CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002922/6102
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002922
Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Gupta
Chief Editor, Abhi Tak Crime Times
704, GT Road, Shahdara, Delhi 110032
Respondent : Superintending Engineer & PIO
MCD, Karol Bagh Zone
Near Khalsa College Anand Parvat
Karol Bagh, Delhi 110005
RTI application filed on : 26/06/2009 and 29/06/2009
PIO replied : 27/07/2009 and 28/07/2009; 06/11/2009
First Appeal filed on : Not enclosed
First Appellate Authority order : 14/10/2009
Second Appeal filed on : 06/11/2009
Information sought:
The Appellant sought information with regard to the following 19 properties situated in
the Karol Bagh Zone:
1. No WBA in front of 7A/43, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
2. No B-5/54, Pyare Lal Road, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
3. No 20 New Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
4. No T-5131, Pusa Lane, Arya Samaj Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
5. No 27 B/2, Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
6. No 56/4441, Raigur Pura, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
7. No 11649/1, Sant Nagar, Tank Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi
8. No 53/3, Deshbandhu Gupta Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
9. No 6 A/67, China Market Road, Sant Nagar, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
10. No 16 A/3, WEA, Karol Bagh, Delhi.
11. No 685, Gali No 2, Joshi Road, Karol Bagh.
12. No 5032, Gali No 3, Sant Nagar, Karol Bagh.
13. No 3/6482, Block 8, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh.
14. No 60/40, Block 60, Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh.
15. No 36-11A, Block WEA, Karol Bagh.
16. No 618, Gali No 18, Khhatar Gali, Faiz Road, Karol Bagh.
17. No 6A-22, China Market Road, WEA, Dev Nagar, Karol Bagh.
18. No 16/331, Khajur Road, Joshi Road, Karol Bagh.
19. No 18/9, Pusa Lane, WEA, Karol Bagh.
The following information was sought with the afore-mentioned properties:
1. Has MCD passed any plan for the property through Karol Bagh Zone, Building
Department or has any other type of approval been granted to this construction
work? If yes, then provide a photocopy of the plan. Is this unauthorized
construction in the knowledge of Commissioner, MCD?
2. How much amount has been paid for passing the plan? If the amount has been paid
by cheque/ demand draft then mention the no. of that cheque/ demand draft and
name of the bank. Is the plan for residential or for commercial purpose?
3. If MCD has not given any approval for the construction then what action has been
taken by the MCD against this unauthorized construction?
4. Has MCD, Karol Bagh zone Building Department booked this property for
demolition? If yes, then why it has not been demolished till date?
5. Has the unauthorized construction been sealed if there was any problem in
demolishing the said unauthorized construction? If no, then why? If yes, then what
is the time limit decided for demolition of the said unauthorized construction?
6. If there is a plan which was sanctioned by MCD, then is the construction according
to that plan? If no, then what action has been taken by MCD Karol Bagh Zone
Building department against the said property?
7. If construction work was permitted on the said property then give the name of the
engineer whose duty was to submit the report to the building department regarding
the said construction either after or during the construction work. Name and mobile
no. of the concerned JE may also be provided
8. Mention the name and designation and present work place of the AE, EE and SE to
whom that JE has submitted his report?
9. Area of the said property? (In Dimensions)
10. What was the status of the said property before Appellant’s complaint or before the
said unauthorized construction i.e. number of storeys or number of rooms in the
building or what was the coverage area?
11. What is the percentage of covered area permitted on the said property?
12. If there a plan has been sanctioned or any permission given, then mention that how
many storeys, rooms, kitchens and bathrooms were permitted?
13. Is construction work being done on part of the said property?
14. How many complaints were lodged against the said construction, mention
Complainant’s name if possible. Otherwise only mention what action has been
taken on that unauthorized construction after the complaint?
15. Name and official mobile no. of the officers of Building Department related to the
said property.
Reply of PIO:
The Executive Engineer (B), Karol Bagh Zone sent replies to the aforementioned 19 RTI
Applications on 27/07/2009 and 28/07/2009. In response to all the RTI Applications, the
same information was given. He stated that the building plans upto 400 sq. yd. of
residential nature are sanctioned for a period of five years. All building plans
released/issued are entered in a release register with full details. The release register for
the years from 2005 to 2009 upto 23/07/2009 consists of 56, 16, 39, 64 and 31 pages
totaling 206 pages. The building plan application register consists of details of amount
deposited by the owners at the time of application. The total number of pages of the
registers for the years from 2005 to 2009 is 279 pages. The EE(B) further informed the
Appellant that all unauthorised constructions booked are entered in Missalband register
which for the year 2005 to 23/07/2009 consists of 339 pages. The Appellant was
informed about the additional fees that may be paid to get copies of the afore-mentioned
registers.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Not enclosed.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
The First Appeal was heard on 09/10/2009 during which the Appellant and the SE were
present. The First Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that incomplete
information had been provided to the Appellant and the information had not been given
question-wise. He also observed that the information for all RTI Application was
provided together. He directed the SE, KBZ to give the complete and correct reply to the
Appellant in Hindi within 15 working days with intimation to him. The PIO was further
advised not to reply to more than one RTI Application together.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The Appellant had not received a response after the First Appellate Authority’s order.
Information received after filing of Second Appeal:
With regard to the 19 RTI Applications the PIO’s response:
i) The Building department had passed the plan of the mentioned property. The
plan could be accessed after payment of a fee.
ii) The files can be physically inspected after due appointment on any working
day.
iii) Same as answer to query no1.
iv) No complains have been received against the said property since the plan was
passed by the building department.
v) The property has not been sealed since the building plan was passed.
vi) Same as answer to query no 4.
vii) Copy of list of designations and names all officials has been enclosed.
viii) Same as above.
ix) Same as answer to query no1.
x) The Appellant has not provided enough explanation. The total coverage area
is as per building plan rule no 14.
xi) Same as answer to query no1.
xii) Same as answer to query no1.
xiii) Same as answer to query no 4.
xiv) All the complaints about the mentioned property are not available in
consolidated form. The complaints are forwarded to the concerned person
once it is registered in the diary register.
xv) Same as answer to query no7 and 8. Decision:
The Commission has perused the documents submitted by the Appellant and the
information received by him after the Second Appeal was filed. It is clear that the
information sought by the Appellant in his RTI Applications falls within the definition of
information under Section 2(f) of the RTI Act. The PIO & SE, KBZ has responded to
several Applications filed by the Appellant vide common replies on 27/07/2009 and
28/07/2009 in which he has offered copies of certain registers to the Appellant on
submission of additional fees. These copies are meant to answer all queries raised by the
Appellant in all his RTI Applications. The First Appellate Authority has observed in his
order dated 14/10/2009 that the Appellant must be provided the complete and correct
information within 15 working days. However, no information was provided to the
Appellant till 06/11/2009. On 06/11/2009 the information provided to the Appellant with
regard to the 19 RTI Applications, which are a subject matter of this Appeal, the PIO has
provided point-wise information.
The Commission finds this a clear case of non-application of mind by the PIO and all
other deemed PIOs who have also signed on the replies initially sent to the Appellant.
The reply given to the Appellant on 27/07/2009 and 28/07/2009 did not provide any
meaningful information to the Appellant’s queries. This is reaffirmed by the information
subsequently provided to the Appellant. The information provided to the Appellant vide
letter dated 06/11/2009 should have been provided to the Appellant within 30 days of
receiving the RTI Applications. Furthermore, it appears from the reply given by the PIO
on 06/11/2009 that he is asking the Appellant to pay additional fees even though the reply
is not being given within 30 days of receiving the RTI Applications.
The Appeal is allowed.
Information has been provided except Query No. 1. The PIO is directed to provide a copy
of the plan free of cost to the Appellant before 17 January 2010.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO is guilty of not
furnishing complete information to the Appellant within the time limits stipulated in
Section 7 (1) of the RTI Act. He has also not obeyed the orders of the First Appellate
Authority, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be
malafide. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1).
A show cause notice is being issued to him and he will present himself before the
Commission at the above address on 22 January 2010 at 4.30 p.m. along with his
written submissions to show cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
mandated under Section 20 (1). Proof of providing information to the Appellant will be
submitted to the Commission on 22 January 2010.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the correct information to
the Appellant and for not complying with the order of the First Appellate Authority, the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing on 22 January 2010 and
direct them to appear before the Commission on 22 January 2010 along with him.
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
24 December 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)