CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003063/10300
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003063
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Mukesh Vaid,
7/76B, Bhim Gali,
Vishwas Nagar,
Delhi- 32.
Respondent : Mr. Bachchu Lal, Sanitary Superintend
Office of Assistant Commissioner,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Shah South Zone, Near Karkardooma Court
Shahadra Delhi
RTI application filed on : 03/08/2010
PIO replied : Not replied.
First appeal filed on : 14/09/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 11/10/2010 Second Appeal received on : 29/10/2010 S. No. Information Sought
1. Copy of the order CA/F&G/2010/60 dated 11/05/2010.
2. List of Officers of MCD who shall sign the Loan Form
3. Whether the amount towards payment of loan taken from the nationalized banks was being
deducted from the salary of the employees monthly on account of an order from the Corporation;
if yes, specify reasons for not making the same deductions now.
4. Whether the DDO can refuse to sign the Loan form of any employee.
First Appeal:
No information provided by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
“The Appellant Shri Mukesh Vaid appeared for hearing and stated that the required information in.
respect of his applications bearing receipt No.78669 dated 03/08/2010 and receipt No.84353 dated
05/08/2010 has not been provided by the. PIO so for.
The Sanitation Superintendent, Shri Bachchu Lal, who was present for hearing on behalf of the PlO, has
been directed to provide the required information to the Appellant by 18th October, 2010 positively under
intimation to the undersigned. The P10 should ensure that the required information is provided by the SS.”
The PIO had been ordered to provide information to the Appellant latest by 18th October, 2010.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
No information furnished by the PIO despite orders from the FAA to provide the same by 18 th October,
2010.
Decision:
The appellant has stated that no information was provided by deemed PIO Mr. Bachchu
Lal who had been ordered to provide the information by the FAA.
The Appeal is allowed.
The Commission directs Mr. Bachchu Lal SS and deemed PIO to provide the
complete information as per records to the appellant before 20 December 2010.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIO Mr. Bachchu Lal 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 25 December 2010. He will also send the information sent to
the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the
information to the appellant.
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
3 December 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (SC)