As they take surcharge from consumers on delay payment likewise they must also pay the surcharge.

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
B.S.N.L.Staffs have not paid still my security deposit. As they take surcharge from consumers on delay payment likewise they must also pay the surcharge.
1 message
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 20 October 2017 at 02:42
To: pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, presidentofindia@rb.nic.in, supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, urgent-action <urgent-action@ohchr.org>, cmup <cmup@up.nic.in>, hgovup@up.nic.in, uphrclko <uphrclko@yahoo.co.in>, “csup@up.nic.in” <csup@up.nic.in>

Modi Sir undoubtedly every transaction must be done through banks but your applicant paid
entire bill of B.S.N.L. U.P. East through internet banking but they are sending me the cheque
after undue procrastination.
Most revered Sir –Your applicant invites the kind attention of Hon’ble Sir with due respect to following submissions as follows. 1-It has been submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that on 15 Sep 2017 your PG. wing informed as- Kindly refer to your grievance registered under the above docket number. The said grievance was forwarded to the concerned service provider who has intimated that. : The Cheque no 026385 dtd13/09/2017 of RS 497/- is issued in the name of Mahesh Pratap Singh pls. The case may be closed. PG WING DOT HEADQUARTER. It is unfortunate that neither cheque nor any amount was provided to your applicant still.2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that you are expected to refund the aforesaid amount as soon as possible in the following account without any more undue delay and procrastination. Account Number 00000034645721675 Branch MIRZAPUR CITY, Address- S/O RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH, JABALPUR ROAD SUREKHAPURAM BASTI BATHUA, POST- SANGAMOHAL, Mirzapur, Pincode-231001 Account Name Mr MAHESH PRATAP SINGH CIF No.- 88167135558 IFS Code- SBIN0012731.3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that 

Registration Number : DOTEL/E/2017/33290
Name Of Complainant : Yogi M P Singh
Date of Receipt : 20 Sep 2017

 If according to the aforementioned report submitted to aforementioned registration number

: DOTEL/E/2017/33290

cheque dated 13/09/2017 issued in the name of Mahesh Pratap Singh, then where is missing that cheque? Why is your applicant still deprived of that cheque?Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh 28 September 2017 at 19:01 To: cgm_upe@bsnl.co.in An appeal under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005 was submitted online by your appellant on date-27/09/2017 which was forwarded to you Hon’ble Sir today i.e. on 28/09/2017 before taking any decision please ensure whether the cheque was made available to your appellant or not. To                                                                                                                                                 CGMT UP(E)                                                                                                                                                Phone: 05222623600                                                               cgm_upe@bsnl.co.in Subject-Where is cheque issued as The Cheque no 026385 dtd13/09/2017 of RS 497/- is issued in the name of Mahesh Pratap Singh pls.? Most revered Sir –Your applicant invites the kind attention of Hon’ble Sir with due respect to following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that from beginning your appellant was requesting that his deposited security amount be refunded to my account as your appellant always paid your dues through net banking immediately but it seems that they are only asking my account number and IFS code but doing nothing as usual. Hon’ble Sir all these correspondences whether under Right to Information Act 2005 or simply in order to get the grievance redressed focused at security amount Rs.497.00 be refunded and those harassed be subjected to penal action in accordance with the law of land. Everything is cheating if security amount Rs.497.00 is not provided to your appellant. Undue delay and continued procrastination have already put the credibility of public authority at the nadir.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that one cryptic word technicalities proved loophole for wrongdoers and well protected them. Whether such practice can be allowed in good governance and not raising the question mark in regard to transparency and accountability in the working of public authority. Democracy doesn’t mean that citizenry be subjected to the arbitrariness of few corrupt people by keeping the rule of law at the bank.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that my account details are available with this representation/forwarded e-mail so before reaching any conclusion in regard to the following appeal, refund of security amount be ensured.
 

                   
This is a humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that how can it be justified to withhold public services arbitrarily and promote anarchy, lawlessness and chaos in an arbitrary manner by making a mockery of law of land? This is need of the hour to take harsh steps against the wrongdoers in order to win the confidence of citizenry and strengthen the democratic values for healthy and prosperous democracy. For this, your applicant shall ever pray you, Hon’ble Sir.

                                                         Yours sincerely

                                              Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh. Pin code-231001. 

: 31


3 attachments
img315.jpg
438K
BSNL made the mockery of law of land.pdf
311K
Application to CPIO BSNL U P East.pdf
474K
0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh

Hon’ble Sir that from beginning your appellant was requesting that his deposited security amount be refunded to my account as your appellant always paid your dues through net banking immediately but it seems that they are only asking my account number and IFS code but doing nothing as usual. Hon'ble Sir all these correspondences whether under Right to Information Act 2005 or simply in order to get the grievance redressed focused at security amount Rs.497.00 be refunded and those harassed be subjected to penal action in accordance with the law of land. Everything is cheating if security amount Rs.497.00 is not provided to your appellant. Undue delay and continued procrastination have already put the credibility of public authority at the nadir.

Preeti Singh
3 years ago

Hon’ble Sir that one cryptic word technicalities proved loophole for wrongdoers and well protected them. Whether such practice can be allowed in good governance and not raising the question mark in regard to transparency and accountability in the working of public authority. Democracy doesn't mean that citizenry be subjected to the arbitrariness of few corrupt people by keeping the rule of law at the bank.