CIC fixed the appeal for hearing on 14/07/2020 against CPIO ministry of consumer affairs

CPIO denied information as

You have not sought information from public authority under RTI Act.

2-On website whether queries are replied by corresponding responses or otherwise in the mysterious and cryptic way. If otherwise can be replied then provide circulars and guidelines.

What is the need of N.C.H.? If the company will submit arbitrary reply.

PARTICULARS                                                    DESCRIPTION

Name-YOGI M. P. SINGH

Address-S/o. SHRI RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH, MOHALLA –SUREKAPURAM, JABALPUR ROAD, DISTT-MIRZAPUR, UP-231001

Diary No./Year- 677278/2020

Diary Date-09-07-2020

DAK Status Compliance/Non Compliance dak received File No.CIC/DOCAF/A/2018/632398 Pertaining CIC/ICNeeraj Kumar GuptaPublic AuthorityDepartment of Consumer AffairsCPIO AddressNATIONAL CONSUMER HELPLINE, PROJECT DIRECTOR, & CPIO, CENTRE FOR CONSUMER STUDIES, INDIAN INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, NEW DELHI – 110002

Speed Post numbered 623331948 in Compliance/Non

Compliance dak received — Means Dak received for Compliance /Non Compliance for earlier order of the commission.

CPIO made the mockery of provisions of Right to Information Act 2005

10 July 2020

12:13

Subject

CPIO made the mockery of provisions of Right to Information Act 2005

From

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh

To

d.sonkar@nic.in; dircoop-ca@nic.in; uspc-ca@nic.in

Sent

27 March 2018 21:37

Attachments

RTI Online __ Request_Appeal Form Details.pdf

RTI Online __ View Status Form.pdf

An appeal under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005.

Subject-Arbitrary denial of sought information by CPIO and his inconsistent conclusions caused 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 the appellant sought two point information from CPIO and his summary denial is as follows.

Enter Registration Number DOCAF/R/2018/50330
Name Yogi M P Singh
Date of filing 22/03/2018
Public Authority Department of Consumer Affairs
Status REQUEST DISPOSED OF
Date of action 26/03/2018
Reply :- You have not sought information from public authority under RTI Act. This does not fall within the purview of the Grievance Cell of this Department. You may file the complaint with the concerned company or with the Consumer Forum of your area to resolve of your complaint.
CPIO Details :- T T K Muan
Phone: 23384872
ttk.muan@nic.in
First Appellate Authority Details :- Sita Ram Meena PG
Phone: 011-23387737
dirpg-ca@gov.in
Nodal Officer Details :-
Telephone Number 01123381233
Email Id uspc-ca[at]nic[dot]in

Online RTI Request Form Details

RTI Request Details :-
RTI Request Registration number DOCAF/R/2018/50330
Public Authority Department of Consumer Affairs
Personal Details of RTI Applicant:-
Name Yogi M P Singh
Gender Male
Address Mohalla Surekapuram , Jabalpur Road , DISTRICT MIRZAPUR
Pincode 231001
Country India
State Uttar Pradesh
Status Urban
Educational Status Literate
Above Graduate
Phone Number Details not provided
Mobile Number +91-7379105911
Email-ID yogimpsingh[at]gmail[dot]com
Request Details :-
Citizenship Indian
Is the Requester Below Poverty Line ? No
(Description of Information sought (upto 500 characters)
Description of Information Sought
1-Please direct concerned staffs of Micromax company to reply five queries as made by the information seeker in Complaint Number: 636695, Complaint Reg Date: 2018-03-09 01:14:17. For detail, vide attached documents.
2-On website whether queries are replied by corresponding responses or otherwise in the mysterious and cryptic way. If otherwise can be replied then provide circulars and guidelines.
Concerned CPIO P Guite
Supporting document (only pdf upto 1 MB)

2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance of the sought information as follows. 1-Please direct concerned staffs of Micromax company to reply five queries as made by the information seeker in Complaint Number: 636695, Complaint Reg Date: 2018-03-09 01:14:17. For detail, vide attached documents.

2-On website whether queries are replied by corresponding responses or otherwise in the mysterious and cryptic way. If otherwise can be replied then provide circulars and guidelines.

3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that undoubtedly under point 1, whatever information sought, you/CPIO may claim before central information commission that information seeker is seeking redressal of grievance which does not come under the purview of Right to Information Act 2005 but at the same time if the staffs of company might had replied the five queries as sought on the website of consumer affairs, then there was no need to seek the information under Right to Information Act 2005. The goal of transparency act is to enhance transparency and accountability in the working of public authority, how the queries sought by the information seeker on the website of consumer affairs were not replied by the staffs of company consistently? If there is instrument to seek queries on the website of consumer affairs from the company concerned, how the consumers can be denied such facilities? Whether such cryptic reply on the part of CPIO is not reflecting that he is acting in caucus with the company?

4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whatever information sought by the information seeker under point 2 must be provided by CPIO as the department accepted the cryptic summary clarification of the company staffs instead of pointwise reply corresponding to queries respectively. Which provision of law provided such discretion to concerned staffs of the department of consumer affairs to accept the cryptic summary clarification from the company at the place of reply of queries?

               This is a humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that It can never be justified to overlook the rights of the citizenry by delivering services in an arbitrary manner by floating all set up norms. This is sheer mismanagement which is encouraging wrongdoers to reap the benefit of loopholes in the system and depriving poor citizens of the right to justice. Therefore it is need of the 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 Mobile number-7379105911

Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, India.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Arun Pratap Singh
4 months ago

CPIO denied information as

You have not sought information from public authority under RTI Act.

2-On website whether queries are replied by corresponding responses or otherwise in the mysterious and cryptic way. If otherwise can be replied then provide circulars and guidelines.

What is the need of N.C.H.? If the company will submit arbitrary reply.
If the applicant had not sought information under R.T.I. Act 2005, then why did he pay R.T.I. Fee and government accepted it.?

Preeti Singh
4 months ago

Please direct concerned staffs of Micromax company to reply five queries as made by the information seeker in Complaint Number: 636695, Complaint Reg Date: 2018-03-09 01:14:17. For detail, vide attached documents.
Matter is old as more than two years passed but no action was taken in the matter and most surprising thing is that if queries can be sought under existing norms set by the government to redress the grievances of the consumers, then department of consumer affairs had to direct the concerned staffs of the company to reply the queries of the aggrieved applicant.

Bhoomika Singh
Bhoomika Singh
4 months ago

Here it is quite obvious that aggrieved consumers can ask queries and this tool is available on the website of Ministry of Consumer Affairs which is known as national consumer helpline but company is not providing the responses of the query which is mockery of the lapland and when the information was sought by the information seeker concerned with this tool they are not providing any information and saying that such information does not come under the Ambit of Right to Information act 2005. Here this question arises that how the transparency and accountability will be promoted if corrupt government functionaries will adopt such reluctant approach.

Beerbhadra Singh
4 months ago

Nowadays is no information is being provided by the Central Public Information Officer as well as State Public Information Officer quite obvious from the cryptic dealings of the central information commission and the state information commission. Penalty imposed on wrongdoer Public Information officers will not be recovered by the concerned government then such illegal practice will remain continued.