CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002877/6696
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002877
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Arvind Mishra,
House No. E-1051, Jahangir Puri
Delhi - 110033.
Respondent : Mr. V. Sathish Kumar
PIO & Dy. Director
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Horticulture Dept.
3rd Floor, 16 Rajpur Road,
Civil Lines Zone, Delhi - 110054
RTI application filed on : 28/05/2009
PIO replied : 15/06/2009
First appeal filed on : 24/06/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 07/08/2009
Second Appeal received on : 10-11-2009
Date of Notice of Hearing : 05/01/2010
Hearing Held on : 04/02/2010
The Appellant had sought following information regarding parks at ward no. 5 from PIO,
MCD, Horticulture Dept.
S. No. Information Sought PIO’s reply
1. How many parks are encroached illegally? Total 21 parks have encroachments which is
of DDA’s time. Under MCD’s possession
there is no encroachment.
2. Give Name, phone no., address of the mali There are 18 employees and one Chaudhary.
and employees working in parks. There are 99 parks. 53 are under Horticulture
dept. and 46 of latrine block.
3. How many trees were planted in the parks Total 100 plants were planted.
since two years?
4. Some parks have large gates and some have Gates installed after consultation with
small where as some gates do not even Nigam Parsad, MLA and Public. Large gates
opening. What is the standard rules of do not open usually. There is no such rule.
installing gates?
5. How many parks have religious temples, Total 21 parks have religious activities
give a list of such parks. Give copy of any which is of DDA’s time. Under MCD’s
rules why such religious thing can be done possession there is no religious activity.
in the parks?
Ground of the First Appeal:
Incomplete information given on points 2, 3, 4 & 5.
Order of the FAA:
“The PIO was directed to submit the requisite and complete fresh information (point
wise) to the appellant within 15 days from now”.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The incomplete information had been provided by the PIO and no positive reply had been
passed by the F.A.A.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Arvind Mishra;
Respondent : Mr. V. Sathish Kumar, PIO & Dy. Director;
Mr. Raj Kumar, Superintendent (R.P. Cell H.Q.) Nigam Bhawan Kashmere Gate;
The PIO has provided the information as per the records.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
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
04 February 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (BK)