Here, the public information officer is the District Panchayat Raj Officer (DPRO) of Bhadohi. In DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar, this officer plays a critical role in guaranteeing transparency and accountability in local governance.
This officer addresses citizens’ queries about various initiatives. They also handle questions on programs undertaken by the Panchayat Raj system.
Additionally, the Deputy Director of the Panchayat Raj Department in Mirzapur is the first appellate authority. They handle grievances or appeals related to information requests.
This director oversees the proper implementation of policies and resolves disputes effectively.
They make certain that the rights of the citizens to access information are upheld. The facilitation is done promptly.

🚨 DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar: Second Appeal Filed for Panchayat Fund Transparency

In a significant setback for transparency efforts, Devi Prasad Gupta has taken action. He filed a Second Appeal with the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission (UPIC). This filing addresses ongoing issues related to developmental schemes in a Village Panchayat.
The appeal emerges from a frustrating lack of response by the Public Information Officer (PIO). The First Appellate Authority (FAA) also did not respond. Both have neglected to adhere to the mandatory timelines outlined in the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
This post delves into the details surrounding the appeal. It sheds light on the procedural failures that have led to this formal grievance. It underscores the continuing struggle for accountability in local governance.

---

📅 Chronology and Registration Details

The appellant, Devi Prasad Gupta, has pursued information on local development schemes through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. The current status is the formal acceptance of the Second Appeal by the UP Information Commission. (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

Particular	Details
RTI Application No. (Section 6(1))	DIRPR/R/2025/61901
Date of RTI Filing	29-07-2025
First Appeal No. (Section 19(1))	DIRPR/A/2025/61627
Date of First Appeal Filing	31-08-2025
Second Appeal Registration No. (UPIC)	A-20251101039
Second Appeal Welcome ID	UPICR20250006159
Date of Second Appeal Filing	13/11/2025

The statutory timelines clearly show a procedural failure:

• Time elapsed from Section 6(1) to First Appeal: 33 days (Past the 30-day limit).
• Time elapsed from Section 6(1) to Second Appeal: 107 days.

---

👤 Parties Involved

This appeal names officials from the Panchayati Raj Department in Uttar Pradesh. It highlights a lack of accountability at both the district (PIO) and divisional (FAA) levels. This concerns the release of public funds. (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

Appellant Details

The applicant, Devi Prasad Gupta, is a citizen of Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, who is not Below Poverty Line (BPL).

• Name: Devi Prasad Gupta
• Location: शुक्लहा तिराहा अनूप कंप्यूटर्स मिर्जापुर सिटी
• Pin code: 231001
• Mobile: 9935329090

Public Information Officer (PIO)

The RTI enquiry was directed toward the PIO responsible for local transparency in the Bhadohi district. (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

• Designation: DPRO Bhadohi
• Office: Panchayati Raj Department, Bhadohi District
• Pincode: 221401
• Status: Not providing Information in Stipulated Time

First Appellate Authority (FAA)

The FAA, who should have reviewed the PIO’s failure, also neglected to act, leading directly to the Second Appeal. (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

• Designation: Mirzapur Deputy Director
• Office: Panchayati Raj Department, Bhadohi District
• Pincode: 231001
• Status: There is no answer

---

🔎 Information Sought: Five Points of Transparency (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

The core of the RTI application is a comprehensive enquiry. It requests financial details. These details pertain to developmental schemes in Village Panchayat – Dhanwatiya. This is including Post- Barwa, Development block- Bhadohi, District-Bhadohi (PIN Code – 221402). It also seeks execution details. The inquiry covers the last four years and the current year.

The five specific points of information requested are:

1. Estimates of the developmental schemes executed.
2. Distribution of government fund in the developmental schemes.
3. Work booklet of the developmental schemes.
4. Description of the release of the government fund for the developmental schemes.
5. Wall painting details and the government fund spent on them.

The applicant emphasised that the RTI Act was introduced to promote transparency in government operations. It ensures that citizens have access to the information necessary to hold public authorities accountable. Nonetheless, its objectives are being undermined by the increasingly cryptic approach of the corrupt officers. They use vague language and bureaucratic red tape to obscure vital information. This deliberate obfuscation frustrates those seeking answers. It also erodes public trust in the very institutions meant to serve them. This creates an environment where accountability is sidelined. Transparency remains an elusive goal. (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

---

⚖️ Grounds for Second Appeal

The Second Appeal is grounded in the total breakdown of the RTI process. This breakdown amounts to a deemed refusal at both the primary and appellate stages. The official grounds presented to the UP Information Commission are: (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

1. Violation of Section 7(1): The SPIO neglected to give any information or communication within the mandated 30-day period. This is the starting statutory violation.
2. Violation of Section 19(6): The FAA did not decide the First Appeal within the statutory period. This effectively denied the Appellant the legal remedy provided under the Act.
3. Total Denial of Transparency: The refusal at both levels breaks the core objectives of the RTI Act. It undermines transparency and accountability in public expenditure. This is especially true about village development funds.

---

🙏 Relief Sought from the Commission (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

The Appellant seeks relief under Section 19(3) of the RTI Act, 2005, requesting decisive action from the Commission:

• Immediate Information: The SPIO must promptly give the full information. It should be correct and sought in the original RTI application. This must be done free of cost, as per Section 7(6).
• Punitive Action: The detailed grounds ask that the Commission consider penalties. These penalties would be imposed on the PIO and FAA under Section 20 of the Act for non-compliance.

The filing of this Second Appeal pushes the matter into a judicial review. The UP Information Commission will now hear the case. It has the authority to mandate the release of the information. It can also impose financial penalties on the non-compliant officers. (DPRO Sant Ravidas Nagar)

Enquiry officer can give the information concerned with enquiry

CMO Prayagraj promoted anarchy by not taking action on the recommendation of CMO Bhadohi