CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000952/7917
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000952
Appellant : Mr. Khazan Singh,
S/o. Sh. Mam Chand
Village Badu Sarai
Post Chhawla, New Delhi 110071
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Office of the SDM (NG)
Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
BDO Office Complex,
Najafgarh, New Delhi 110043
RTI application filed on : 14/01/2010
PIO replied : 17/02/2010
First Appeal filed on : 02/03/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 26/03/2010
Second Appeal Received on : 16/04/2010
Mentioning Case no. and order of High Court dated 20/12/2005 and dated 07/11/2006, Appellant
sought following:
Sl. Information Sought PIO's Reply
1. Name of the officer by which order changing in The said change of Kh. No's has been
Khasra no. 9/7 Area (4-16) 32 Mustil,, 19/1, 20/2 made during the Village consolidation
Area, (6-4) 31 of Mustil 25(4-10), 32/7 Area (4-16) by the consolidation officer and the said
was done despite of stay order of High Court in this consolidation is under process of Sec
regard. 21(2), which is under the consideration
Reason for not mentioning Court's stay order in of Court of Financial Commissioner.
record.
2. Action taken on Case no. 199/88, 59/89, 70/91 SDM, The required certified copy can be
Court NJF, 79/co/05 till date. Provide certified copy obtained from SDM Office, after
of order sheet. depositing the requisite fees and
fulfilling of C-1 form on any working
day.
3. Provide the case no. and copy of that order by which No information is available.
Chakbandi had been stopped at Village-Badusarai.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Not enclosed
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
FAA mentioned that he was not satisfied with the information provided to Question No. 1 & 2.
SDM(NG) was directed by FAA to provide complete information within 10 days.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Incomplete & unsatisfactory information.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Khazan Singh;
Respondent: Mr. R. N. Kaushik, Naib Tehlisdar Mr. Rajiv Shukla, PIO & SDM(NG)
The Respondent claims that he had sent the information to the Appellant on 12/04/2010.
The Appellant claims that he has not received the information. The Appellant has perused the
information which the respondent claims to have sent and states that this meets the requirement
of information which he had sought.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to give the information to the Appellant before 05 June
2010.
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
31 May 210
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj