CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000343/2945Penalty
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000343
SHOWCAUSE HEARING:
Appellant : Mr. J.D. Kataria,
9398, Tokriwalan, Azad Market,
Delhi-110006.
Respondent : Mr. N.K.Gupta,
Superintendent Engineer & PIO,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Sadar Paharganj Zone,
Idgah Road, Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 05/01/2009 PIO replied : 30/01/2009 First Appeal filed on : 30/01/2009 First Appellate Authority order : 18/02/2009 Second Appeal filed on : 02/03/2009
The appellant had asked in RTI application regarding illegal
encroachment on service road of Shahzada Bagh, New Delhi. and action taken
report on the said matter by MCD.
S. No. Information sought. The PIO replied.
1. Please tell me total height & width of Road Shahzada Bagh colony
opposite Metra Pillar No. 185-186, Plot no. 5, comes under the Area no.
Shahzada Bagh, Shastri Nagar. 74 of Karol Bagh Zone
Division EE(M)/KZ/II.
2. Had made recently any illegal encroachment As above.
on service road of Shahzada Bagh land?
3. Please tell me name and address of the As above.
department had made illegal encroachment on
service road.
4. Please tell me what action had been taken As above.
against illegal encroachment by department.
5. In which department of MCD comes this area? Comes under Division
EE(M)II/KBZ.
6. What is the roll of J.E works in which stopped As above.
illegal encroachment?
7. Did take any departmental action regarding As above.
illegal encroachment against J.E.Works or any
others officers?
8. Will MCD to drive away illegal encroachment, As above.
Page no. 1 of 4
if yes, when?
9. Did MCD cause some police FIR against As above.
illegal encroachment? If no, what is the reason
did not take action against said matter?
10. What is the reason for not contacting -to DC, This area is not comes under
SPZ? While we did try contact to DC. by S.P.Zone.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar (PA-DC), will be taken
any action by MCD against Mr. Rajesh
Kumar (PA-DC)?
First Appellate Authority Ordered:
“I have gone through the appeal and replying on the statement of appellant Sh.
J.D. Kataria that he has not received any information in respect to his application
under RTI Act, 2005 filed on 05.01.2009 in Sadar Paharganj Zone vide receipt no
AZ-2299960 of Rs. 10/- PIO/SE/SPZ is directed to provide the requisite information
to the appellant as per RTI act, within 10 working days.”
Inspite of this the appellant did not receive any communication from the PIO.
Relevant facts emerging during hearing:
The following were present.
Appellant: Mr. J.D. Kataria
Respondent: PIO
The appellant states that no information has been provided to him inspite of the clear
directions of the First appellate authority.
Decision dated 27 April 2009:
The Appeal was allowed. The Commission directed the PIO to give the information to
the Appellant before 10 May, 2009. The Commission issued a show cause notice to
the PIO and directed him to appear before the Commission on 18 May 2009 along
with written submissions to show cause why penalty should not be imposed on him
under Section 20 of the RTI Act.
Brief facts leading to show cause hearing on 23 December 2009:
There are two letters dated 24/03/2009 and 13/05/2009 sent by Karol Bagh Zone to
the Appellant which are on the Commission’s file in which reference has been made
to a RTI Application ID No. 3375-G/SE/KBZ/2008 dated 26/02/2009. In both letters,
the response is that the matter relates to PWD but there is no evidence that the RTI
Application has been transferred under Section 6(3). The person who signed the letter
dated 24/03/2009 was Mr. NK Gupta. During a show cause hearing held on
20/11/2009 in this matter, Mr. NK Gupta, PIO & SE stated that the person who signed
the letter dated 13/05/2009 was Mr. Hassan. The Commission therefore issued a show
cause notice to Mr. NK Gupta and Mr. Hassan to appear before the Commission on
23/12/2009.
Relevant facts arising during the show cause hearing on 23 December 2009:
The following persons were present:
Appellant: Absent
Respondent: Mr. NK Gupta, then SE, KBZ;
Page no. 2 of 4
Mr. Hassan, Executive Engineer the then deemed PIO;
The Respondents state that the RTI Application was filed with the SP Zone in
September 2008. When the Appellant filed a First Appeal, the First Appellate
Authority gave an order that the RTI Application should transferred to the Karol Bagh
Zone. The RTI Application was received on 02/03/2009 in the Karol Bagh Zone. A
reply was prepared by the AE and EE (Mr. Hassan) on 20/03/2009 in which it was
stated that the information pertained to the PWD. On 24/03/2009, Mr. NK Gupta, SE
informed the Appellant that the matter pertained to the PWD. After the Appellant
approached the Commission, the RTI Application was once again transferred to the
Karol Bagh Zone by the SP Zone on 13/04/2009. Once again the same response was
sent by Mr. Hassan, the EE M II, to the PIO that the matter pertains to PWD. The
matter was transferred to the PWD on 13/10/2009 by the current SE & PIO, KBZ.
The failure has been that though it has been recognized on 24/03/2009 that the
information pertains to PWD the application was not transferred to PWD. Finally the
RTI application was transferred to PWD on 01/10/2009 by the PIO Mr. Suresh
Chandra, Karol Bagh Zone. The Superintendent Engineer Mr. N.K.Gupta states that
Mr. Hasan, Executive Engineer and Mr. Chaman Lal deemed PIOs given this
information that the information was not with the department but was with PWD. The
PIO instead of transferring the RTI Application as per the provisions of the RTI Act
inform the appellant that the matter pertained to PWD. Mr. Gupta contends that the
responsibility for this should be fixed with the Junior Officers who informed about
this. Mr. Gupta appears to claim that as Superintendent Engineer and PIO he
discharges no function nor applies his mind on what happens and is merely acting as
forwarding officer. The PIO definitely has the role to play when the application has to
be transferred and failure to do this is certainly assignable to the PIO. Senior officers
who are PIOs often tend to put their misdoing on their juniors and appear to claim that
they are responsible for nothing. The SE informed the Commission that he was
transferred form this position on 05 June 2009. The Commission therefore holds Mr.
N.K.Gupta responsible for the delay in transferring the application from the period
25/03/2009 to 01/06/2009. This a period of 64 days.
The Commission sees this as a fit case for levy of penalty for not transferring the
application as per the provision of Section 6(3) of the RTI Act when the PIO realized
that the information belongs to another public authority. The Commission therefore
levies a penalty for a delay of 64 days at Rs.250/- per day of delay on Mr.
N.K.Gupta, Superintendent Engineer & PIO, MCD, Sadar Paharganj Zone, Idgah
Road, Delhi. The penalty amount comes to 64 days X Rs.250 = Rs. 16000/-
Decision:
As per the provisions of Section 20 (1), the Commission finds this a fit case
for levying penalty on Mr. N.K.Gupta, Superintendent Engineer & PIO. Since the
delay in providing the correct information has been of 70 days, the Commission is
passing an order penalizing Mr. N.K.Gupta for Rs. 16,000/-.
The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi is directed to recover the
amount of Rs.16,000/- from the salary of Mr. N.K.Gupta and remit the same by a
Page no. 3 of 4
demand draft or a Banker’s Cheque in the name of the Pay & Accounts Officer, CAT,
payable at New Delhi and send the same to Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar, Joint
Registrar and Deputy Secretary of the Central Information Commission, 2nd Floor,
August Kranti Bhawan, New Delhi – 110066. The amount may be deducted at the rate
of Rs.4000/ per month every month from the salary of Mr. N.K.Gupta and remitted by
the 10th of every month starting from January 2010. The total amount of Rs.16,000/-
will be remitted by 10th of April, 2010.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
23 December 2009
(In any case correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)
1- Commissioner
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Town Hall, Delhi- 110006
2. Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar,
Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary
Central Information Commission,
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110066
Page no. 4 of 4