CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000961/12838
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000961
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Devender Singh Tomar
16/9980, Gali No.5,
Near Sarai Rohilla Railway Station
New Rohtak Road, New Delhi- 110005
Respondent : Mr. Balbir Singh
PIO & Dy. Director (Admin)
Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board
F-4, Vikas Kuteer, ITO,
New Delhi-2
RTI application filed on : 23/12/2010
PIO replied on : 20/01/2011
First Appeal filed on : 02/02/2011
First Appellate Authority order of : 25/02/2011
Second Appeal received on : 08/04/2011
Information Sought:
The appellant sought information about names and designation of the officers/officials who were
suspended in the forgery scam of deposition of Rs.7000/- per person by slum dwellers. He had sought
amount recovered in this matter/scam, number of persons issued forged receipts, copy of FIRs,
whether ministry or minister has been informed about this scam, copy of the order by which officers
were suspended and so on...............
PIO`s Reply:
From the DUSIB, the Finance, Vigilance and SUR Branch supplied replies to the query.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The information provided was incomplete and misleading.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The reply was relevant as per the information sought by the Applicant. If the applicant needed specific
reply he was asked to approach the departments, with the I.D.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The appellant was not satisfied with the reply.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Devender Singh Tomar;
Respondent : Mr. Balbir Singh, PIO & Dy. Director (Admin) and Mr. Vijay Maggo, JLO(Vigilance-
DUSIB)
The appellant has sought information about a financial scam which occurred some time in
September 2010. The respondents have informed the Appellant that an inquiry ordered by the Delhi
Government is currently going on and hence details of this are not available until the report is
obtained. The appellant has also sought details of any FIR filed against two officers who are
suspended. The respondents have stated that no FIR has been filed against them. However, they have
been suspended. The Commission directs the PIO to give attested copy of the suspension order to the
appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to send attested copy of the suspension order to the Appellant
before 25 June 2011.
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
13 June 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)