The erosion of transparency in UPIC has become a growing concern among stakeholders. As policies and decisions are made, the lack of clear communication undermines trust and accountability. Many individuals feel excluded from the decision-making processes that affect them directly. This opacity not only breeds resentment but also hinders effective collaboration between departments and the community. To address this issue, a concerted effort is needed to foster open dialogue, involve diverse stakeholders, and ensure that information is accessible and understandable. By prioritising transparency, UPIC can rebuild its credibility and foster a more inclusive environment for all involved.

Digital Lawlessness: The Erosion of Transparency in the Uttar Pradesh Information Commission

The Right to Information (RTI) Act of 2005 was supposed to be the “sunlight” that disinfects power. However, recent events in District Mirzapur suggest a thick fog of administrative apathy now blocks that light^. Notably, this problem highlights the gradual erosion of transparency taking place within UPIC. When the State Information Commission fails to enforce basic digital rules, it creates a state of “digital lawlessness.” This negligence directly undermines every citizen’s democratic rights.+3

---

The Core Dispute: Formal Portals vs. Personal WhatsApp

A fundamental shift in RTI delivery is currently occurring in District Mirzapur. Recent filings show that Public Information Officers (PIOs) frequently bypass the official RTI Online Portal. Instead, they use personal WhatsApp IDs to send information.+3 This situation exemplifies the erosion that transparency standards suffer in the current UPIC environment.

The law demands accountability, even in a digital age. Using personal social media for official business causes several critical failures and contributes to a broader pattern of transparency erosion affecting UPIC’s function:

• No Certification: Information shared via WhatsApp often lacks the “certified copy” status required for legal evidence.
• Verification Gaps: The Commission lacks an official monitoring mechanism to verify delivery dates.
• Contradictory Records: PIOs often claim one delivery date while the digital trail shows another.
• Security Risks: Official data on private servers bypasses the security of mandated domains like @up.gov.in.

---

The Silence of the Commission

The applicant asked for a specific Circular or Office Memorandum (OM) regarding WhatsApp. This document would show if the Commission explicitly permits personal IDs for RTI delivery, but this silence further contributes to what can only be described as transparency erosion inside UPIC.

The PIO, Mumtaz Ahmed, offered only silence. He failed to produce any legal document. Instead, he issued an evasive reply that referred to a general list of officers. This refusal suggests that PIOs operate in a policy vacuum. In consequence, erosion of transparency within UPIC proceeds as officers seem to invent their own rules.+3

---

The “Registered but Not Active” Paradox

Internal Commission records (CATS-UPSI) reveal a startling admission. Many PIOs in Mirzapur have official government email IDs ending in @up.gov.in or @nic.in. However, these officers simply do not use them.+3 Thus, the pattern reflects wider transparency erosion in UPIC’s practices.

This behaviour violates transparency standards. When a PIO ignores their official digital identity, they cause three main problems. Above all, this behaviour underscores the erosion of what should be transparency at the heart of UPIC:

1. They Hide the Paper Trail: Central systems cannot track response times or quality.
2. They Defy the Judiciary: They ignore Supreme Court guidelines on mandatory official email use.
3. They Admit Negligence: The Commission’s own records show these officers are registered but inactive.+1

---

The “Point No. 1” Evasion Strategy

The PIO used a frustrating tactic in RTI response UPICM/R/2026/60146. The applicant submitted five distinct and complex queries. These ranged from lists of non-compliant officers to monitoring protocols.+2 This kind of blanket response further highlights how the erosion of transparency has become entrenched in UPIC’s processes.

The PIO gave a single, inadequate answer for the first point. For every other point, he simply stated “As per Point No. 1“. This “blanket response” mocks the RTI Act. It treats a citizen’s legal right as a nuisance. This strategy shields non-compliant PIOs from any real scrutiny and seems to accelerate transparency erosion within the UPIC.+1

---

Systematic Lawlessness and the Road Ahead

The situation in Mirzapur is a systemic failure, not a technical glitch. PIOs provide contradictory dates and ignore mandatory email protocols. In summary, these issues contribute to the Erosion of Transparency in UPIC, leading to a “lawless” environment for the applicant.

The Impact on the Common Man

• Delayed Justice: Applicants cannot easily calculate timelines for appeals when dates clash. With erosion of transparency in UPIC, justice is all the more elusive.
• Administrative Anarchy: The Commission has no way to verify if a PIO is telling the truth.
• Wasted Resources: Millions fund the RTI Bhawan and digital infrastructure. Yet, officers still prefer private apps.+1

---

Conclusion: A Call for Accountability

First Appeal UPICM/A/2026/60065 challenges this culture of evasion. It sits now before Deputy Secretary Shri Tejaskar Pandey. To sum up, the demand is an end to the ongoing Erosion of Transparency in UPIC—the Commission must enforce the existing rules.

Transparency is a statutory mandate, not a suggestion. The Commission must penalise officers who refuse official digital channels. Otherwise, the RTI Bhawan remains a glass building where no one can see inside. Citizens of Mirzapur, and indeed all of Uttar Pradesh, are entitled to answers—without experiencing the present erosion in transparency throughout UPIC.+2dows. The citizens of Mirzapur, and indeed all of Uttar Pradesh, deserve better than “Point No. 1” answers to life-and-death questions of governance.

Based on the documents and the official RTI registration details, here are the application IDs, contact information, and web details for the concerned public authorities:

RTI Application and Appeal Details (Erosion of Transparency in UPIC)

• Original Application Registration Number: UPICM/R/2026/60146.
• First Appeal Registration Number: UPICM/A/2026/60065.
• Date of Filing (Application): 12/03/2026.
• Date of Filing (Appeal): 21/04/2026.
• Official RTI Portal: rtionline.up.gov.in.

---

Public Information Officer (PIO) Details (Erosion of Transparency in UPIC)

• Name: Mumtaz Ahmad.
• Designation: Administrative Officer / State Public Information Officer.
• Office Address: Room No. 404, RTI Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
• Official Email: jansu-section.upic@up.gov.in.
• Mobile Number: 9151804317.
• Landline Number: 0522-2724945.

---

First Appellate Authority (FAA) Details (Erosion of Transparency in UPIC)

• Name: Tejaskar Pandey.
• Designation: Deputy Secretary, U.P. Information Commission.
• Office Address: Room No. 410, RTI Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow – 226010.
• Official Email: deputysecretary-upic@up.gov.in.
• Mobile Number: 9415021746.
• Landline Number: 0522-2724941.

---

Concerned Public Authority (Erosion of Transparency in UPIC)

• Organization: Uttar Pradesh Information Commission (UPIC).
• Location: 7/7A, RTI Bhawan, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, PIN: 226010.
• Internal Section Referenced: CATS-UPSI (Computerized Application Tracking System).

Core Web and Contact Links (Erosion of Transparency in UPIC)

• Official RTI Portal (UP): rtionline.up.gov.in.
• Public Authority Website: upsic.gov.in (Uttar Pradesh Information Commission).