CPIO High court of Judicature at Allahabad denied sought information after 1 year 3 months 25 days

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
Lawlessness, anarchy and arbitrariness originates from uncontrolled powers given to public servants.There must be a proper mechanism to control it.
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 25 April 2018 at 13:30
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, csup@up.nic.in, uphrclko <uphrclko@yahoo.co.in>, lokayukta@hotmail.com, Anjali Anand Srivastava <secy-cic@nic.in>, “sec. sic” <sec.sic@up.nic.in>

Subject- CPIO made available the denial of sought information dated 27/11/2016 on 22-March-2018 ipso facto obvious from his own communication. At the place of 30 days, CPIO High court of Judicature at Allahabad took 1 year 3 months 25 days in denying a sought information. Moreover, First Appellate Authority/ Registrar general High court of Judicature at Allahabad didn’t deem it fit to consider the appeal submitted under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005. The hearing took place before CIC on 23-March-2018 and aforementioned lacunae on the part of public authority High court of Judicature at Allahabad was brought up by the applicant before chief information commissioner of India but the outcome remained null ipso facto obvious from the attached scanned copy of the judgment of chief information commissioner of India.

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 whether undue, deliberate, willful delay i.e. 1 year 03 months and 25 days in denying sought information on the part of CPIO High court of Judicature can be condoned by the chief information commissioner of India. Most surprising when the applicant sought evidence in regard to claim of CPIO that he had provided the sought information during the hearing, then Chief Information Commissioner of India told me that his information is annexed to the paper book. Whether rule of law means, in the largest democracy like India, constitutional functionaries will be above the law?
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that during the hearing the applicant sought penal action against both CPIO and registrar general High court of Judicature at Allahabad as duo violated the provisions of Right to Information Act 2005 but the plea of the applicant overlooked by the chief information commissioner of India ipso facto obvious from the attached scanned copy of judgment of chief information commissioner of India. Whether under such circumstances, to seek information from the High court of Judicature at Allahabad is feasible? If the audio or video copy of the proceedings may be available, then please take a glance at proceedings.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that the applicant has paid Rs.250  not only Rs.50 as written in the order passed by the chief information commissioner of India and CPIO had asked me to pay the amount so that sought information could be made available but once the fee /demand draft made available neither CPIO nor registrar general High court of Judicature at Allahabad communicated and denial was made available by the CPIO after hearing took place before the chief information commissioner of India i.e. after 23-March-2018. Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance at the attached scanned copy of the documents.

                                           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.

 


[Quoted text hidden]


Undue deliberate delay by CPIO Highcourt condoned by CIC.pdf
950K
0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh

CPIO made available the denial of sought information dated 27/11/2016 on 22-March-2018 ipso facto obvious from his own communication. At the place of 30 days, CPIO High court of Judicature at Allahabad took 1 year 3 months 25 days in denying a sought information. Moreover, First Appellate Authority/ Registrar general High court of Judicature at Allahabad didn’t deem it fit to consider the appeal submitted under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005. The hearing took place before CIC on 23-March-2018 and aforementioned lacunae on the part of public authority High court of Judicature at Allahabad was brought up by the applicant before chief information commissioner of India but the outcome remained null ipso facto obvious from the attached scanned copy of the judgment of chief information commissioner of India.

Preeti Singh
2 years ago

At the place of 30 days, CPIO High court of Judicature at Allahabad took 1 year 3 months 25 days in denying a sought information. सोचिये ३० दिन की जगह १ वर्ष तीन महीने २५ दिन लिया गया केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी उच्च न्यायालय की सूचना देने से इनकार करने में और महत्वपूर्ण बात है की पत्र लिख कर जन सूचना शुल्क मागा गया और जैसे २५० रुपये डिमांड ड्राफ्ट पहुचा सभी चुप हो गये रजिस्ट्रार जनरल जो की प्रथम अपील अधिकारी है प्रथम अपील को ही दरकिनार कर दिया सारी बाते मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त को बताई गयी किन्तु वे भी कुछ नही कर पाए क्यों की मामला उच्च न्यायालय से सम्बंधित था |

Arun Pratap Singh
2 years ago

Whether such thing is the reflection of the good governance? Why do our accountable public functionaries adopt lackadaisical approach in dealings concerned with the serious allegations of infringement of the law.सोचिये ३० दिन की जगह १ वर्ष तीन महीने २५ दिन लिया गया केन्द्रीय जन सूचना अधिकारी उच्च न्यायालय की सूचना देने से इनकार करने में और महत्वपूर्ण बात है की पत्र लिख कर जन सूचना शुल्क मागा गया और जैसे २५० रुपये डिमांड ड्राफ्ट पहुचा सभी चुप हो गये रजिस्ट्रार जनरल जो की प्रथम अपील अधिकारी है प्रथम अपील को ही दरकिनार कर दिया सारी बाते मुख्य सूचना आयुक्त को बताई गयी किन्तु वे भी कुछ नही कर पाए क्यों की मामला उच्च न्यायालय से सम्बंधित था |