Whether we are governed by jungle rule where every one behaves tyrant .
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh<email@example.com>
11:36 AM (7 minutes ago)
to sec.sic, urgent-action, bcc: cmup, bcc: hgovup, bcc: csup
Whether appeal sent under subsection 1 of section 19 of Right to Information Act 2005 is entertained by first appellate authority or public information officer.
28 March 2016
Chief Information Commissioner of India
Indira Bhawan , Sixth floor
Lucknow ,Uttar Pradesh
Subject-In regard to First Appeal under subsection 1 of section 19 submitted before superintendent of Police District-Mirzapur ,Uttar Pradesh on 24-02-2016 through speed registered post and received in the office of public authority on 25-02-2016 ipsofacto obvious from annexure attached with this representation.
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 your applicant sent the aforesaid first appeal to First Appellate Authority /superintendent of police district-Mirzapur. Your applicant on 27-03-2016 received the communication of public information officer who reminds me that your sought information through R.T.I. Communique dated-17/01/2016 has been furnished by assistant public information officer (C.O. City) through communication dated-26/02/2016 . He also apprised me that in case of misleading information or incomplete information ,first appellate authority is D.I.G. Mirzapur division. He also informed me that in future to seek information sent R.T.I. Communique may be brief and legible as well as in accordance with the provisions of Right to Information Act 2005.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whether first appeal can be entertained by the public information officer itself. Your applicant knows well that first appeal is entertained first appellate authority who is senior in rank to public information officer. Most surprising is that those who itself never take the perusal of provisions of Right to Information Act 2005 make efforts to show that they are well versed in transparency laws. Your applicant was aggrieved with the information provided by PIO so appeal was made against him ,it means he would not entertain appeal against as it is against the principle of natural justice.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that in their repeated communications ,DGP office and home ministry informed your applicant that additional superintendent of police is the public information officer and superintendent of police is the first appellate authority but it is too much surprising that PIO is informing your applicant that DIG is the first appellate authority. This implies that S.P. Mirzapur is the public information officer so he will not be subjected to penal action of commission as PIO is penalized with pecuniary penalty under section 20 of Right to Information Act 2005. Ipsofacto obvious that every one saving its own skin in this lawlessness and chaos.
This is humble request of your appellant 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 appellant shall ever pray you Hon’ble Sir.