CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000219+000220/11997
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000219+000220
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Chirag Saini,
4447, Arya Pura,
Subzi Mandi, Delhi - 110007
Respondent : Mr. R. Prasad
Public Information Officer & SE,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
O/o of the Superintending Engineer,
Civil Lines Zone, 16, Rajpur Road,
New Delhi - 110054
RTI application filed on : 06/09/2010
PIO replied : 17/09/2010
First appeal filed on : 06/11/2010
First Appellate Authority order : Not enclosed.
Second Appeal received on : 21/1/2011
S.No. Information sought by the appellant Reply of the PIO
1. Is illegal construction going on at A77/6A, Rana Pratap Bagh, Delhi? Plan has not been
sanctioned by Civil Lines
Zone.
2. What percentage of the plan has been sanctioned w.r.t. abovementioned As above.
property? Has a basement also been sanctioned? Certified copies and details to
be supplied.
3. How many days after filing the RTI did the J.E. and the A.E. make an enquiry Information not on
into this matter? What percentage of construction was illegal? record.
4. Will the Department demolish the construction which is beyond what was As above.
sanctioned? On what date?
First Appeal:
Information not satisfactory.
Order of the FAA:
Not enclosed.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Information not satisfactory.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Absent;
Respondent : Mr. N. K. Yadav, AE(Civil) on behalf of Mr. R. Prasad, PIO & SE;
The Appellant had come to the Commission but had not come for the hearing and had gone away.
The Appellant is filing a number of appears but appears to be behaving irresponsibly by not appearing
during the hearing before the Commission. Though he had come to the Commission he has not bothered
to come and attend the hearing. The hearings conducted by the Commission are a cost to the public and
this attitude of the Appellant is irresponsible. If there was any reason why he had to leave the Commission
he should atleast have given information why he had to leave. Public funds and resources must not be
wasted in this manner by irresponsible appellants.
Decision:
The Appeal is dismissed.
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
15 April 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (AP)