An appeal under subsection 3 of section 19 of the Right to Information Act 2005 against the denial of sought information by the CPIO and project director designated as project director at national consumer helpline, a centre for consumer studies, Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi-110002, in the ministry of consumer affairs.
To
Hon’ble Chief Information Commissioner of India
Central Information Commission
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
New Delhi Pin code-110067
Appellant-Yogi M. P. Singh S/O Rajendra Pratap Singh
Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road
District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, PIN code-231001.
Versus
Respondent-1-Under Secretary, CPIO and Public Grievance,
Prof Suresh Mishra, Project Director,
at national consumer helpline, a centre for consumer studies,
Indian Institute of Public Administration, New Delhi-110002,
in the ministry of consumer affairs.
2- Shri S. S. Thakur, Director (PG) and First Appellate Authority,
Department of Consumer Affairs,
Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.
Subject-CPIO through its communication dated 18/05/2018 letter no. CD/NCH/F-09/233 addressed to appellant, denied the sought information on the flimsy and cryptic grounds and in a mischievous way. He must be subjected to scrutiny under section 20 of the Right to Information Act 2005 of India.
First appellate authority instead of applying own rational mind, only copied the irrational decision of CPIO so disciplinary proceedings may be initiated against him so that such practice of non-providing sought information to information seekers may be curbed.
With due respect and regard to Hon’ble Sir, the appellant invites the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that your appellant sought information from the CPIO
Sought information as, 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.
2-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that undoubtedly the function of the company in respect of its reply is not natural so the unnatural reply is being accepted by the staffs of National Consumer Helpline so there must be some privileges which empower the company to make reply arbitrarily. If not available, they had to provide information that such provisions are not available. Consequently, the appellant seeks action against the erring staffs who accepted the arbitrary reply of the company and promoted lawlessness and anarchy in the society.
3-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that the government of India enforced the Right to Information Act 2005 in order to promote transparency and accountability in the working of public authority but here such information is denied on the ground that information sought not existed to public authority.
4-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whether even duties and role and public staffs will not be revealed under the Right to Information Act 2005 ipso facto obvious from the denial of sought information by the CPIO.
5-It is to be submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that when it is the obligation of the erring company staffs to reply the queries of the consumers but they are not replying so and staffs posted at National Consumer Helpline are not instrumental so and therefore appellant is seeking feedback regarding the public staffs posted at the NHA, but it unfortunate that this information also does not exist to CPIO, then CPIO must disclose what information he has to provide under RTI Act? CPIO has no information concerned with the working of public authority. Whatever information ought to be made available under section 4 (1 )(b) of the Right to Information Act 2005 free of cost is not being provided after providing a proper fee to CPIO under subsection 1 of section 6 of the Right to Information Act 2005 is not mockery of the Right to Information Act 2005.
This is a humble request of your 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. Yours sincerely
Date-27-09-2018 Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.
Response of the office of President of India on the complaint against the commissioner appointed under Right to Information Act 2005-RTI issues are barred from being taken up for redressal on this portal. No provision under the RTI act for the Commission to review its own order. Parties free to seek redressal of their grievance in appropriate judicial forums.
ReplyDeleteI think that main criteria for selection on a public post must be honesty but if key post in the government will be occupied by the man of non impeccable integrity then how honesty can be expected.
ReplyDeleteO honest political masters whether you are honest only during election campaigns if not why overlooked the representation against a commissioner openly supporting the corrupt staffs of the government and shielding their corrupt deeds. Here it is quite obvious that there is ample evidence of corruption but concerned did not take any action because they themselves promote corruption from behind the screen.
If the man of impeccable integrity will not be appointed as the Information Commissioner then such things will happen frequently and need of hour is that public may demand honesty in the government machinery otherwise there are corrupt sheep from top to bottom in the government machinery.From the contents of the post it is quite obvious that matter is concerned with the deep rooted corruption and it is also obvious that our accountable public functionaries are not taking any action in the matter even when repeated complaints have been submitted before them which is a mockery of the law of land and reflects the lackness of rule of law in the government and it is proving that we are living in a Banana Republic.
ReplyDeleteHonest people must be appointed as the information commissioners in the information commissions to curb such corrupt activities and promote transparency and accountability in the government machinery.
ReplyDeleteRole of the information commission is to be instrumental in providing information to the information seekers but if the information commission will be flooded with the corrupt public functionaries how can it be instrumental in providing information to the citizens and there will be transparency and accountability in the working of the public authority.