Executive Engineer again denied information on ground that it concerns SHO anti power theft police station Mirzapur


Appeal submitted against arbitrary action of executive engineer in matter power theft as violated subsection 3 of section 6 of RTI Act 2005

 Registration Number PUVNL/A/2024/60044

Name Kamlesh Singh

Date of Filing 24/02/2024

Status APPEAL DISPOSED OF as on 12/03/2024

Reply :- Please find the attachment given by Executive Engineer EDD 2 MZP. Please close this

View Document 

  Nodal Officer Details  

Name SANDEEP KUMAR VERMA

Telephone Number 9453047544

Email-ID rtipuvvnl@gmail.com

Online RTI Appeal Form Details

Public Authority Details :-   

* Public Authority PURVANCHAL VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED   

Personal Details:-

* Name Kamlesh Singh

Gender Male

* Address Village Kothra Kantit , Post Shree Nivas Dham, Police station Jigna

Districts Mirzapur

Pincode 231313

State Uttar Pradesh

Educational Status Illiterate

Phone Number Details not provided

Mobile Number +91-8127195424

Email-ID myogimpsingh[at]gmail[dot]com

Citizenship Indian

* Is the Applicant Below Poverty Line ? No

First Appeal Details u/s 19(1) :-

Registration Number PUVNL/A/2024/60044

Date of Filing 24/02/2024

Concerned Appellate Authority RAM BHUJARAT( EDC FATAH MRZ)

Phone No 9415304000

Email Id seedcmirzapur1@gmail.com

* Ground For Appeal Refused access to Information Requested

((Description of Information sought (upto 500 characters) )

* Prayer or Relief Sought From the following status it is quite obvious that the appellant submitted the RTI application on 19th December 2023 which was disposed of by the concerned public information officer on 22nd February 2024 which means more than 2 months were taken by the public information officer to deny the information to the appellant. Registration Number PUVNL/R/2023/60424, Name Kamlesh Singh, Date of Filing 19/12/2023 Status REQUEST DISPOSED OF as on 22/02/2024, Reply :- letter no. 1140 date 22.02.2024 uploaded. It is quite obvious from the submitted report of the executive engineer electricity distribution division second Mr Rajesh Kumar he denied the information to the appellant by taking the recourse of the fact that information is concerned with the station house officer, anti-power theft police station district Mirzapur. Undoubtedly the appellant is agreed with this fact that information is concerned with the station house officer, anti-power theft police station district Mirzapur, but the appellant is not agreed that RTI application of the appellant maybe disposed of on this ground instead of transferring it put the concern public information officer under subsection 3 obstruction 6 of the right to Information Act 2005 which was not done by the public information officer Rajesh Kumar. The fault is also on the part of the nodal officer who did not forward the matter to the proper public information officer which is quite obvious from the report of the public information officer Mr Rajesh Kumar. This is a humble request of the appellant to direct the public information officer to forward the RTI application to the public authority station house officer, anti-power theft police station district Mirzapur for providing information to the appellant as required under subsection 3 of section 6 of the Right to Information Act 2005. For this appellant shall ever pray you most respected Sir.

Supporting document ((only pdf upto 1 MB)) Supporting document not provided

RTI Application Details u/s 6(1) :-

Registration Number PUVNL/R/2023/60424

Date of Filing 19/12/2023

PIO of Public Authority approached RAJESH KUMAR( EDD-2 FATAH MRZ)

Designation EE & PIO EDD-2 FATAH MIRZAPUR

Phone No 9450963598

Email Id eddiimirzapur@gmail.com

PIO Order/Decision Number Details not provided

* PIO Order/Decision Date 

Beerbhadra Singh

To write blogs and applications for the deprived sections who can not raise their voices to stop their human rights violations by corrupt bureaucrats and executives.

Post a Comment

Whatever comments you make, it is your responsibility to use facts. You may not make unwanted imputations against any body which may be baseless otherwise commentator itself will be responsible for the derogatory remarks made against any body proved to be false at any appropriate forum.

Previous Post Next Post