CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room no. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi - 110066
Tel: +91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000358/2554
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000358
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Kali Ram,
R/o 4196, Ram Nagar Extn.
Loni Road Shahadra, Delhi-110032.
Respondent : Superintendent Engieenr -I PIO,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Shahdara North Zone,
Shahdara, Delhi-110032.
RTI application filed on : 08/12/2008 PIO replied : not replied First Appeal filed on : 09/01/2009 First Appellate Authority order : 06/02/2009 Second Appeal filed on : 05/03/2009
The appellant had asked in RTI application for illegal constructions and
work progress by MCD in the ward no. 245 Durgapuri, Shahdara, Delhi.
1. That, how many works are made by MCD in Durgapuri Ward No. 245, from
dated 01.10.2008 to 07.12.2008.
2. That, in the above wars, how many plots map had been passed by MCD.
3. That, in the above ward, how many illegal construction and provide list with
address.
4. That, in the above ward, how much complaints are received from the date of
01.10.2008 to 07.12.2008.
5. That, how many illegal construction had booked for destroyed by Mr.
R.K.Singhal (Ex. Engineer) from the date of 01.10.2007 to 07.12.2008.
6. That, in the above ward had destroyed by MCD. Provide list from date of
01.10.2008 to 07.12.2008.
7. That, in the above ward, how much notices are issued by Ex. Engineer, for
destroying illegal construction from the date of 01.10.2008 to 17.12.2008.
8. That, how much work are made by MCD in said ward presently.
The PIO replied.
Not replied.
First Appellate Authority Ordered:
“Heard. PIO is directed to furnish the complete required information to the
appellant within 10 days positively. ”
Inspite of this the appellant did not receive any communication from the PIO.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The complete information will be sent to the appellant before 18 April, 2009.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information
by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
It also appears that the First appellate authority’s orders have not been implemented.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO is guilty of not
furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not
replying within 30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. He has further refused to
obey the orders of his superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of
information may also be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has clearly ordered the
information to be given.
It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1) .
A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the
Commission to show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
He will give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed
on him as mandated under Section 20 (1) before 23 April, 2009. He will also submit
proof of having given the information to the appellant.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
31st March, 2009
(In any case correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)