A man of integrity as Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh is the need of hour.


Please consider on my submissions on priority basis which would cultivate positive results.

yogimpsingh@gmail.com

Attachments6:55 PM (1 hour ago)

to supremecourtcsuphgovuppmosburgent-action, bcc: cmup, bcc: uphrclko, bcc: lokayukta, bcc: secretary, bcc: sec.sic
 “An application under article 32 of constitution of India.”
To
         Hon’ble Chief Justice of India /Companion judges of Apex court of India
                                      New Delhi , India
Petitioner- Mahesh Pratap Singh (Yogi M. P. Singh)
            Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road 
           District-Mirzapur , Uttar Pradesh ,India .
Respondent-1- Chief secretary , Government of 
                 Uttar Pradesh , Lucknow (U. P.)
           2-Principal secretary , Governor ,
Government of Uttar Pradesh , Lucknow (U.P.)
Prayer -Please direct Government of Uttar Pradesh to appoint Lokayukta in the state by adopting due procedure of law which may be in accordance with the spirit of constitution of India. Hon’ble Sir Chief Justice of High court is the Guardian of constitution at the state level so he may not overlooked in the appointment of anti-corruption ombudsman  in the state
.
With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
Central Government Act
Article 51A in The Constitution Of India 1949

51A. Fundamental duties It shall be the duty of every citizen of India
 (a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the national Flag and the National Anthem; How is it feasible if Government functionaries itself are not pursuing the provisions of constitution? Why Government of Uttar Pradesh bypassing the chief justice of High court at Allahabad in appointing the anti-corruption ombudsman in this largest state of Government of India. If Hon’ble Sir considers it mere apprehension as no direct evidence in the matter but circumstantial evidence is proving the evil design of government of Uttar Pradesh.
(b) to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom; If followed entire life will be spent in defending false and fabricated cases instituted in various courts as a consequent of hatched conspiracy of corrupt public functionaries. Your petitioner is itself such victim.
(c) to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India; Senior I.P.S. Officer  Mr. Amitabh Thakur has been suspended by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. Because he raised the voice against is suppression.
(d) to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so;
(e) to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India . Whether it is feasible by awarding the key posts in the administration to the members of particular cast as quite common practice in the Government of Uttar Pradesh . transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women; Even F.I.R. Is not lodged in the matters concerned with the atrocity on women in the Government of Uttar Pradesh if lodged no action is taken by the concerned staff of Government.
(f) to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;
(g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures; Billions of public fund flown for plantation under MGNREGA but not a single tree is seen. Fund meant to plantation gone into the pockets of concerned public functionaries. Trees of forest areas  are being  blindly cut by taking  government staff under good faith. Disturbed climate is its consequent.  
(h) to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform;Hon’ble Sir this is also enquiry in order to reform our Government machinery. Your applicant expects that prayers would not be overlooked on flimsy ground.
(i) to safeguard public property and to abjure violence; There is ample evidence that public property is being managed to convert into private property by adopting various tricks but no one is taking action as most are adopting the same path i.e. Path of least time to get riches.
(j) to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement PART V THE UNION CHAPTER I THE EXECUTIVE The President and Vice President. If our public functionaries will have broad thinking by keeping the selfish motives at the bay and meditate on the building up strong nation. Why police is not interrogating stalwart leader of ruling party instead of making efforts to suppress the voice of whistleblower ipsofacto obvious from the media reports . Whether every one is alike before the law. If the Government of Uttar Pradesh is really honest in its dealings ,then entire episode may be referred to C.B.I. Which will build up the confidence of people of state in the state government machinery.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
Central Government Act
Article 32 in The Constitution Of India 1949

