Whether Lucknow police can’t distinguish civil remedy and criminal remedy?

 

 

 

 

Grievance Status for
registration number : DPOST/E/2019/29905
Grievance Concerns To
Name Of Complainant-Yogi M. P. Singh Date of Receipt-29/11/2019
Received By Ministry/Department-Posts
Grievance Description
Posts
>> Delay/ Non – Delivery/Abstraction of Postal Articles >> Domestic
>> Registered letters/Registered letters with acknowledgement
Track/Trace
No. : RU525418145IN
Post
Office of Booking/PINCODE : 226001
Division
: SSLKO
———————–
Matter
is urgent but concerned staffs are procrastinating since five days. All the
requisite information is attached with the grievance so take a glance of them
for proceedings in the matter.
Grievance Document
Current Status-Under process Date of Action-02/12/2019
Remarks-Please take appropriate action to
resolve the issue and provide satisfactory reply to the complainant at an
earliest.
Officer Concerns To
Officer Name-B.P. Tripathi Officer Designation-SSRM O Division Lucknow
Contact Address-Sr Supdt RMS O Division Lucknow
Email Address-ssrmodnlko@gmail.com
Contact Number-05222635733
Reminder(s) / Clarification(s) Reminder Date
Remarks-29/11/2019
Sir
matter is urgent but communication did not reach to destination still is a
matter of great concern consequently take appropriate action in the matter
under intimation to the applicant. Following is the current status of the
registered post sent by the aggrieved applicant. Please ensure the delivery as
soon as possible otherwise in case of denial by concerned office
communication must be returned back to address of the sender after appropriate
proceedings.Mirzapur City SO 22/11/2019 13:03:27 226001 32.00 Registered Post
Lucknow GPO Event Details For : RU525418145INCurrent Status : Item Bagged Date
Time Office Event 24/11/2019 16:21:31 CRC Lucknow RMS Item Bagged 24/11/2019
11:50:21 CRC Lucknow RMS Item Received 23/11/2019 04:33:27 Mirzapur RMS L2R
Item Bagged 22/11/2019 23:08:10 Mirzapur RMS L2R Item Received 22/11/2019
13:03:27 Mirzapur City SO Item Booked

 

 

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
मामला गृह सचिव उत्तर प्रदेश शासन से सम्बंधित है क्यों की उनका रोल एक सुपरवाइजरी बाड़ी का है |
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 28 November 2019 at 21:34
To: shome@nic.in, pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, presidentofindia@rb.nic.in, supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, urgent-action <urgent-action@ohchr.org>, hgovup@up.nic.in, cmup <cmup@up.nic.in>, csup@up.nic.in
Sir think about the gravity of situation that R.T.I. Appeal reached to Lucknow within two days but within next four days, it could not be delivered. Whether it is not surprising? Think about the credibility of the system. Where is lacunae must be traced by the accountable public functionaries?
Most revered Sir –Your applicant invites the kind attention of Hon’ble Sir with due respect to the following submissions as follows.

 

1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that why delivery of the post couldn’t be ensured with next four days as from the initial pace of the post it is quite obvious that within two days it reached to Lucknow so no need to fix the accountability of the staffs of the post.
Booked At
Booked On
Destination Pincode
Tariff
Article Type
Delivery Location
Mirzapur City SO
22/11/2019 13:03:27
226001
32.00
Registered Post
Lucknow GPO
Event Details For : RU525418145IN
Current Status : Item Bagged
Date
Time
Office
Event
24/11/2019
16:21:31
CRC Lucknow RMS
Item Bagged
24/11/2019
11:50:21
CRC Lucknow RMS
Item Received
23/11/2019
04:33:27
Mirzapur RMS L2R
Item Bagged
22/11/2019
23:08:10
Mirzapur RMS L2R
Item Received
22/11/2019
13:03:27
Mirzapur City SO
Item Booked
  2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that following is the receipt of the registered post  which must be perused by Hon’ble Sir.
img044.jpg

Contact Home department First, Second and Third Floor,

Lal Bahadur Shastri Bhawan ( Annexy Building )
Sarojini Naidu Marg, Lucknow ,
Uttar Pradesh, India. Pin: 226001 
Phone Number : 0522-2239295, 0522-2239279, 0522-2238299
Fax : 05222238409
Email Address : shome@nic.in
   3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that why do our public functionaries run away from the truth quite obvious from the live examples? Home secretary is respondent number in the order / verdict passed by the Lucknow bench of the High court of judicature at Allahabad. He must tell the applicant why contempt of court was committed by the police of state capital Lucknow just under the nose of central office of the home department and made the mockery of the law of land.

