CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003646/11331
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003646
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta,
H. No. 12, Gali No. 1
Durgapuri Extension
Delhi-93.
Respondent : Mr. Raj Pal
Deemed PIO & Executive Engineer M – III
Office of Executive Engineer (Shahadra North)
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
L.I.G. Flats East of Loni Road, Shahdara
Delhi – 93
RTI application filed on : 14/06/2010
PIO replied : 08/08/2010
First appeal filed on : 27/09/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 06/10/2010
Second Appeal received on : 24/12/2010
S. No. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. The reply of the applications dated 24/07/2009, .the reply of every letter received by this
13/08/2009, 06/03/2008, 10/09/2009 has not department has been replied to
been received till date
2. Reasons for not proceeding on complaint to The proceedings have been done and the result
MCD Shahdra north zone dated 26/4/2008 has been sent to control room.
3. Reasons for no proceedings by JE, AE and XE The cleaning of the sewage drains is done
on the cleaning of sewage drains before rains according to requirement.
4. The proceedings done against the This question proves that MCD does the
encroachments in the sewage drain of loni road cleaning of sewage lines when necessary by
machines and otherwise by labour
5. .reason for not making an estimate on the MCD did not do any work in the partnership
proposal given by SDM shahdra zone for MCD plan of budget 2007 – 2008 and 2009-2010
work M – III. because PWD did it
6. The applicant has stated flaws in the works The add is given by the tax scheduling and
done by MCD for the drainage of water and collection department so this does not relate to
road construction and asks the development this department
which is done from the various taxes which are
collected
First Appeal:
Not Enclosed
Order of the FAA:
Since the information is already framed, so the PIO is ordered nothing and the appeal is disposed off.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The Appellant is aggrieved with the information supplied by the PIO. He believes that the information is
incomplete and unsatisfactory.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Absent;
Respondent : Mr. Raj Pal, Deemed PIO & Executive Engineer M – III;
The Respondent states that he has provided all the information available on 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
07 February 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (AM)