The following are the key takeaways from the blog post regarding the systemic challenges in the RTI process and your specific case. One central theme is how Institutional Apathy Erodes RTI, creating additional barriers for applicants.

The Failure of Accountability

• Chronic Systemic Delay: A response should take 30 days. However, it has been stretched over six years. The original application dates back to November 25, 2019.+2
• Obsolescence of Information: Extensive delays in providing development records, estimates, and invoices for the Sangmohal ward are problematic. These delays effectively render the data useless for timely public oversight.+4
• The “Endless Loop”: The Commission tends to grant repeated “further hearings” without finality. This practice allows PIOs to evade their legal obligations indefinitely.+2

Illegal Administrative Tactics

• Violations of Section 7(6): Although the PIO missed the 30-day deadline by years, they have illegally demanded fees. The law mandates that this information must be free.+2
• Misleading the Judiciary: The PIO claimed in a previous hearing that information was sent. However, internal letters dated just days prior admitted the records were not even prepared.+1
• Erosion of Dignity: The quasi-judicial dignity of the office is compromised. This happens when a Commissioner prioritizes procedural logistics over penalizing documented misconduct.

Strategic Objectives for the Appellant

• Mandatory Penalties: The Commission is legally required under Section 20(1). It must impose a penalty of ₹250 per day for such extreme delays. This penalty can go up to ₹25,000 for providing false statements.+2
• The Power of Written Records: Formal written submissions are essential to ensure that arguments are not ignored. They also create a “paper trail” to challenge arbitrary dismissals in higher courts.+1
• Targeted Information Seek: The focus remains on obtaining specific Sangmohal ward documents. These include estimates, work booklets, invoices, and staff monitoring details.+3

The Crisis of Accountability: How Institutional Apathy Erodes RTI

The Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 promised “sunlight” to disinfect the corridors of power. It empowered citizens to demand transparency. However, the struggle of Appeal No. S09/A/2174/2024 shows a different reality. Many now argue that Information Commissions act as shields for non-compliant officials. This case is one more demonstration that institutional apathy fundamentally erodes RTI, making it difficult for citizens to access information.

1. The Strategy of Chronic Delay

Time is the most potent weapon against transparency. The law mandates a response within 30 days. Yet, this case began with an RTI filing on November 25, 2019. The application shuffled between departments for years. It finally reached the Mirzapur District Magistrate’s Office on August 12, 2024.+3 In many cases, the erosion of RTI can be traced back to the effects of institutional apathy.

By the February 23, 2026 hearing, over six years had passed. This is a systemic failure. Withholding records on development works for half a decade makes the information obsolete.+2

2. Cunning Tricks and Misleading Statements

RTI litigation now faces a troubling trend: false statements to the Commission. During a hearing on October 16, 2025, the PIO claimed they dispatched the information via registered post.+1

However, the same office issued a letter on October 13, 2025, admitting the information was “not ready”. This blatant contradiction proves the PIO misled the judicial process. Such “cunning tricks” aim to avoid penalties. The Commission invites further lawlessness when it fails to punish these lies.+3 Erosion of RTI by institutional apathy becomes obvious when misleading statements are left unpunished.

3. Illegal Fee Demands: Violating Section 7(6)

Section 7(6) provides a clear protection for citizens. It states that a public authority must provide information free of cost if they miss the 30-day limit.+1

Despite a six-year delay, the Nagar Palika Parishad demanded fees in October 2025. These demands are illegal barriers. They discourage appellants from pursuing the truth. If the Commission does not strike down these demands, it participates in the violation.+3 As a result, institutional apathy erodes RTI by enabling illegal fee requests to become routine practice.

4. The Endless Loop of “Further Hearings”

Commissions often label high-stakes appeals as “For further hearing”. The Commission has the power to issue final orders. It can impose penalties. Instead, it frequently grants multiple opportunities to non-compliant PIOs.+2 This endless cycle reflects how RTI is eroded further by institutional apathy at many levels.

This culture mirrors the delays of traditional courts. The RTI Act aimed to bypass this bureaucracy. By granting endless dates, the Commission risks appearing as a tool for the executive branch.

5. When the Commission Behaves Like a PIO

The Information Commission is a quasi-judicial body. Its dignity depends on fair adjudication. It must penalise wrongdoers. However, some Commissioners now tell appellants that their only right is to “seek information.” When a commission mirrors the behaviour of a PIO, one can see exactly how RTI is eroded by institutional apathy.

The Commission’s role is not to find excuses for the PIO. It must uphold the law with harsh steps. If it ignores the Section 20(1) penalty for a six-year delay, it lowers the dignity of the post.+1

6. The Core Issues at Stake

The Sangmohal Ward records represent a larger crisis. The appellant seeks fundamental data:+1 In this environment, institutional apathy erodes RTI, obscuring the public’s right to information and accountability.

• Estimates and Work Booklets: To confirm proper use of public money.+4
• Invoices and Fund Details: To track taxpayer funds.+2
• Monitoring Staff: To hold individuals accountable for inspections and payments.+1

Without this data, transparency is a myth. Local governance remains a “black box” of potential corruption.

7. Conclusion: The Need for Institutional Integrity (Institutional Apathy Erodes RTI)

Formal written submissions serve as a vital record. Arguments lose their legal value if they are not officially recorded in the “Order Sheet.” Ultimately, institutional apathy erodes RTI, making it essential to restore integrity and accountability within the system.

The Information Commission must become an active watchdog again. It must enforce Section 7(6). It must impose mandatory penalties under Section 20(1). The dignity of the Commission lies in its courage to hold the powerful to account.+1

Based on the documents provided, here are the contact and identification details for the public authorities and offices involved in your case:

Uttar Pradesh Information Commission (UPIC) (Institutional Apathy Erodes RTI)

• Case Details:
  • Appeal Registration Number: A-20241100325.+4
  • File Number: S09/A/2174/2024.+2
  • Diary Number: D-230220260044.+1
  • CATS Case ID: 202602509N300114.
• Contact Information: (Institutional Apathy Erodes RTI)
  • Address: 7/7A, RTI Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, PIN 226010.+2
  • Court Email: hearingcourts9.upic@up.gov.in.+3
  • Web Link: https://upsic.up.gov.in.+1
  • Hearing Link: https://upsic.up.gov.in/cispu/onlinehearing/ce489f.

Public Information Officer (PIO)

• Contact Details:
  • Name: Hemant Kumar.+2
  • Designation: Tehsildar (Sadar) / PIO.
  • Office Address: Executive Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Mirzapur, PIN 231001.+1
  • Mobile Number: 9454416823.+2
  • Email ID: teh-sadar.mi@up.gov.in.+3

First Appellate Authority (FAA) (Institutional Apathy Erodes RTI)

• Contact Details:
  • Name: Asha Ram Verma.+2
  • Designation: SDM Sadar.+1
  • Office Address: District Magistrate Office, Mirzapur, PIN 231001.+2
  • Mobile Number: 9454416810.+1
  • Email ID: sdm-sadar.mi@up.gov.in.+1

Other Involved Entities (Institutional Apathy Erodes RTI)

• Nagar Palika Parishad Mirzapur:
  • Official Email: mnpmirzapur@gmail.com.+2
• Department of Urban Development:
  • Nodal Officer: Sajivan.
  • Nodal Email: so.nagarvikas8@gmail.com.
  • Original RTI Registration: DOUDV/R/2019/60044.+1

Would you like me to help you draft a follow-up inquiry to the PIO’s specific email address regarding the status of the “free of cost” documents?