Whether the FAA adopted logistic aproach, then why information sought under point 2 is not being provided?

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
CPIO made the mockery of provisions of Right to Information Act 2005
1 message
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 27 March 2018 at 21:37
To: d.sonkar@nic.in, dircoop-ca@nic.in, uspc-ca@nic.in

An appeal under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005.
Subject-Arbitrary denial of sought information by CPIO and his inconsistent conclusions caused this appeal.
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 the appellant sought two-point information from CPIO and his summary denial is as follows.
Enter Registration Number
DOCAF/R/2018/50330
Name
Yogi M P Singh
Date of filing
22/03/2018
Public Authority
Department of Consumer Affairs
Status
REQUEST DISPOSED OF
Date of action
26/03/2018
Reply:- You have not sought information from the public authority under RTI Act. This does not fall within the purview of the Grievance Cell of this Department. You may file the complaint with the concerned company or with the Consumer Forum of your area to resolve your complaint.
CPIO Details :-
D K Sonkar- PG
Phone: 23073612
d.sonkar@nic.in
First Appellate Authority Details :-
S S Thakur
Phone: 23386210
dircoop-ca@nic.in
Nodal Officer Details :-
Telephone Number
01123382525
Email Id
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance of the sought information as follows. 1-Please direct concerned staffs of Micromax company to reply five queries as made by the information seeker in Complaint Number: 636695, Complaint Reg Date: 2018-03-09 01:14:17. For detail, vide attached documents.
2-On website whether queries are replied by corresponding responses or otherwise in the mysterious and cryptic way. If otherwise can be replied then provide circulars and guidelines.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that undoubtedly under point 1, whatever information sought, you/CPIO may claim before central information commission that information seeker is seeking redressal of grievance which does not come under the purview of Right to Information Act 2005 but at the same time if the staffs of company might be had replied the five queries as sought on the website of consumer affairs, then there was no need to seek the information under Right to Information Act 2005. The goal of transparency act is to enhance transparency and accountability in the working of public authority, how the queries sought by the information seeker on the website of consumer affairs were not replied by the staffs of the company consistently? If there is an instrument to seek queries on the website of consumer affairs from the company concerned, how the consumers can be denied such facilities? Whether such cryptic reply on the part of CPIO is not reflecting that he is acting in caucus with the company?
4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whatever information sought by the information seeker under point 2 must be provided by CPIO as the department accepted the cryptic summary clarification of the company staffs instead of pointwise reply corresponding to queries respectively. Which provision of law provided such discretion to concerned staffs of the department of consumer affairs to accept the cryptic summary clarification from the company at the place of reply of queries?
               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.


2 attachments
RTI Online __ Request_Appeal Form Details.pdf
186K
RTI Online __ View Status Form.pdf
164K
0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh

Hon'ble Sir that undoubtedly under point 1, whatever information sought, you/CPIO may claim before central information commission that information seeker is seeking redressal of grievance which does not come under the purview of Right to Information Act 2005 but at the same time if the staffs of company might be had replied the five queries as sought on the website of consumer affairs, then there was no need to seek the information under Right to Information Act 2005. The goal of transparency act is to enhance transparency and accountability in the working of public authority, how the queries sought by the information seeker on the website of consumer affairs were not replied by the staffs of the company consistently? If there is an instrument to seek queries on the website of consumer affairs from the company concerned, how the consumers can be denied such facilities? Whether such cryptic reply on the part of CPIO is not reflecting that he is acting in caucus with the company?

Preeti Singh
2 years ago

How much incompetent is the CPIO concerned that instead of providing sought information colluding with the staffs of the company in order to secure the wrong stand of the concerned staffs of the company?
Reply:- You have not sought information from the public authority under RTI Act. This does not fall within the purview of the Grievance Cell of this Department. You may file the complaint with the concerned company or with the Consumer Forum of your area to resolve your complaint.