Barak Bani Dainik
Allegations of Collusion Against PFC Staff as Victims Claim Transparency Has Been Replaced by Harassment
Barak Bani Digital Desk,Silchar,19 July : The Assam Government introduced the Sewa Setu platform and the ARTPS (Assam Right to Public Services) Portal as key components of its digital governance initiative, with the objective of ensuring that citizens receive government services within a stipulated timeframe. Under this system, if a designated public service is not delivered within the prescribed period, the concerned government official is required to provide an explanation and may be held accountable under the law. The initiative was designed to eliminate middlemen, reduce unnecessary delays, curb corruption, and establish a transparent and accountable public service delivery mechanism.
However, according to numerous affected citizens, the original purpose of this system is being undermined at the offices of the District Sub-Registrar and Deputy Sub-Registrar in Cachar district. Complainants allege that certain employees of the Public Facilitation Centres (PFCs) located adjacent to the registration offices, in alleged collusion with individuals associated with the department, have created a non-transparent system in which access to government services allegedly depends on the payment of additional money.
According to the complainants, applicants are allegedly informed at the time of submitting their applications that if they pay an additional ₹1,000 to ₹2,000, their registration process can be completed within two days. Those who refuse to make such payments reportedly face repeated objections to their applications. In many cases, they are allegedly asked to submit information that has already been provided or are confronted with unnecessary queries, resulting in prolonged delays. The complainants claim that these tactics are intended to mentally exhaust applicants and compel them to pay the additional amount.
One of the most serious allegations concerns the use of applicants’ mobile phone numbers. According to the complaints, instead of recording the applicant’s personal mobile number, some PFCs allegedly enter their own contact numbers in the application records. As a result, any communication from the registration office including requests for additional documents or clarification is first received by the PFC rather than the applicant. Whether and when that information is subsequently conveyed to the applicant is then entirely dependent on the intermediary.
The complainants allege that this practice deliberately keeps applicants uninformed. Many reportedly remain unaware that additional documents or responses have been requested, causing statutory deadlines to expire while their applications remain pending. Subsequently, applicants are allegedly informed that they failed to respond within the prescribed time. According to the complainants, this practice effectively defeats the legal requirement of delivering services within ten days and weakens the accountability mechanism established under the ARTPS framework.
The complainants further argue that this is not merely an instance of administrative negligence but a systematic method of avoiding accountability. Had applicants received official communications directly, they could have responded within the stipulated period and, if the service was not delivered on time, could have initiated proceedings against the responsible officials. By allegedly obstructing the communication process itself, they contend, the very purpose of the law is rendered ineffective.
The situation has also drawn criticism from Gram Unnayan O Samaj Seba Sangstha, a prominent voluntary organisation in the Barak Valley. The organisation has stated that if digital public service platforms introduced for the benefit of citizens are being misused by a limited group for personal gain, it would undermine the government’s objective of ensuring transparent governance. The organisation has therefore demanded an impartial administrative inquiry into the allegations.
Faster Services for Bribes, Delays for Those Who Refuse? Serious Questions Raised Over the Role of the PFC District Manager
The organisation has also raised serious questions regarding the role of District PFC Manager Junaid Ahmed Mazumder. According to the complainants, despite repeated allegations of irregularities involving PFC operations under his supervision, no effective corrective action has been taken. They argue that if an organised network or syndicate has indeed emerged, responsibility cannot simply be avoided. Instead, they have called for stricter district-level monitoring, regular audits, and an independent investigation to restore transparency in the system.
Affected citizens have further alleged that the same personnel have been deployed around the registration offices for extended periods, creating the possibility of entrenched vested interests. They have therefore demanded the immediate transfer of employees working at PFCs attached to the registration offices or the implementation of a rotational transfer policy at regular intervals to prevent any individual or group from establishing long-term influence over the system.
The controversy has also highlighted another important issue. The neighbouring districts of Hailakandi and Sribhumi have already implemented the Dharitree Portal, an integrated land records management system through which citizens can access Jamabandi records, e-Khajana services, and various land-related documents online without repeatedly visiting government offices. The system has reportedly enhanced transparency and reduced the need for physical visits.
Cachar, however, has yet to be brought under the Dharitree system. Consequently, residents continue to visit government offices repeatedly for land-related services, a situation that, according to the allegations, provides opportunities for unscrupulous intermediaries to exploit applicants. Citizens believe that the early implementation of the Dharitree Portal in Cachar would significantly reduce the influence of middlemen and enable people to access government services directly.
The affected citizens have demanded that the allegations be thoroughly verified and that strict administrative action be taken against anyone found guilty. They have also called for several institutional reforms, including mandatory use of the applicant’s personal mobile number in every application, direct SMS notifications to applicants regarding the status of their applications, regular monitoring of PFC operations, CCTV surveillance, an independent grievance redressal mechanism, and the implementation of a transparent staff rotation policy.
Ultimately, citizens argue that the success of digital governance depends on ensuring that government services are delivered within the prescribed timeframe without bribery, middlemen, or unnecessary harassment. They maintain that safeguarding the fundamental objectives of Sewa Setu and the ARTPS framework now requires an impartial investigation into the allegations, strict action against any individuals found responsible, and the prompt implementation of the Dharitree Portal in Cachar.
