Whether public authority High court of judicature will abide by the direction of Hon’ble C.I.C. or not.

Hon’ble Sir please direct central public information officer to comply the order dated 04/11/2015 passed by Hon’ble chief information commissioner of India.


Yogi M. P. Singh

Yogi M. P. Singh yogimpsingh@gmail.com

AttachmentsNov 15 (6 days ago)

to cj
Hon’ble Sir please direct central public information officer to comply the order dated 04/11/2015 passed by Hon’ble chief information commissioner of India.
15 November 2015
09:47
To
                                                Hon’ble chief justice of High court of judicature at Allahabad                                                  District -Allahabad , Uttar Pradesh
Subject-Request to ensure compliance of order dated -04/11/2015 passed by Hon’ble C.I.C. as consequent of hearing dated -26/10/2015. in appealCIC/CC/A/2014/001147/VS.
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.
                                               
This is humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that It can never be justified to overlook  the rights of citizenry by delivering services in arbitrary manner by floating all set up norms. This is sheer mismanagement which is encouraging wrongdoers to reap benefit of loopholes in system and depriving poor citizens from right to justice. Therefore it is need of 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
Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road District-Mirzapur , Uttar Pradesh ,India .
Ensure compliance of order of Hon’ble C.I.C..pdf
Created with Microsoft Office OneNote 2007
One place for all your notes and information

Grievance Status

Print || Logout
Status as on 21 Nov 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
Officer name : Shri Atul Kaushik
Officer Designation : Joint Secretary,
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 : RECEIVED THE GRIEVANCE

3 comments on Whether public authority High court of judicature will abide by the direction of Hon’ble C.I.C. or not.

  1. 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

  2. Since the matter is concerned with the non compliance of order of the court so court must take it seriously as more dereliction will lower the dignity of high court of judicature in the eyes of citizenry. This is Principle of natural law of justice that counter affidavits must be submitted by those against whom writ is instituted, it means against those who are the necessary party in the suit .It seems that there is some cryptic dealing on the part of staffs of high court so they don't want to reveal the real status of the case before the information seeker.

  3. EU468512264IN Track More
    Booked at Booked On Destination
    Pincode Tariff Article
    Category Delivered at Delivered on
    Not Available Not Available Not Availa Not availa Not Available Not Available Not Available

    Detailed Track Events For EU468512264IN

    Date Time Office Event
    20/11/2015 19:40:58 ICH MIRZAPUR Item Received
    21/11/2015 02:09:26 ICH MIRZAPUR Item bagged for NSH ALLAHABAD
    21/11/2015 02:14:51 ICH MIRZAPUR Bag Despatched to NSH ALLAHABAD
    21/11/2015 10:31:56 NSH ALLAHABAD Bag Received
    21/11/2015 10:32:15 NSH ALLAHABAD Item Received
    21/11/2015 10:32:15 NSH ALLAHABAD Bag Opened

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: