Key takeaways from this blog post are as follows

Here are the key takeaways from the analysis of your RTI case and the current administrative stalemate in the Uttar Pradesh Department of Home. This overview will be especially helpful if you are preparing a Uttar Pradesh RTI Application related to the department.

1. Statutory Time Limit Breach (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

The most critical takeaway is the clear violation of Section 7(1) of the RTI Act 2005. The Home Department received your transferred application on June 4, 2025, but failed to provide a response within the mandatory 30-day window. This “deemed refusal” is the legal basis for your current appeal.

2. The “Accountability Gap” on Jansunwai

The core of your grievance stems from the Jansunwai (IGRS) Portal. The takeaway here is a systemic flaw where: (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

• Subordinate staff (Tehsildar/Lekhpal) submit inconsistent or arbitrary reports.
• The system lacks a robust verification mechanism, allowing senior offices to “accept” these reports and close complaints without actual resolution.

3. The Bureaucratic “Maze” (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

Your information request was passed through a chain of authorities (CMO → Home Department → Section Officer P-11). This highlights a common tactic of administrative fragmentation, where transferring the request serves to delay the provision of information and dilute individual responsibility.

4. Specific Information Denied

The PIO’s silence effectively hides three vital pieces of data you requested: (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

• The names and designations of the staff who misdirected the revenue matter to the police.
• The justification for ignoring the non-compliance of the court order by the Lekhpal.
• Legible copies of documents that were intentionally or negligently uploaded as illegible files on the portal.

5. Escalation to First Appeal (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

Since the PIO (Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey) failed to act, the responsibility now rests with the First Appellate Authority (FAA), Shri Ashutosh Chandra Pandey. The takeaway for the next step is that the FAA is legally obligated to adjudicate on your prayer for disciplinary proceedings and the immediate release of information.

---

Summary of Key Details (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

• RTI Registration: DHOME/R/2025/80166
• Appeal Registration: DHOME/A/2025/60168
• Primary Issue: Lack of transparency in the “Action Taken” reports regarding court order compliance in Mirzapur.

This blog post breaks down the ongoing struggle for accountability within the Uttar Pradesh administrative machinery, specifically focusing on the RTI journey of Yogi M. P. Singh.

---

Uttar Pradesh RTI Application: How the RTI Act Stalls in the Corridors of UP’s Home Department

In a functional democracy, the Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 is the citizen’s strongest weapon against bureaucratic lethargy and corruption. However, the case of Yogi M. P. Singh, a resident of Mirzapur, highlights a troubling reality: when the guardians of law become the practitioners of procrastination, the “Rule of Law” risks transforming into what Singh describes as a “Rule of Anarchy.

The core of this issue lies not just in a delayed response, but in a systemic failure of the Jansunwai Portal and the subsequent “passing the buck” between the Chief Minister’s Office (CMO) and the Department of Home.

1. The Genesis: Arbitrary Reporting on the Jansunwai Portal (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

The grievance began with a complaint regarding the non-compliance of a court order by a local Lekhpal in Village Panchayat Babura. Despite a clear directive from the Additional Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) Sadar, the local land official failed to act.

When this was reported on the Jansunwai (IGRS) Portal, the resulting reports submitted by the Tehsildar Sadar and the Circle Officer (City) were, according to the applicant, “arbitrary and inconsistent.” This is a common grievance among citizens—where officials submit perfunctory or “action taken” reports that do not actually resolve the underlying legal breach, yet are accepted as “closed” by the portal’s staff.

2. The RTI Trail: From the CMO to the Home Department

To fix accountability for these inconsistent reports, Singh filed an RTI application (DOCMO/R/2025/60448) with the Chief Minister’s Office on May 27, 2025. The intent was clear: to identify the specific staff members who accepted these faulty reports and to understand why the matter was diverted to the police rather than the revenue authorities (SDM). (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

The timeline of the transfer reveals the first layer of the “bureaucratic maze”:

• May 27, 2025: Filing with the CMO.
• June 3, 2025: CMO transfers the request to the Home Department (DHOME/R/2025/80166).
• June 4, 2025: The Home Department transfers it internally to another PIO (Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Section Officer P-11).

3. Section 7(1) Violation: The 30-Day Failure (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

Under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act 2005, a Public Information Officer (PIO) is mandated to provide the requested information within 30 days. In this instance:

• The Home Department received the transferred application on June 4, 2025.
• The deadline for a response expired on July 4, 2025.

By the time Singh filed his First Appeal on July 21, 2025, the PIO had exceeded the statutory limit by over two weeks with no communication. This silence is legally deemed a “deemed refusal,” prompting the applicant to approach the First Appellate Authority (FAA), Shri Ashutosh Chandra Pandey.

4. The Culture of “Deemed Refusal” and Procrastination (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

The procrastination by the PIO of the Home Department is not an isolated incident; it represents a “mockery of the law.” When high-level departments ignore RTI deadlines, it sends a message to lower-level officials that accountability is optional.

Singh’s appeal raises poignant questions:

• Why was the matter transferred to the Police? While the grievance concerned land revenue and SDM orders, the CMO staff directed it to the Home Department.
• Who is responsible for the “Clean Chit”? The RTI seeks the names of officials who validated the “illegible” and “inconsistent” reports submitted by the District Magistrate’s office.

5. The Role of the First Appellate Authority (FAA)

The First Appeal (DHOME/A/2025/60168) is now a litmus test for the Department of Home. The appellant has requested more than just the information; he has called for disciplinary proceedings against the PIO for violating the provisions of the RTI Act. (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

According to the Act, the FAA has the power to:

1. Direct the PIO to provide the information immediately and free of cost (as the deadline was missed).
2. Recommend a penalty if there is a persistent default (though penalties are technically the jurisdiction of the Information Commission).

6. Conclusion: A Call for Administrative Reform (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

The case of Yogi M. P. Singh is a microcosm of the struggle for Good Governance (Su-shasan) in Uttar Pradesh. While the state leadership frequently speaks of transparency and administrative reform in the media, the ground reality—characterized by “jungle raj” in local land records and “anarchy” in RTI compliance—suggests a significant disconnect.

For the RTI Act to remain a “sunlight” law, the Department of Home must act. Procrastination is not merely a delay; it is a denial of justice.

---

Current Status Summary (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

Detail	Information
Current Status	RTI Appeal Received (21/07/2025)
FAA Name	Shri Ashutosh Chandra Pandey
Ground for Appeal	No response within the time limit
Primary Grievance	Inconsistent reporting on Jansunwai Portal

Based on your RTI application details and the official records for the Government of Uttar Pradesh, here is the structured list of contact details for the concerned public authorities.

---

1. Department of Home (The Current Authority)

Since your application was transferred here and is currently in the First Appeal stage, these are your primary contacts for follow-up. (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

Role	Name	Mobile / Phone	Email
First Appellate Authority (FAA)	Shri Ashutosh Chandra Pandey	9454413802	sohomepolice11@gmail.com
Public Information Officer (PIO)	Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey	9454412088	shome.p11@up.gov.in
Nodal Officer	Sri Rajeev Kumar Yadav	9454419458	shome.p15@up.gov.in

• Application Registration No: DHOME/R/2025/80166
• Appeal Registration No: DHOME/A/2025/60168

---

2. Chief Minister’s Office (The Originating Authority)

You may need these details if you choose to file a grievance regarding the transfer of your application or the acceptance of inconsistent reports by their staff. (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

Role	Name	Mobile / Phone	Email
Public Information Officer	Surya Prakash Pandey	9454411709	pandeysp49@gmail.com
Nodal Officer	Sanjay Chaturvedi	9454410972	sanjay.10972@gov.in
General CMO Email	—	0522-2226344	cmup@nic.in

• CMO Application No: DOCMO/R/2025/60448

---

3. Web Links & Portals (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)

Use these links to track your status or file further escalations:

• UP RTI Online Portal:rtionline.up.gov.in
  • Use this to check the status of Registration No. DHOME/A/2025/60168.
• Jansunwai (IGRS) Portal:jansunwai.up.nic.in
  • Use this to reference your original complaint No. 60000250091069.
• UP Information Commission:upic.gov.in
  • This is where you will file a Second Appeal if the Department of Home does not resolve your First Appeal within 30–45 days.

---

Recommended Next Step

Since the 30-day limit for your First Appeal is approaching (filed July 21, 2025), the FAA should ideally pass an order by late August 2025.

Would you like me to draft a “Reminder Letter” addressed to the First Appellate Authority (Shri Ashutosh Chandra Pandey) to press for a hearing date? (Uttar Pradesh RTI Application)