32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part. Please safeguard our fundamental rights.
(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clause ( 1 ) and ( 2 ), Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause ( 2 )
(4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by this Constitution
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whether it is justified and in accordance with the provisions of constitution of India-
मनमाफिक नियुक्ति में पेंच फंस जाने के बाद राज्य सरकार ने लोकायुक्त चयन में हाईकोर्ट केचीफ जस्टिस की भूमिका ही खत्म कर दी है। लोकायुक्त की नियुक्ति अब मुख्यमंत्री कीअध्यक्षता वाली पांच सदस्यीय कमेटी करेगी। इसके लिए यूपी लोकायुक्त तथा उप लोकायुक्तअधिनियम 1975 में संशोधन के प्रस्ताव को कैबिनेट बाई सर्कुलेशन मंजूरी दे दी गई है।
सरकार विधानमंडल के मानसून सत्र में संशोधन विधेयक पेश करेगी। विधेयक पास होते हीसीएम की अध्यक्षता वाली कमेटी को लोकायुक्त चयन का अधिकार मिल जाएगा। सरकार के इसफैसले से लोकायुक्त चयन में चीफ जस्टिस की कोई भूमिका नहीं रह जाएगी।
यह सारी कवायद नए लोकायुक्त की नियुक्ति को लेकर सुप्रीम कोर्ट के कड़े रुख को देखते हुएबेहद गोपनीय ढंग से की जा रही है। सूत्रों का कहना है कि केरल समेत कई राज्यों में लोकायुक्तचयन प्रक्रिया का अध्ययन कराने के बाद संशोधन का ड्राफ्ट तैयार कराया गया है। सरकार केभरोसेमंद सूत्रों के अनुसार इस संशोधन प्रस्ताव को हाल ही में बाई सर्कुलेशन कैबिनेट की मंजूरीमिली है।
 4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that it was discretion of Hon’ble C.J.I. As he has more experience in regard to working style of a judge but instead of seeking the assent on the name of other candidate ,accountable functionaries of the Government is making efforts to change the set up norms and rules. Where is transparency and accountability in the processing of appointment of anti-corruption ombudsman? How can it be justified that state government functionaries  may impose its decisions on Chief justice of High court of judicature who is head of institution which is supreme guardian of constitution at state level. Hon’ble C.J. Will not allow the state executives to play with the provisions of constitution  and act against the spirit of constitution.
मुख्यमंत्री ने नेता प्रतिपक्ष से सलाह के बाद फरवरी में लोकायुक्त पद के लिए इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्टके न्यायाधीश जस्टिस रवींद्र सिंह यादव का नाम चीफ जस्टिस के पास भेजा था। चीफ जस्टिस नेउनके नामपर असहमति जता दी तो सरकार चयन प्रक्रिया में ही बदलाव करने की तैयारी मेंजुट गई थी। अंततदूसरे राज्यों की तर्ज पर यहां भी चयन में चीफ जस्टिस की भूमिका ही खत्मकरने का फैसला कर लिया।
यूपी लोकायुक्त तथा उप लोकायुक्त अधिनियम 1975 की धारा 3 (के अनुसार मुख्यमंत्री औरनेता विरोधी दल की चयन समिति लोकायुक्त का नाम तय करके उसे परामर्श के लिए हाईकोर्ट केचीफ जस्टिस के पास भेजती है। उनकी सहमति के बाद राज्यपाल लोकायुक्त की नियुक्ति करतेहैं।
5-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that already one years delay in the appointment of anticorruption ombudsman itself explaining the will power of state government in regard to appointment of Lokayukt and made efforts after the notice of Hon’ble apex court is itself condemnable . We citizenry in the state sufferer of rampant corruption in most of the departments of state government wants immediate appointment of Lokayukt who may be man of integrity.
लोकायुक्त की नियुक्ति मुख्यमंत्रीनेता प्रतिपक्षविधानसभा अध्यक्षसरकार के एक वरिष्ठमंत्री तथा मुख्य न्यायाधीश द्वारा नामित उच्च न्यायालय के न्यायाधीश की समिति करेगी।
एक साल से ज्यादा वक्त बीत जाने के बाद भी नए लोकायुक्त की नियुक्ति  होने पर हाल ही मेंसुप्रीम कोर्ट ने राज्य सरकार को नोटिस जारी किया था।
बृहस्पतिवार को भी इस मामले की सुनवाई करते हुए सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने मुख्य सचिव से पूछा है किपिछले साल अप्रैल में दिए गए आदेश के बाद अभी तक क्या कार्यवाही की गई है
इसके लिए बुधवार तक विस्तृत हलफनामा दाखिल करने का आदेश दिया गया है। अब सरकार,लोकायुक्त के चयन के लिए हुई बैठकोंउसके कार्यवृत्त और चीफ जस्टिस के साथ हुए पत्राचार कापूरा ब्यौरा तैयार करा रही है।
6-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that ruling party in the state by appointing own candidates having loyalty to political masters  at various constitutional posts in the state have crippled the constitutional institutions in the state. No rule of law is being followed any where in the state. To withhold sought information even complaint files are set to missing. Even in long four-five years processing in appeals filed under subsection 3 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005 in UPSIC , don’t provide sought information to information seekers. Hon’ble Sir please take a glance of annexures with this representation.
Whether chief information commissioner UPSIC would be instrumental in providing sought information to your applicant.
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
6:58 PM (3 minutes ago)
    to sec.sic, supremecourt, secy-cic, pmosb, urgent-action, cmup, csup, hgovup
An application under subsection 3 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005.
11 July 2015
17:32
To
                           Chief Information Commissioner
                          Government of Uttar Pradesh , Indira Bhawan .
                               Sixth floor ,Lucknow
Appellant-Yogi M. P. Singh
Mohalla-Surekapuram ,Jabalpur Road
District-Mirzapur (Uttar Pradesh)
Respondents-1-Public Information Officer,
State Information Commission
 Government of Uttar Pradesh , Indira Bhawan .
 Sixth floor ,Lucknow
2-First appellate authority,
State Information Commission
 Government of Uttar Pradesh , Indira Bhawan .
 Sixth floor ,Lucknow
Prayer-Not a single point information was made available by PIO ,UPSIC Lucknow as sought by appellant through the RTI Communique 07/03/2015 and blunder on the part of PIO is that he didn’t deem fit to make correspondence in regard to sought information and first appellate authority also took under teeth the provisions of transparency act by overlooking the first appeal of appellant made under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005 dated 14-May-2015. Copy of R.T.I. Communique and first appeal is attached with this representation.
With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that your appellant sought information in regard to following representation which subject is as follows – Whether this is not criminal breach of trust that information 
commissioner , once impose the penalty after number of 
hearings but latter revoke it in the absence of complainants by colluding with the corrupt 
staff of Government.
Yogi M. P. Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 10:37 PM To: supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, sec.sic@up.nic.in, pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, urgent­action <urgent­ action@ohchr.org>, hgovup@up.nic.in
cmup <cmup@up.nic.in>, csup <csup@up.nic.in>
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whether such body will promote transparency and accountability in the public offices which itself doesn’t like transparency and accountability in its office .
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that  those who itself don’t regard the provisions of Right to Information Act 2005 , how can be instrumental in enforcement of provisions of Right to Information Act 2005.
4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that in two financial years only two PIOs of Mirzapur district were penalized and most surprising that pecuniary penalty imposed on them was not recovered from their salaries. Whether this is not signal of anarchy.
5-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
Please don’t allow any one to make mockery of Right to Information Act 2005.
  
 Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh
Sat, May 23, 2015 at 6:11 PM
To: “sec.sic” <sec.sic@up.nic.in>
An appeal under subsection 3 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005.
23 May 2015
17:03
To
                                       Chief Information Commissioner
                                          Government of Uttar Pradesh
                                        Indira Bhawan , Sixth floor Lucknow (U.P)
Subject-To direct the Executive Engineer EDD II Mirzapur to made available sought information as sought by your appellant through R.T.I. Communique dated 08/02/2015 . This R.T.I. Communique along with relevant annexures are attached with this appeal.
With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that your appellant through aforesaid R.T.I. Cmmunique sought information under six points . This R.T.I. Communique was sent through speed registered post as well as copies to various government authorities through e-mails.
Please direct Executive Engineer ,electricity distribution division (II),Fataha ,Mirzapur to made available sought information as invited through R.T.I. Communique 08.02.2015 attached with this representation.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
Executive engineer EDD II Mirzapur did not furnish access to information as sought by your applicant through RTI Communique 08/02/2015 .
Yogi M. P. Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
11:58 AM (8 minutes ago)
to supremecourt, sec.sic, pmosb, urgent-action, cmup, hgovup, csup
Executive engineer EDD II Mirzapur did not furnish access to information as sought by your applicant through RTI Communique 08/02/2015 .
An application under subsection (1) of section (19) of Right to Information Act 2005.
Subject-Sheer violation of provisions of Right to Information Act 2005 by the Executive Engineer EDD II Mirzapur.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that this is the need of hour to take harsh steps against Executive Engineer EDD II Mirzapur who not only violated the provisions of RTI Act 2005 wilfully but acted against the spirit of transparency Act.
   
Why these officers are not providing sought information ? Because they know that no action would be taken against them . As this is set up precedent that no erring PIOs are penalized in this district as far as documents reveal , it may be same practice may be in other districts.
This is humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that It can never be justified to overlook  the rights of citizenry by delivering services in arbitrary manner by floating all set up norms. This is sheer mismanagement which is encouraging wrongdoers to reap benefit of loopholes in system and depriving poor citizens from right to justice. Therefore it is need of hour to take concrete steps in order to curb grown anarchy in the system. For this your applicant shall ever pray you Hon’ble Sir.
                           ‘Yours  sincerely
                            Yogi M. P. Singh
Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road District-Mirzapur , Uttar Pradesh ,India
Sent from Windows Mail

2 comments on A man of integrity as Lokayukta of Uttar Pradesh is the need of hour.

  1. मुख्यमंत्री ने नेता प्रतिपक्ष से सलाह के बाद फरवरी में लोकायुक्त पद के लिए इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्टके न्यायाधीश जस्टिस रवींद्र सिंह यादव का नाम चीफ जस्टिस के पास भेजा था। चीफ जस्टिस नेउनके� नामपर असहमति जता दी तो सरकार चयन प्रक्रिया में ही बदलाव करने की तैयारी मेंजुट गई थी। अंतत: दूसरे राज्यों की तर्ज पर यहां भी चयन में चीफ जस्टिस की भूमिका ही खत्मकरने का फैसला कर लिया।

  2. This is sheer unjustified decision of the government of Uttar Pradesh and in my personal view ,there is hatched conspiracy to linger the appointment of anti-corruption ombudsman. How much anarchy in the state that matter is pending before the apex court of India but no hurry in order to appoint the anticorruption ombudsman. Most of the ministers facing the charges of corruption but such allegations are piercing the ears of concerned.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: