Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.Rajender Gupta vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 30 September, 2011

Central Information Commission
Mr.Rajender Gupta vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 30 September, 2011
                        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                            Club Building (Near Post Office)
                          Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                 Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                     Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001934, 1937, 1936, 1943/14959
                                             Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/001934, 1937, 1936, 1943
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                            :      Mr. Rajender Gupta
                                            704, G.T. Road,
                                            Shahdara, Delhi - 110032

Respondent                      :           PIO & SE- II,
      Municipal Corporation of Delhi
                                            Zonal Building, Shahdara North Zone.
       Delhi - 110032


RTI application filed on             :      16-11-2010
PIO replied on                       :      17-01-2011
First Appeal filed on                :      17-02-2011
First Appellate Authority order of   :      29-04-2011
Second Appeal received on            :      20-07-2011

Information Sought:
      1.            Whether the property No.2013, Ram Nagar, Raghuveer Dutt Marg, Shahdara, Delhi
                    is being constructed illegally or has MCD sanctioned a plan for the above
                    mentioned property? Has any other permission been granted for the above said
                    construction? If yes, then which engineer is given the responsibility to inspect that
                    the construction is being done as per the sanctioned plan. The photocopy of the
                    diary maintained by the field officer time to time as per the direction given by the
                    letter No. J-13036/3/96-DD11B dated 28-08-2000 by the Ministry of Urban
                    Development and Poverty Alleviation.
      2.            Whether the plan has been sanctioned by MCD          as per rules and regulations
                    mentioned in MPD and as per basic necessities. Provide a copy of above said rules
                    and regulations.
      3.            Whether the said property is being constructed as per the earthquake resistant
                    technique and design and whether the builder has taken the permission from the
                    concerned department. Provide information along with the photocopy.
      4.            In case no permission has been given by the MCD Building Department North Zone
                    for the above said construction, then please provide the details of action taken
                    against the said property.

       5.             Whether any demolition order has been issued in case if the property had been
                      booked. How much time it will take to initiate the prosecution action on the above
                      said property or whether any other action has already been taken. Is this
                      information available on internet.
       6.             Whether any direction has been issued to the SHO regarding this unauthorised
                      construction.


                                                                                             Page 1 of 2
      The PIO Reply:

          1.                  Plan for Property No.2013 was not sanctioned by MCD.
          2.                  This reply is according to Serial No. 1 stated above.
          3.                  This reply is according to Serial No. 1 stated above.
          4.                  No reply was provided.
          5.                  No reply was provided.
          6.                  No reply was provided.


Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply was given to the appellant by the PIO.

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
        "The main ground for appeal was dissatisfaction with the reply furnished by the PIO. The same
was discussed and it was observed that complete information was not supplied to the appellant. PIO is
directed to supply the complete information as discussed during the course of hearing within a period of
Ten days from the date of issue of this letter,"

Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Rajender Gupta
Respondent : Mr. V K Bhatia, SE- II, Shahdara North Zone, MCD

The PIO has provided certain information, but is the Appellant alleges that unauthorized construction has
taken place but has not been brought on record. The PIO has takes personal responsibility to check on this
allegation and take appropriate action.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is hereby directed to provide the information of the action taken, to the Appellant
before 25th October 2011

This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
30 September 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (ved)

Page 2 of 2