 

                              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 the 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.

 

Date-28/11/2019                                         Yours sincerely

 

                                                      Dinesh Pratap Singh S/O Mr Angad Prasad Singh

 

 

 

C/O Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, Lakshmi Narayan Baikunth Mahadev Mandir District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.  
 

 

 

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 at 02:23, Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> wrote:
  Writ Petition Number 135 HC Year 2006 श्री मान गृह सचिव महोदय प्रतिवादी संख्या -१ है इसलिए  माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश का अनुपालन सुनिश्चित करना उनकी जिम्मेदारी सर्वोपरि थी | किन्तु जिस तरह से लखनऊ आशियाना थाने का थानाध्यक्ष कल्याण सिंह सागर ने उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश को दरकिनार करके मानवता को शर्मशार करने वाली घटना को अंजाम दिया है और खुद को सक्षम न्यायालय बना  कर न्याय किया है उससे न्यायालय, शासन और पुलिस सभी को शर्मसार होना चाहिए और स्थिति स्पष्ट करना चाहिए किन्तु आप की चुप्पी महोदय खुद रहस्यमयी है | इससे बड़ा भ्रष्टाचार का उदाहरण कहा मिलेगा की माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के स्पष्ट आदेश के बावजूद प्रदेश सचिवालय के नाक के नीचे लखनऊ पुलिस मकान कब्जा करवा दी जो की श्री मान जी की ओर से उच्च न्यायालय में प्रस्तुत हलफनामा जो की उपनिरीक्षक द्वारा प्रस्तुत किया गया था उसको झूठा साबित कर दिए अर्थात आप द्वारा माननीय उच्च न्यायालय को गुमराह किया गया | 
जनसूचना अधिकार २००५ के तहत मागी गयी सूचनाओं को न दे कर सिर्फ यही सिद्ध किया जा रहा है की आज भी वरिष्ठ पुलिस अधिकारी मामले पर पर्दा दाल रहे है और भ्रष्टाचार को छुपा रहे है जो किसी ढंग से उचित नही है | कृपया मामले की गंभीरता को समझते हुए नियमानुसार कार्यवाही करे और प्रार्थी को सूचना उपलब्ध कराये जो की लोकहित में होगा |
An appeal under subsection 1 of section 19 of the Right to Information Act 2005 as PIO did not consider it fit to even communicate to the information seeker.
To
                                                                   First Appellate Authority in the                                                                              office of Principal Secretary, Department of Home
 
                                              District-Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, PIN Code-226004
Prayer-Public Information Officer not only violated subsection 1 of section 7 of the Right to Information Act 2005 but acted against the spirit of the august act by adopting a reluctant approach to the R.T.I. Communique dated 06/10/2019 which was received in the office of PIO on 10/10/2019 quite obvious from online tracking of the speed post which is given below for perusal of Hon’ble Sir.
Most revered Sir –Your applicant invites the kind attention of Hon’ble Sir with due respect to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that following is the online tracking of the speed registered post through which aforementioned R.T.I. Communique was sent.
Event Details For EU787012644IN
Current Status: Item Delivery Confirmed
Date
Time
Office
Event
10/10/2019
17:56:38
Lucknow GPO
Item Delivery Confirmed
10/10/2019
12:17:41
Lucknow GPO
Out for Delivery
09/10/2019
09:26:43
Lucknow GPO
Item Received
08/10/2019
03:54:06
Lucknow NSH
Item Dispatched
08/10/2019
00:53:01
Lucknow NSH
Item Bagged
07/10/2019
23:32:58
Lucknow NSH
Item Received
07/10/2019
05:51:53
MA Mirzapur TMO
Item Dispatched
07/10/2019
05:44:19
MA Mirzapur TMO
Received at TMO
07/10/2019
01:03:57
Mirzapur ICH
Item Dispatched
07/10/2019
00:56:13
Mirzapur ICH
Item Bagged
06/10/2019
20:28:06
Mirzapur ICH
Item Received
06/10/2019
20:13:53
Mirzapur RMS POS Counter
Item Dispatched
06/10/2019
20:12:54
Mirzapur RMS POS Counter
Item Bagged
06/10/2019
19:34:22
Mirzapur RMS POS Counter
Item Booked
 
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that through aforementioned R.T.I. Application dated- 06/10/2019 received in the office of public authority on 10/10/2019, the following information was sought.
CPIO may be directed to provide the following information point wise as sought.
 
Most respected Superintendent of police, District Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, the applicant aggrieved Dinesh Pratap Singh, wants to draw the kind attention of the revered Sir to the order passed by the Lucknow bench of the High court of Judicature at Allahabad in the Writ Petition Number 135 HC Year 2006 as follows It is simply ordered that the respondent number 4 to 7 shall open the lock of the staircase so that Smt Anuradha Singh the petitioner may come out of the house and take the proper and appropriate remedy in the competent court and after that, she may have the liberty to go anywhere. Since it is not a case in the strict sense of illegal detention, therefore, no direction can be issued to the respondent to produce the detenue in the court and allow her to live free at her home but since she can not take necessary steps for taking the remedy in the competent court, therefore it is simply ordered that the alleged detenue Smt Anuradha Singh shall be allowed to go out of the house and respondent number 4 to 7 shall open the lock of the door and open the door so that Smt Anuradha Singh may come out and take appropriate remedy. Dated07032006 Signed by the concerned Honourable Justices of Division bench of Lucknow.
 
1-Please provide the G.O./Circular/Legislation which empowers the Lucknow police as the competent court having the power to grant the civil remedies or if any constitutional functionary delegated any such power as aforementioned must be revealed to information seeker in detail.
 
2-Please, provide access to information regarding the reasoned decision taken by the S.S.P. Lucknow in the grievances aforementioned and which detail is available as page 1 and page 2 of the annexure. Right to reason is an indispensable part of the sound administrative system.
 
Applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the respondent number First who is Secretary of home department, civil secretariat, Government of Uttar Pradesh and respondent number second who is senior superintendent of police Lucknow as well as the station house officer police station Ashiyana who is the respondent number 3 in the Writ Petition Number 135 HC Year 2006 filed in the Lucknow bench of the High court of Judicature at Allahabad filed by Anuradha Singh also named Guddi also named Aradhana Singh through her mother Beena Singh wife of Brijraj Singh also Beena Singh wife of Netrpal Singh. Whether in the same matter, to get remedy from various redressal bodies and get public aid by changing the name is not illegal? This lady took the land of LDA by bearing the name of Guddi daughter of Brijraj Singh and in order to seek remedy from High court of Judicature at Allahabad, she took the new name Anuradha Singh and now she has been Aradhna Singh whether it is not a mockery of the law of land? Sir, please take a glance of the affidavit submitted by the sub-inspector Satyesh Prakash Dwivedi in the Writ Petition Number 135 HC Year 2006. This affidavit is on behalf of the respondent number-1, 2 and 3 so it is the responsibility of concerned to maintain the sanctity of the affidavit. Sir order of the High court of judicature was for respondent number 1.2 and 3. Sir how can it be justified that Aradhna changed name of Guddi and Anuradha could manage the support of respondent number 1, 2 and 3 to get illegal possession of the land and house of the applicant by robbing the household articles of the applicant and fabricating the false charges not only on the applicant but also on his wife and daughter? Whether this step of the aforementioned respondents had not undermined the authority of High court of judicature and against the spirit of the affidavit submitted by them through the aforementioned sub-inspector as the spirit of the affidavit was crushed by them? Whether High court of judicature had ordered to slap false and fabricated charges on the applicant and his wife and daughter as a conspiracy to provide illegal possession to Anuradha Singh now Aradhana Singh and loot the valuables of the applicant by breaking the Locks of rooms? Whether it was the motive of the High court in passing the order that police may play the role of a competent court and competent administrative body as ordered in the writ of multi named personality Anuradha Singh to seek a civil remedy before the competent court? Whether the civil remedy is provided by the police in this largest democracy in the world and the police is the competent court?
 
