CPIO Air force denied to provide answer sheets so appeal made to CIC ipso facto corruption

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
It has been practice not to provide sought information under R.T.I. Act 2005 if it is listed after two and half years in commission and commission if orders then information is provided.
1 message
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 18 November 2019 at 14:37
To: Anjali Anand Srivastava <secy-cic@nic.in>, aoaweb@iaf.nic.in, pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, presidentofindia@rb.nic.in, supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, urgent-action <urgent-action@ohchr.org>
An appeal under subsection 3 of section 19 of the Right to Information Act 2005 as CPIO did not provide the sought information on flimsy ground and FAA blindly supported the withheld of sought information by the CPIO cryptically by not entertaining the first appeal submitted under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005.
To
                                  Chief Information Commissioner of India
                                The Central Information Commission,
                                            Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka,
                              New Delhi – 110 067
Appellant Yogi M. P. Singh, Mohalla-Surekapuram
Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code -231001
Mobile number-7379105911
                Versus
1-Central Public Information Officer, Soman Adhikari, Wing Commander
2-First Appellate Authority, Air Marshal PP Bapat VSM, Air Officer in-charge Administration, Air Headquarters (Vayu Bhawan)  Rafi Marg, New Delhi -110106 
Sir, in this case, subsection 1 J section 8 is not applicable as the information sought on behalf of aggrieved aspirant Satyjeet whose affidavit and CPIO denial of sought information is attached to this appeal under subsection 3 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005.  
With due respect, your appellant wants to draw 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 please take a glance of the status of the R.T.I. Communique.
Enter Registration Number MODEF/R/2019/80463
Name Yogi M P Singh
Date of filing 22/04/2019
Public Authority Department of Defence
Status REQUEST PHYSICALLY TRANSFERRED TO OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITY
Date of action 23/04/2019
Details of Public Authority :- Indian Air Force
Nodal Officer Details :-
Telephone Number 011-23016813
Email Id pawank.doc@nic.in

Detail of the R.T.I. Communique is attached to the appeal.


2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that according to CPIO reply

Air HQ/23401//204/4/16879/E/PS dated 24-May-2019
– Sought information under Right to Information Act 2005 is personal which disclosure has no relationship to any public activity or interest and it would cause unwarranted invasion on the privacy of the individual. Therefore sought information is denied under subsection 1 J section 8 of Right to Information Act 2005.

3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that 
A SCHEDULED TEST FOR AIRMEN RECRUITMENT: Mar 2019, On behalf of Satyjeet, applicant invites the following information from respected CPIO in regard to the aforementioned recruitment.
A 1-Answer sheet of physics of Satyjeet whose Registration No: 19030019135 of group X.
A 2-Answer sheet of the math of Satyjeet whose Registration No: 19030019135 of group X
Mark sheet is herewith attached.
Here it is crystal clear that aforementioned information is sought by the appellant on behalf of the aggrieved aspirant Satyjeet so how the information is personal if individual itself is seeking information as not satisfied with the cryptic dealings of the recruiting agency? Hon’ble Sir affidavit of the Satyjeet addressed to appellate authority and others is attached to this appeal.
4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that according to CPIO sought information is not concerned with the any public activity or public interest. Whether to conduct “A SCHEDULED TEST FOR AIRMEN RECRUITMENT: Mar 2019″ this exam by recruiting agency is not public activity and in the wide public interest it must be carried out in transparent and accountable manner? Here activity of the recruiting agency is the pure public work consequently sought information is not exempted from the disclosure under section 8 and 9 of the transparency act 2005.

5-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 No. 22 of 2005
[15th June, 2005.] An Act to provide for setting out the practical regime of right to information for citizens to secure access to information under the control of public authorities, in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of every public authority. Whether denial of the sought information would be plausible by misinterpreting the provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005? Undoubtedly act of CPIO is ultra vires to august act i.e, Right to Information Act 2005 and reflection of the sheer insolence.

                     This is a humble request of the 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 sincerely


Date-18-11-2019              Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.

3 attachments
First appeal Satyjeet.pdf
1478K
RTI Communique cpio.pdf
208K
First appeal.pdf
117K

3 comments on CPIO Air force denied to provide answer sheets so appeal made to CIC ipso facto corruption

  1. Sir, in this case, subsection 1 J section 8 is not applicable as the information sought on behalf of aggrieved aspirant Satyjeet whose affidavit and CPIO denial of sought information is attached to this appeal under subsection 3 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005.

  2. How will they provide the answer sheet if they are well apprised with the fact that there is no transparency and accountability in the recruitment process of the department of defence.Most surprising is that central information commission itself playing negative role in providing the sought information to the information seekers. If complaint is made against wrongdoer information commissioners, then no action is taken against such black sheep.

  3. If every thing is O.K. , they why do they not providing the answer sheet to the information seeker on flimsy ground not consisting in this case.Undoubtedly there is no transparency and accountability in the recruitment process of the Air force otherwise what is objection in providing answer sheet to students as it will increase the credibility of the recruiting agency as well as department.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: