BY E-MAIL
HEARING DATED 02nd APRIL 2008
BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION UTTAR PRADESH
Case no. : S-1 / 1317/C/2007
Petitioner : URVASHI SHARMA , F-2108 ,RAJAJIPURAM ,LUCKNOW - 226017
Vs.
Respondent :PIO , SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT , U. P. GOVT. , LUCKNOW
==========================================
To.
Hon'ble State Chief information Commissioner
Utter pradesh State Information Commission
VI th floor , Indira Bhavan , Lucknow- U. P.
Subject: Objections against the information provided by the respondent vide letter no. 426 / 26-1-08-4(15)/02 lucknow dated 27th february 2008 and application under RULE 7(2) of
UTTAR PRADESH STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION
(APPEALPROCEDURE)RULES2006
==============================================
Hon'ble sir,
With due respect the abovenamed petitioner wants
this to bring to your kind notice that -
1} The petitioner, to obtain inormation , made a request under section 6 of the "RTI act 2005 " to the respondent on 21 March 2007.
2} The case has gone through 11 hearings so far and 12th hearing is scheduled to be held on 02-04- 2008.
3} Even after 12 months and 11 hearings the respondent has not
provided required information as per section 7{9} of the act on point nos. 2 , 3 & 4 of my letter ( sent under section 6 of the act )
dtd. 21st march 2007.
4} The respondent has sent letter nos.
{i} 3033/26-1-07-4(15)/2002dtd.16th july 2007 ,
(ii) su.aa.273/26-1-2007-4(15)/2002dtd. 10th august2007
(iii) letter no. 535-38 / bha. Ba. / 2007-08 dtd 08-10-2007
(iv)168/ SA.KA./JA.SU.AA./2007-08 , LUCKNOW DATED 09JANUAURY 2008
(v)letter no. 258/sa. Ka. / u.ni.k./ja.su.aa./2007-2008 lucknow dated 31st january 2008 &
(vi) letter no. 426 / 26-1-08-4(15)/02 lucknow dated 27th february 2008
5} It's extreme painful and tragic that the information sent by the respondent is not the information required by the petitioner.Thus the respondent is guilty of not only wasting the precious time of Hon'ble commission and the petitioner but of protecting the corrupt officials and corrupt practices prevailing in the department also .Its even more henious that wrong information is being sent deliverately with the intent to safeguard the culprits at the cost of public money.
6} my objections regarding the information provided vide letter no. 426 / 26-1-08-4(15)/02 lucknow dated 27th february 2008 are as given below ->
OBJECTIONS ->
a} Point no. 2 of my letter dated 21-03-07-> Instead of providing me the certified copy of the required rules , the respondent has justified sri mahendra singh's unlawful act of signing the letter on a day before taking charge only on the basis of statements of sri L. D. PANDEY (joint director) .I want certified copy of rules on the basis of which sri L. D. Pandey prepared the inspection note provided by the respondent to me in point no. 1of my letter of section 6 of the act, or else I should know if whatever Sri L. D. Pandey says is a rule. To your knowledge , sir , on 01-01-2002 sri R. P. Kalra was the principal of the said institute , the fact which can be seen in the records of the institute which were not seen by sri L. D. Pandey at the time of inspection for reasons best known to him only .If there can be two persons holding the same post in same office? If the said order dated 31-12-2001 was served to sri R. P. Kalra before 02-01-02? If yes , the respondent should provide me proofs of the same. If the respondent is unable to provide me the required rules and documentary evidences , I am reiterating all my objections of my letter dated 14-08-07 once again. Moreover a bare perusal of the letter no. 535-38 / bha. Ba. / 2007-08 dtd 08-10-2007 issued by sri L. D. Pandey would reveal that he really knows nothing about the rules as he has written that the director was the competent autority to issue letter dated 31-12-2001 , is false baseless and contrary to service rules of the department.the fact has been elaborated by directorate itself time and again in many of its letters .
Its very painful to see the quality of work of uttar pradesh social welfare department. The letters issued by the government should be a class of its own , but the reality is far far far away from what is expected. A bare perusal of page 2 point 2C would reveal the true picture of quality of work of uttar pradesh social welfare department. Here the respondent has written that sri Mahendra Singh Took Charge of the institute after retirement of sri R. P. Kalra. Actually Sri R. P. Kalra retired in year 2006 . In social welfare department uttar pradesh a person retires how many times ?This statement of the respondent is not only a blank false statement but also portrays that even today wrongs done in the past are being safeguarded and
either
- incompetent persons having no knowledge of hindi bhasha and aptitude to understand the files of the secretriate were involved in the process of issuing of this letter , which is very serious matter and should be dealt with immediately. Please ask the respondent to provide them the necessary training so that in future they should not commit such blunder and also to punish them as per law and official procedures of the department .please ask the respondent to provide me the names of all employees and officers concerned
or
- False information is provided to me deliberately with a malafide intention to safeguard the corrupt officials , persons and practices of the department which is a crime vis-a-vis the responsibilities of a government servant and clearly shows that something wrong is still prevailing in the department. Please punish the respondent for providing me false information.
If my objections are baseless , false and objectionable , the respondent is free to take any legal action against me as per law but refusing to provide information is gross violation of the act for which the respondent should be punished under section 20 of the act.
b} point no. 3 and 4 of my letter -> The respondent has once again taken the attitude to safeguard all past , present and future corrupt practices prevailing in the department vis a vis illegal appointments of g. b. pant polytechnic in the name of the so called inspection report which shall never be completed .The required information requires only these documements to reach on a conclusion -
-order of hon. High court lucknow bench dated 27-11-95 passed in regarding wp 2566/ss/1995
- order hon. High court lucknow bench dated 17-10-2000 passed in regarding wp 2566/ss/1995
-g.o. no. 50/43-2-2001 lucknow dated 04th january 2001
but only to safeguard the prevailing wrongs in the department the respondent , who is dutybound to provide the information is beating about the bush and passing the time only to safeguard his personel interests at the cost of loss to the state exchequer. Given facts need to be considered -
- pawan kumar mishra and k. k. srivastava were not holding the requisite qualifications of the posts they joined @ Rs. 40/- per lecture means their initial appointment was illegal and ultra virus to the constitution of india.
- K.k.srivastava was a diploma holder in feb 92 and took payment of degree holder and this financial irregularity is not ever seen by the officials of the department. I ask why ? why no recoveries made so far?
-In wp 2566/ss/95 pawan kumar mishra and k. k. srivastava used false/fabricated/misleading / manipulated annexure nos 2 ,3,4, & 5 and no pains were taken by the officials who were responsible for bringing the facts to the knowledge of hon. High court , I ask why ? suppression of facts with a malafide intention is a crime but who cares .
-k. k. srivastava and p. k. mishra were paid 5 months' salary from january 2001 to may 2001 without doing any work and against the order of hon. High court lucknow bench dated 17-10-2000 passed in regarding wp 2566/ss/1995 and defying the principle of no work no pay.
- Social welfare u. p. government prepared g.o. no. 4747/26-1-2002-9(40)/2002 lucknow dated 28 october 2002 against the reservation policy of the state government which is a crime but instead of punishing the culprits , the all corrupts are enjoying the good time. This was done only to help k. k. srivastava in his contempt petition which he did also.
- Pawan kumar mishra was illegally adjusted on the post of Workshop Superintendent under political pressure which is evident from g.o. no. 4709/26-1-2007-6(41)/2007 lucknow 23 october 2007 point 1& 3 , g. o. no.479(aa) /26-1-2008-6(41)/2007 lucknow dated 18 february 2008 and notesheets of files.
- P. k. mishra did not possess three years' experience , a must qualification for the post of workshop superintendent.even then the corrupt regularization committee comprising of many I. A. S. officers regularize services of p. k. mishra which was cancelled by the hon. High court in his order dated 24-02-2006.instead of complying the court order the height of corruption is evident from the fact that executive order for grant of promotional pay scale to pawan kumar mishra is released against the said hon high court order dated 24-02-06 and lakhs of rupees are drained out as arrears to pawan kumar mishra.this is a landmark example of how corrupt our officers are and how they are exploiting the system for their vested interests and going scot-free . they are clearly misusing the power vested in them for the good of the masses but they have become parasites and are feeding on blood of the masses. The order of cancellation of regularization was dittoed in review petition no. 80 / 2006 final order of hon. High court and special leave to petition cc no 1083/2008 order dated 01-02-2008 by hon. Supreme court.as per rule 8 of rugularization rules and rule 5 of uttar pradesh ordinance no.26 of 2001 no. 2922(2)/xvii-v-1-2(ka)35-2001 lucknow dated 24december 2001 servises of pawan kumar mishra were to be terminated but the corrupt officials are so much engrossed in their vested interests that they have not only retained pawan kumar mishra in service but by giving the free hand to the principal of the institute sri ashok kumar bajpai they have rewarded pawan kumar mishra with four extra increments .not only this pawan kumar mishra though legally not an employee of the department has been given the charge of store officer and incharge of board exams.this is the height of irregularity and all officials at government are responsible for this.but who cares when everyone is getting his share.now honesty is only a word often used by the most dishonest officials during meetings and seminars .u.p. social welfare department is a den of corrupt or indifferent officials.
- K.k.srivastava was regularised on the post reserved for scheduled caste in the guise of hon high court order. I want social welfare department to quote me a single example where court has ever ordered the executive to work against the law but I have many examples where the executives distort the court order on their own. K. k. srivastava's regularization is also a class example of the same.
- Pawan kumar mishra , k. k. srivastava , and s.k.s.gaur were awarded promotional pay scale without directorate's proposal which is illegal and the fact has itself been admitted by the government in g.o.no.479/26-1-2007-6(41)/2007 lucknow dated 4 january 2008 but no steps are taken by the government to mend the things done against the rules in the past.
- k.k. srivastava was in custody for more than 48 hours but he has not been suspended and duty pay has been given to him even for the period when he was in police lock-up and in district jail on 09-04-06 &10-04-06 .this is height of malpractices of social welfare department. since right from section officer to commissioner , everybody is getting his share so what's the need to investigate the matter and follow rules.make money and live happy is the slogan of social welfare department.
Henceforth your goodself is requested to
A}direct the respondent to go through my letter sent under section 6 of the act seriously and to provide information sought by the petitioner in point nos. 2 , 3 , & 4 strictly as per provisions of section 7(9) of the act.
B} The respondent be punished for not complying the act in spirit and for unnecessarily delaying the discharge of information and thus shielding the CORRUPT officials / practices of the department.
C} The petitioner be exempted from personally appearing in the hearing dated 02-04-2008 as he is continuously getting life threats from a. k. bajpai , k. k. srivastava and pawan kumar mishra ( all representatives of the respondent ) and appropriate order be passed based on this letter and material on record as per RULE 7(2) of UTTAR PRADESH STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION ( APPEAL PROCEDURE ) RULES 2006
Date : 08 march 2008
Thanks and regards.
Petitioner
{URVASHI SHARMA }
F - 2108, RAJAJIPURAM , LUCKNOW - 17
Copy to the undermentioned to give them an overview of state of government offices and for necessary action :
1. The president of india , president house ,new delhi
2. The chief justice the supreme court of india new delhi
3. The governer , uttar pradesh government , lucknow -u.p.
4. The chief justic of high court of uttar pradesh , allahabad-u.p.
5. Sri pabitra roy chaudhary citizens forum against corruption , c-67.sector 14 noida - u.p.
6. Justice (retd. )sri Kamleshwar nath , c-105 , niralanagar , lucknow 226020
7. Sri prashant kumar mishra , The chief secretary , u. p. government , lucknow . u. p.
8. Sri R. K. Mittal , The apellate authority and the commissioner
,Social Welfare ,department , uttar pradesh government , Lucknow ,Uttar Pradesh
9. Sri Ram Ganesh , The PIO and joint secretary ,Social Welfare
,department , uttar pradesh government , Lucknow , Uttar Pradesh
{URVASHI SHARMA }
F - 2108 , RAJAJIPURAM , LUCKNOW - 17
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment