My grievance for disposal was forwarded to Registrar general high court at Allahabad by DOJ.

Grievance Status

Print || Logout
Status as on 12 Dec 2015

Registration Number : DEPOJ/E/2015/01711
Name Of Complainant : Yogi M P Singh
Date of Receipt : 21 Nov 2015
Received by : Department of Justice
Forwarded to : Department of Justice
Contact Address : Jaisalmer House,
Mansingh Road,
New Delhi110011
Contact Number : 23385020
Grievance Description : 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 order dated-04/11/2015 passed by Hon’ble C.I.C. Of India is uploaded on the website of central information commission of India of which downloaded copy is attached with this representation. Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance of attached document with this representation. Decision: 4. The respondent is directed to provide the appellant, within 30 days of this order, information sought in the RTI application. The appeal is disposed of. Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties. (Vijai Sharma) Chief Information Commissioner 2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that Hon’ble Sir-Plese take a glance of order of High Court at Allahabad dated 13.4.2006 in writ no.20121 of 2006 delivered by justice Tarun Agrawala as follows- Apparently , the impugned order dated. 1.2.2006 is against the teeth of the direction given by this court in its judgement dated 16.5.2005(it may be 16/04/2004 order passed by Justice Jgadish Bhalla) . Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 to 4 will file counter affidavit within three weeks explaining as to what the respondent mean by the words “Sadharan Vetanman”. List immediately thereafter. Sd/-Tarun Agarwala J. 13.4.2006 Respondents-1-Director secondary education Arth-1 Allahabad ( is the necessary party in the matter concerned) 2-Assistant deputy director secondary education working in the of director of secondary education .Allahabad. 3-D.D.R. Mirzapur.4-DIOS Mirzapur. 5-Committee of management R.I.C. Naugaon ,Mirzapur. 3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that Here counter affidavit was submitted on behalf of DIOS Mirzapur on behalf of respondent no.2,3,4, most surprising is that DIOS Mirzapur states in its letter that he had complied the order of court but same was returned back by director secondary education Arth-1 Allahabad . But the necessary party in the case ie respondent no.1 who superseded the judgement of court dated- 16/04/2004 order passed by Justice Jgadish Bhalla attached with this representation still did not abide by the order of High Court. Hon’ble Sir- Even a common man can understand that order passed in the writ no.20121 of year 2006 is against the impugned order dated 1.2.2006 passed by director education Arth-1 Allahabad. Here this question arises that when counter affidavit was not submitted by director ,then how court will ascertain the role of director if he is found guilty of non -compliance the order whether that will require one more writ already five writs filed by petitioner in order to seek justice so that his accountability may be decided. Why director secondary education Arth Allahabad did not comply the direction of High court at Allahabad? DIOS Mirzapur can submit its own submissions not on behalf of respondent 2 and 3 whether view points of DIOS can be view points of respondent 2 and 3. Respondent 2 and 3 still did not submit any counter submissions. Here petioner is aggrieved with the director as he superseded the direction of High court.
Current Status : CASE CLOSED
Your Feedback :
Good
Date of Action : 23 Nov 2015
Details : The grievance has been forwarded to the Registrar General, Allahabad High Court for further action, as appropriate.

2 comments on My grievance for disposal was forwarded to Registrar general high court at Allahabad by DOJ.

  1. Hon'ble Sir- Even a common man can understand that order passed in the writ no.20121 of year 2006 is against the impugned order dated 1.2.2006 passed by director education Arth-1 Allahabad. Here this question arises that when counter affidavit was not submitted by director ,then how court will ascertain the role of director if he is found guilty of non -compliance the order whether that will require one more writ already five writs filed by petitioner in order to seek justice so that his accountability may be decided. Why director secondary education Arth Allahabad did not comply the direction of High court at Allahabad? DIOS Mirzapur can submit its own submissions not on behalf of respondent 2 and 3 whether view points of DIOS can be view points of respondent 2 and 3. Respondent 2 and 3 still did not submit any counter submissions. Here petioner is aggrieved with the director as he superseded the direction of High court.

  2. It is obligatory duty of each public authority that it may ensure transparency and accountability in its functions. Think about the order passed in2006 for director secondary education to submit counter affidavit before the high court of judicature at Allahabad within four weeks but nine years passed and unfortunately order of high court of judicature at Allahabad still not complied by director secondary education arth-1 Allahabad. Now accountable staffs of high court of judicature at Allahabad feel insult in providing information that whether direction of high court of judicature at Allahabad was complied or not. Consequently CPIO disobeyed the order passed by chief information Commissioner of India.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: