|Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <email@example.com>|
|How can Deputy Registrar central registry return the second appeal in order to seek the copy of the reply of CPIO and FAA when no such communication was made with the information seeker?|
On 14 February 2018 at 01:10, Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
ToChief Information Commissioner of IndiaThe Central Information Commission,August Kranti Bhawan,Bhikaji Cama Place,New Delhi – 110066An application under article 51 A of the constitution of India seeking the attention of the accountable public functionaries of the government of India.Subject-Deputy Registrar central registry of central information commission returned the second appeal of Ekta Singh aggrieved lady sought information under subsection 1 of section 6 of Right to Information Act 2005 on flimsy ground as follows.Ground of rejection -1-Copy of R.T.I. Application submitting to CPIO is not enclosed.2-Copy of reply if received any from the CPIO, is not enclosed.3-Copy of reply if received any from the FAA, is not enclosed.Here role of Deputy Registrar central registry is sheer negative and unproductive as well as causing great damage to the spirit of the august act.Reply of the applicant is as follows-1-Since the RTI Application submitted online ipso facto obvious from the registration numbers of the application and the appeal, and online portal allow application in PDF form attached with the application so entire records available to the applicant was attached with the second appeal submitted online under subsection 3 of the section 19 of the Right to Information Act 2005. Information sought was attached with the second appeal as supportive document and Deputy Registrar without thoroughly examining the submitted document reached on wrong conclusion which is reflection of his insolence and dereliction to the public duty.2-When no reply was made by CPIO, then how the copy of reply, may be submitted by the appellant?3-When no reply was made by FAA, then how the copy of reply, may be submitted by the appellant?The act of Deputy Registrar central registry is ultravires to Right to Information Act 2005 as he is forcibly seeking those copies which were not exchanged by the CPIO and FAA with the information seeker.With due respect, applicant invites the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.1-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that matter is concerned with the communication dated 30-Jan-2018,Return of your Second Appeal/Complaint for removal of deficiencies.30 Janto meDear Madam/Sir,Your request details are given below:1 Appellant Name Ekta Singh2 Address Village-Patevar, Village Panchayat-Patevar, Block-Pateharaa, Police station – Marihan, District-Mirzapur, Post office-Marihan3 Diary Number 6105144 Diary Date 24-01-20185 Letter Date 01-01-1970Your Dak (Diary No. 610514) has been returned vide Facilitation Memo date 30/01/2018. Please click here to view Facilitation Memo.Regards,Central Information Commission (CIC)2-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that please take a glance of communication exchanged between aggrieved lady Ekta Singh and deputy registrar. 3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that Hon‘ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance at attached document with the representation.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 the mockery of law of land. This is need of the hour to take harsh steps against the wrongdoer 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 sincerelyYogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road District- Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.