⚖️RTI Procedures & District Judge: A Citizen’s Quest for Accountability Through RTI

RTI Registration Number: DNMZP/R/2025/60017, Applicant: Shivam Gupta, Public Authority: District Court Mirzapur, Date of Filing: 07/08/2025. This case involves important aspects of RTI Procedures & District Judge decision-making in relation to the application.

---

The Crux of the Matter: A Chargesheet Lost in Transit? (RTI Procedures & District Judge)

The Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, is the most powerful tool for Indian citizens. It helps them seek accountability through established RTI Procedures. It ensures transparency from public bodies. Shivam Gupta filed this specific RTI application following the prescribed RTI Procedures under Section 6(1). It highlights a serious discrepancy between the Police Department and the District Judicial Administration in Mirzapur. The situation requires the intervention of the District Judge.

The core issue revolves around Chargesheet No. 88/2025, dated 17/05/2025.

🛑 The Discrepancy: Police Claim vs Court Denial

The application meticulously lays out the factual background, sourced from official communications:

1. The Police Department’s Stand (RTI Procedures & District Judge)

• On 31/05/2025, the Inspector of Kotwali Katra, Mirzapur, explicitly stated that he sent Chargesheet No. 88/2025 to the respective court on 17/05/2025. The Circle Officer, City Mirzapur, then conveyed this information in writing to the applicant.

2. The Judicial Administration’s Counterclaim

• The applicant, Mr Gupta, made a personal inquiry at the District Court, Mirzapur. The concerned clerical staff stated they had not received any chargesheet. They also denied receiving any related communication. (RTI Procedures & District Judge)

This direct conflict between the records of two major public authorities is critical. The authorities involved are the Police and the Court. This forms the basis for the RTI query.

❓ Information Sought: Demanding Clarity under Section 6(1)

Mr Gupta has recognized the gravity of this information gap. Following the established RTI Procedures, he has invoked Section 6(1) of the RTI Act. He seeks specific details from the Nodal Officer of the District Court, Mirzapur. The matter may escalate to the District Judge. The District Judge serves as the First Appellate Authority.

The applicant is respectfully asking for the following:

• Current Status: What is the current status of Chargesheet No. 88/2025, dated 17/05/2025, as per the official records of the District Court, Mirzapur?
• Confirmation of Receipt: Has the said chargesheet been officially received by the District Court?
• Date of Receipt (If Received): If the chargesheet was received, what was the exact date of its receipt?
• Subsequent Action: What subsequent action, if any, has been taken on the chargesheet?

📢 The Significance: Credibility of Public Authorities

This RTI application is more than just an inquiry about a single document; it is a demand for systemic integrity through proper RTI Procedures. The role of the District Judge as the First Appellate Authority becomes pivotal in such cases.

“This discrepancy is serious. It raises concerns about the credibility of two public authorities. These are the police department and the judicial administration.”

The outcome of this request will reveal the true location or status of the chargesheet. It will also force a public accounting. The authorities will address the miscommunication, misinformation, or procedural lapse that occurred between the Police and Court staff. It highlights the vital role of RTI Procedures. They expose gaps in procedural integrity and hold government bodies answerable. This happens from the filing stage all the way to the District Judge’s appellate chamber.

⏳ Next Steps

The District Court, Mirzapur, received the RTI request on 07/08/2025. They must now respond within the mandated timeframe set by the RTI Act.

➡️ Follow-up Action Plan for RTI Appeal (DNMZP/R/2025/60017)

The original RTI application seeks crucial information about a discrepancy between two public authorities. A structured follow-up plan based on standard RTI Procedures is essential. This becomes critical if the District Court Mirzapur does not provide a complete answer within the mandatory 30-day period. At this point, the matter escalates to the District Judge as the First Appellate Authority (FAA).

Here, RTI Procedures under the RTI Act, 2005, mandate specific actions. If the District Court does not provide the information within 30 days from the date of filing (07/08/2025), Mr. Gupta must take action. He must file the First Appeal before the District Judge. If the court provides an incomplete answer, he must still file the First Appeal before the District Judge. The same holds if the response given is unsatisfactory. If it provides an incomplete answer, he must still file the First Appeal. The same holds if the response given is unsatisfactory.

Stage 1 First Appeal

• Timeline: File the appeal within 30 days after the expiration of the 30-day response period. Alternatively, file it within 30 days of receiving the unsatisfactory reply.
• To Whom: As per standard RTI Procedures, the District Judge of Mirzapur serves as the First Appellate Authority (FAA). This is at the District Court level. A senior officer specifically designated by the District Judge may also be authorised to fulfil this role.
• Content: The appeal must clearly state:
  • The original RTI Registration Number (DNMZP/R/2025/60017).
  • The date of filing and the description of the information sought.
  • A photocopy of the original RTI application.
  • The reasons for the appeal (e.g., no response received, unsatisfactory denial, or incomplete information).
• Goal: The District Judge (FAA) follows RTI Procedures to hear the case. They review the actions of the Public Information Officer (PIO). Then, they issue an order requiring the correct information to be disclosed. The District Judge must resolve the First Appeal within 30 days, or within 45 days if reasons are formally recorded.

---

Stage 2: Second Appeal (The State Information Commission)

If the First Appellate Authority (FAA) fails to pass an order, Mr Gupta must file the Second Appeal. He must also file it if the order passed is still unsatisfactory.

• Timeline: File your appeal within 90 days of the FAA’s decision. If the FAA should have made a decision but did not, use that date instead. This means you must file within 90 days of the FAA’s response deadline expiring.
• To Whom: Address the appeal to the State Information Commission (SIC) of Uttar Pradesh. Mirzapur is located in U.P.
• Content: The appeal must include:
  • A copy of the original RTI application.
  • A copy of the FAA’s order (if any).
  • A statement explaining why the FAA’s decision is unsatisfactory or why the FAA failed to respond.
• Goal: The SIC is the highest authority under the State RTI Act. It has the power to summon officials and conduct an inquiry. It can order the immediate provision of information. The SIC can even impose penalties (up to $mathbf{₹25,000}$) on the CPIO for maliciously denying or delaying information.

---

Stage 3: Seeking Inquiry and Penalty

The nature of this specific request—highlighting a conflict between the Police and Court records—makes the penalty provision particularly relevant.

• Request for Inquiry: In the Second Appeal to the SIC, Mr Gupta should make a specific request. He should ask the Commission to conduct an inquiry. This inquiry should address the conflicting claims regarding Chargesheet No. 88/2025. This inquiry would not only aim to find the document but also to fix responsibility for the misinformation.
• Compensation: If the SIC finds a delay or denial of information, it can conclude that this caused a loss. It can also be concluded that this caused a detriment. In such cases, the SIC can order the public authority to pay compensation to the applicant.
• Maximum Penalty: The SIC can impose a penalty of ₹250 per day. This starts from the date the information was due. The maximum penalty is $mathbf{₹25,000}$. This applies if the PIO acted unreasonably or maliciously.

That’s a smart move. You need the contact information for the State Information Commission (SIC) of Uttar Pradesh to file the Second Appeal. This appeal is where the real power of inquiry and penalty lies.

Here are the key contact details for the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission (UPSIC):

🏛️ Uttar Pradesh Information Commission (UPSIC)

The UPSIC is the final appellate authority under the state RTI framework. It also represents the last stage in the RTI Procedures available to Mr. Gupta. This is where he will file his Second Appeal. He will do this if the District Judge (FAA) at the District Court fails to provide a satisfactory answer. He will also file it if the District Judge does not respond within the stipulated timeframe. (RTI Procedures & District Judge)

Address	7/7A, RTI Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh
Official Phone	0522-2724930 (Office)
Official Email	webmaster-upic[at]up[dot]gov[dot]in
Pertaining to Appeals	jansu-section[dot]upic[at]up[dot]gov[dot]in (Email for Public Information Officer/Administrative matters)
Website	https://upsic.up.gov.in/

📝 Key Person for Appeals (Second Appeal) (RTI Procedures & District Judge)

The State Information Commission receives the appeal. Typically, the Registrar’s Office handles the matter. One of the State Information Commissioners then assigns it.

You should specifically state in your appeal document. You are filing a Second Appeal under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005.

🖱️ Online Filing Option (RTI Procedures & District Judge)

The UPSIC provides a comprehensive online portal. Mr Gupta can use this to file his appeal once the deadline for the First Appeal has passed:

1. Visit the Official Website: https://upsic.up.gov.in/
2. Look for the “Citizen Service Portal” or links related to “द्वितीय अपील 19(3)” (Second Appeal 19(3)).
3. Online filing allows for easy tracking and digital submission of all supporting documents (original RTI, First Appeal, CPIO/FAA responses, etc.).

---