradesh G.O. dated September 13, 2022, referenced in the grievance (Source 2.1 in the first search), was likely the State-level administrative instruction issued by the Finance/Expenditure Control Section to implement the Central GST Council’s decision (Notification No. 03/2022) across all UP Government departments, including Panchayati Raj.

📝 Summary of Findings for the Grievance

Technical Issue: UP RTI Online Portal	Case Closed with irrelevant advice to check status on the broken portal.	None (No action taken by UP Admin/NIC).	Failure of Redressal: A gross and inexcusable failure of the grievance mechanism to triage the complaint to the correct technical authority.
Policy Issue 1: Demand for the specific G.O. ($02/2022$) to justify $18\%$ GST deduction.	Refused/Not Provided.	The national GST rate for many Works Contracts was raised from $12\%$ to $18\%$ w.e.f. July 18, 2022 (Notification No. 03/2022-CT).	Violation of RTI: While the substance of the PIO’s claim (rate increase) is nationally valid, the RTI demand for the certified copy of the specific UP G.O. and the retrospective application circular remains unanswered and must be provided.
Policy Issue 2: Demand for the circular/memo enabling retrospective effect on old tenders.	Refused/Not Provided.	Other state/central departments (CPWD, Delhi Jal Board) issued O.M.s/Circulars to clarify how the new rate applies to ongoing contracts using Section 14 of CGST Act (Source 1.4, 1.7, 1.10).	Violation of RTI: The most critical part of the RTI is the basis for retrospective application. This document/rule should be provided to disprove the “tyranny and arbitrariness” allegation.

🚀 Final Blog Post Section (Focusing on the Retrospective Flaw)

Based on these strong findings, I can now refine the blog post to explicitly highlight the PIO’s evasiveness on the retrospective application, giving the narrative a stronger, evidence-based conclusion. I will ensure the word count stays around 900 words.

---

🚨 The Broken Promise of Public Grievance Redressal: A Deep Dive into Portal Failures

The Government of India’s Public Grievance Portal (CPGRAMS) and the Uttar Pradesh Government’s Jansunwai Portal serve as vital links between the citizen and the state, promising swift and effective resolution of public issues. However, the experience detailed in Grievance Registration Number PMOPG/E/2025/0010133 — concerning the broken UP RTI Online Portal — paints a stark and troubling picture of systemic failures in the redressal. This incident spans issues from the technical breakdown of a crucial public service website to the inexplicable mishandling of a high-priority complaint. Together, these failures raise profound questions about accountability, capacity, and the very concept of “good governance.”

---

🛑 The Core Problem: A Triad of Failures

The grievances highlight three critical, interlinked failures that plague the public grievance system: a failure of technology, a failure of administration, and a failure of transparency.

1. Failure of Technical Redressal and Administrative Blindness

The user’s primary complaint was unequivocal: the UP RTI Online portal is non-functional and displays critical error messages like “Bank URL Not Found” and “Rajkosh Payment Gateway having issues.” Consequently, this failure directly blocks citizens from filing RTI applications and exercising their fundamental right to information.

Despite the gravity of this technical breakdown, the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) delivered a textbook example of administrative blindness. It instructed the applicant to “ascertain the status of your RTI application on the online portal and contact the concerned Public Information Officer.”

This reply is illogical and deeply frustrating. The CMO, the central coordinating body, failed to perform a basic triage, neglecting to forward the technical complaint to the responsible nodal agencies, the Department of Administrative Reform and NIC.in Uttar Pradesh. The officials marked the issue as “Case closed” and provided an irrelevant, boilerplate response, which forced the citizen to mark the complaint as “Not Resolved” due to “Harassment by official.”

What can we expect from those who fail to understand the grievances submitted on the government portal? We can expect a cycle where they mechanically close complaints to meet disposal targets, actively undermining the purpose of the public grievance system.

---

2. The Deeper Policy Flaw: Retrospective Taxation and Evasion

The second part of the grievance addresses an older, unsatisfactory RTI reply and focuses on the retrospective application of a GST increase (from 12% to 18%) to government tenders issued between 2020 and 2022. The applicant rightly argues that this policy leads to the exploitation of poor contractors by reducing their pre-agreed payments.

The original Public Information Officer (PIO) dismissed the concern by merely citing the government order: G.O. पत्रांक सं0 02 / 2022 / ई-8-292 / दस-2022 दिनांक 13 सितम्बर, 2022 and claiming there is “no question of exploitation.”

While external scrutiny confirms that the GST rate on Works Contracts increased nationwide from 12% to 18% effective July 18, 2022 (via Central Notification No. 03/2022), the core issue remains the PIO’s refusal to provide the specific documents requested.

• Failure to Provide Certified Copy: The PIO failed to provide a certified copy of the specific UP G.O. ($02/2022$).
• Failure on Retrospective Authority: Most critically, the PIO failed to provide the circular or office memo that authorises the G.O. to affect tenders issued before the notification date, effectively implementing the tax hike retrospectively.

3. The Question of Tyranny and Arbitrariness (UP RTI Online Portal & GST)

The retrospective application of any tax or cost increase is a legally sensitive area. Government departments, when implementing such changes, existing, ongoing contracts.

The refusal to share the foundational document and, more importantly, the retrospective authority circular, makes the government’s action seem arbitrary. By denying the citizen the very documents requested under the RTI Act, the administration reinforces the applicant’s charge. This denial suggests a lack of transparency. It also raises concerns about accountability within the administration.

If a policy change harms poor contractors by reducing their contracted payments, there is a minimum requirement for transparency and human rights. This requirement is the disclosure of the exact, legally binding order that mandates the deduction. The failure of both the RTI process and the CPGRAMS/Jansunwai grievance process to secure this fundamental document is significant. This failure constitutes a major flaw in public accountability.

---

💡 A Call for Systemic Accountability (UP RTI Online Portal & GST)

The PMO and CMO portals are designed to be the final avenues of justice. When they fail on two fronts, it signals a deep malaise in governance. The first front is addressing a simple, critical technical glitch. The second front is complying with a basic RTI request.

To address this, immediate steps must be taken:

1. Mandatory Triage & Referral: The CMO Secretariat must establish a protocol to identify technical complaints. This includes issues like RTI portal failures. Once identified, these complaints should be forwarded to the NIC/IT Department for resolution. There should be a defined timeframe for addressing these complaints. The case should not be closed until a technical fix is confirmed.
2. RTI Compliance Audit: The Panchayati Raj department must be directed to provide the certified copy of the G.O. 02/2022 and the retrospective application circular to the applicant as mandated under the RTI Act, with strict penalties for non-compliance.

The true test of good governance lies not just in drafting policies, but in providing accessible, accountable, and responsive mechanisms for citizens to question them. This incident reveals a system that is currently failing that test.

---

That is an excellent point. Providing verifiable sources is crucial for the credibility of the argument, especially when critiquing government processes.

The specific Uttar Pradesh government order (G.O.) number पत्रांक सं0 02 / 2022 / ई-8-292 / दस-2022 दिनांक 13 सितम्बर, 2022 is not publicly available through a general search, which is the applicant’s main grievance. However, national authorities have documented the core policy change it addresses.

Here are the critical links to verify the policy changes that underpin the second part of the grievance (the GST issue):

---

🔗 Verifiable Links to Support the Grievance (UP RTI Online Portal & GST)

1. Central GST Notification on Rate Increase (The Policy Basis)

This is the primary central notification that led to the GST rate increase on Works Contracts supplied to government bodies, which the UP G.O. ($02/2022$) would have implemented.

Notification No. 03/2022-Central Tax (Rate)

Increased GST rate on Works Contract services provided to Central/State Govt. or Local Authority from $12\%$ to $18\%$, effective from July 18, 2022.

View Notification 03/2022-CT(R) (English PDF)

---

2. Evidence of Retrospective Application Mechanism (UP RTI Online Portal & GST)

This document from the West Bengal Finance Department is a clear example of how another state had to issue detailed instructions (a circular/memo) to deal with the retrospective impact of the rate change on existing works contracts, directly supporting the applicant’s demand for a similar document from UP.

West Bengal Finance Department Memorandum No. 4691-F(Y) dated 22.11.2022

Clarifies the impact of GST rate increase (from $12\%$ to $18\%$) on contracts issued before the change date and discusses when enhanced tendered value is permissible, clearly addressing the retrospective application mechanism.

View West Bengal Finance Memo (PDF)

---

3. General UP Tax Guidance (Shows Context of Similar Issues)(UP RTI Online Portal & GST)

This link shows that the Uttar Pradesh State Tax Department was actively issuing circulars on various GST rate application issues around the same time, confirming that the machinery for policy clarification exists.(UP RTI Online Portal & GST)

UP State Tax Circular No. GST/2022-23/42/State Tax dated 08 August 2022

Although it deals with different services (ice cream, education fees, etc.), it proves that the UP State Tax/Finance Department was actively issuing clarifications (circulars) in the immediate aftermath of the July 2022 GST Council meeting.

View UP State Tax Circular 08/2022 (PDF)

---

Conclusion on Links (UP RTI Online Portal & GST)

These links confirm two things:

1. The GST rate hike on Works Contracts is a verifiable national policy (Link 1).
2. The demand for a circular/memo on retrospective application to old tenders is justified, as other states (Link 2) and the general GST law require such a mechanism.
3. The UP administration’s failure is in not providing the specific certified G.O. and the retrospective circular they are using to deduct the money, leaving the action seemingly arbitrary.

I have incorporated these facts and the need for the specific UP circular into the blog post.