 
 
3-Please provide the detail of the privileges granted to Lucknow police specially Ashiyana police station which not only overlooked the direction of the Lucknow bench of the High court of judicature at Allahabad but also persecuted not only the applicant but also slapped serious charges on the wife and daughter of the information seeker.
 
4-Please, provide access to information which caused the police to submit forged documents before the Lucknow bench of the High court of Judicature at Allahabad on behalf of respondent number -1,2 and 3 as later all those documents were declare forged when police acted to provide civil remedy as competent court in order to comply the order passed by High court.
 
5-Please provide the detail of name and designation of the staffs of the Lucknow police who remained instrumental in declaring the impugned land and house of the applicant as the property of Aradhana Singh and robbing the household valuables by breaking the locks of rooms when family fled from the terror of police, third name of the multi named Lady.
For more detail, vide attached R.T.I. Communique in the P.D.F. form.
 3-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that in subsection 2 of section 7 of the Right to Information Act 2005 stated as follows-
  (2) If the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, fails to give decision on the request for information within the period specified under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have refused the request. 
 4-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 cryptic denial of the sought information by taking provisions of transparency act under teeth would be plausible by misinterpreting the provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005? Undoubtedly act of PIO is ultra vires to august act i.e, Right to Information Act 2005 and reflection of the sheer insolence.
5-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that since the working of public authority is not transparent and accountable and corruption is rampant in its office so they are not providing sought information. According to subsection 1 d section 4 of the Right to Information Act 2005, it shall be the obligatory duty of every public authority to provide the reasons for its decisions to the parties concerned but here PIO is only seated/ procrastinating on the R.T.I. Application nothing else.
                              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 the 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.                                                         
 Please provide the aforementioned sought information point wise as sought by the information seeker. For this applicant shall ever pray you, Hon’ble Sir.
 
 
 
Date-22/11/2019                                         Yours sincerely
                                                      Dinesh Pratap Singh S/O Mr Angad Prasad Singh
 
C/O Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, Lakshmi Narayan Baikunth Mahadev Mandir District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.
 

 

 

Lucknow police against High court order.pdf
966K

5 comments on Whether Lucknow police can’t distinguish civil remedy and criminal remedy?

  1. Please provide the detail of the privileges granted to Lucknow police specially Ashiyana police station which not only overlooked the direction of the Lucknow bench of the High court of judicature at Allahabad but also persecuted not only the applicant but also slapped serious charges on the wife and daughter of the information seeker.

  2. Undoubtedly there is rampant corruption in the government offices that is why they don't provide sought information under Right to Information Act 2005.
    जनसूचना अधिकार २००५ के तहत मागी गयी सूचनाओं को न दे कर सिर्फ यही सिद्ध किया जा रहा है की आज भी वरिष्ठ पुलिस अधिकारी मामले पर पर्दा दाल रहे है और भ्रष्टाचार को छुपा रहे है जो किसी ढंग से उचित नही है | कृपया मामले की गंभीरता को समझते हुए नियमानुसार कार्यवाही करे और प्रार्थी को सूचना उपलब्ध कराये जो की लोकहित में होगा |

  3. Hon’ble Sir, why do our public functionaries run away from the truth quite obvious from the live examples? Home secretary is respondent number-1 in the order / verdict passed by the Lucknow bench of the High court of judicature at Allahabad. He must tell the applicant why contempt of court was committed by the police of state capital Lucknow just under the nose of central office of the home department and made the mockery of the law of land. I think that he will never tell the truth.

  4. Undoubtedly Lucknow police cannot decide whether the case is criminal or civil but when the order was delivered by the Lucknow bench of the high court of judicature at Allahabad that matter is civil and the aggrieved lady must get the Civil remedy from the appropriate Court then how Lucknow police can provide criminal remedy in the matter whether it is not mockery the law of land?

  5. निसंदेह लखनऊ पुलिस यह तय नहीं कर सकती कि मामला अपराधिक है या दीवानी लेकिन जब इलाहाबाद के न्याय उच्च न्यायालय की लखनऊ पीठ द्वारा आदेश दिया गया कि मामला सिविल है और पीड़ित महिला की उच्च न्यायालय सिविल उपाय जांच करना होग। केंद्रीय कार्यालय की नाक के नीचे न्यायालय के आदेशों की अवमानना की दिनेश सिंह की पत्नी एवं बेटी पर गंभीर आरोप भी लगाए

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: