What a practice in India , denial of sought information was considered as information furnished to seeker as sought .

An appeal under subsection 3 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005 .


Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh yogimpsingh@gmail.com

7:56 PM (1 minute ago)

to sicurgent-actionpmosbsupremecourtddpg2-arpgsecypghgovupcmupcsup
Complaint-Yogi M. P. Singh
Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road 
District-Mirzapur
State-Uttar Pradesh
Country-India
Respondents- 1-Public Information Officer in the office of Chief secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh.
2-First Appellate authority in the office of Chief secretary , Government of Uttar Pradesh
3-Public Information Officer in the department of personnel ,Government of Uttar Pradesh.
4-First Appellate authority in the office of department of personnel   , Government of Uttar Pradesh.
Prayer-No information was made available by concerned and denial of sought information on flimsy ground by the PIO was justified by First Appellate Authority through cryptic words.
            Short submissions .
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that –
                                 Sought Information.
1-Please made available the copy of counter affidavit submitted by the government of uttar pradesh to High court.
2-What action was taken by Government of Uttar Pradesh on the submissions of your applicant ? Please made available the noting on the representation of your applicant as aforesaid.
3-How much loss incurred to public exchequer because of this long lasting strike called by few employee unions in order to pressurize the government.
4-Whether action was taken against few leaders who indulged in criminal activity during the strike.
5-Whether the principle of no work no pay was applied on strikers as the strikes are declared illegal by apex court of India.
6-Who afforded the huge loss incurred on public exchequer  due to this long lasted strike call by strikers under which provision  of law of land.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
Public Information Officer is denying sought information on the ground that matter is concerned with the pending litigation. Here this question arises that under which provision of Right to information Act 2005 ,applicant was denied sought information? He can deny the sought information under section 8&9 of Transparency Act but section aforesaid have no such provision that if sought information concerned with pending litigation, then such information exempted from disclosure.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that here role of first appellate authority is too much misleading and concealing the facts “as denial of information was considered by him as made available information by public information officer” through its letter dated 23-May-2014 as attachment to this e-mail.
This is humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that aforesaid sought information be made available to your applicant. Those accountable for creating hurdle in furnishing sought information must penalized in accordance with the law. For this your applicant shall ever pray you Hon’ble Sir. 
                                     
                 Your sincerely
             Yogi M. P. Singh
        Mohalla-Surekapuram ,Jabalpur Road

      District-Mirzapur ,State-Uttar Pradesh ,                 Country-    India

yogimpsingh

2 comments on What a practice in India , denial of sought information was considered as information furnished to seeker as sought .

  1. Every one knows that what is going on in this system behind the screen. Even a common man can understand the cause of withholding information by the staff of government of uttar pradesh.
    Sought Information.
    1-Please made available the copy of counter affidavit submitted by the government of uttar pradesh to High court.
    2-What action was taken by Government of Uttar Pradesh on the submissions of your applicant ? Please made available the noting on the representation of your applicant as aforesaid.
    3-How much loss incurred to public exchequer because of this long lasting strike called by few employee unions in order to pressurize the government.
    4-Whether action was taken against few leaders who indulged in criminal activity during the strike.
    5-Whether the principle of no work no pay was applied on strikers as the strikes are declared illegal by apex court of India.
    6-Who afforded the huge loss incurred on public exchequer due to this long lasted strike call by strikers under which provision of law of land.

  2. In public interest ,they had to make available sought information. There is something wrong so they are concealing the sought information. Matter is subjudice is not a solid ground to withhold sought information under transparency act. 8 (1)

    Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, there shall be no obligation to give any citizen,—(b)

    information which has been expressly forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal or the disclosure of which may constitute contempt of court;

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: