CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002714/5991
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/002714
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Jag Mohan,
House No.A-67, Shiv Vihar,
Behind Barkatia Masjid, Vikas Nagar,
Uttam Nagar, New Delhi - 110059.
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
O/o The Assistant Commissioner,
West Zone, Vishal Enclave,
Rajouri Garden, New Delhi - 110027.
RTI application filed on : 20-03-2009
PIO replied : 20-04-2009
First appeal filed on : 08-07-2009
First Appellate Authority order : Not replied
Second Appeal received on : 23-10-2009
Date of Notice of Hearing : 06/11/2009
Hearing Held on : 18-12-2009
Information Sought:
The Appellant had sought following information from PIO - MCD, West Zone, regarding
original Tehbazari Allotment letter deted 27.01.2009 letter No. AC-WZ/2009/D-908 dated
27.01.2009, name of allotted Tehbazari site F-Block, Vikas Puri, New Delhi.
1. Whether if any license fee of Tehbazari is due against the appellant.
2. Whether the applicant was issued allotment letter for Particular place newly allotted sied to the
applicant.
3. Whether the applicant was issued possession slip in respect of newly allotted site.
4. Whether the applicant was issued Tehbazari identify card in respect of newly allotted tehbazari
site.
5. Any other relevant documents in respect of Tehbazari of the applicant may kindly be provided.
The PIO's reply.
"Applicant may be requested to submit the photocopy of the document indicated vide point no.
1,2,3,4 in his RTI application. So, the same could be verified in this office & reply could be given to the
appellant accordingly".
Ground of the First Appeal:
Dissatisfied information had been provided by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
No order had been passed by FAA.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Dissatisfied information had been provided and no any order had been passed by the FAA.
Incorrect and incomplete information had been supplied by the PIO after Ist Appeal.
.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Jag Mohan;
Respondent : Mr. Dalip Singh, Public Information Officer & Assistant Commissioner;
The RTI was received on 23/03/2009 vide id no. 399. The then PIO & AC Mr. Madan Mohan on
21/04/2009 claims to have sent a letter to the appellant asking that a photocopy of the document regarding
his tehbazari should be submitted so that reply could be given. The Appellant states he has never received
this letter and no evidence has been shown to prove that this letter was sent.
The information has been provided on 13/08/2009 with the order of the FAA, along which the
information has been provided. It is apparent that no clarification or information was required by the
appellant to provide the information.
The Appellant claims that he is being harassed by MCD officer and not allowed to conduct his hocking in
the place allotted to him. The Commission desires that MCD look into this grievance and redress it. The
PIO assures the Commission that he will personally investigate the matter and try and redress the
grievance of harassment. The PIO is directed to send a report after this to the Commission before 15
January 2010.
The PIO states that the responsibility of not providing the information rests with Mr. Ahok Kumar, Rent
Collector and Mr. P. Bose, Licensing Inspector.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The information has been provided.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
deemed PIOs Mr. Ahok Kumar, Rent Collector and Mr. P. Bose, Licensing Inspector within 30
days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIOs Mr. Ahok Kumar, Rent
Collector and Mr. P. Bose, Licensing Inspector are 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.
It appears that the deemed PIOs actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause
notice is being issued to them, and they are directed give their reasons to the Commission to show cause
why penalty should not be levied on them.
They will present themselves before the Commission at the above address on 18 January 2010 at 02.30pm
alongwith their written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on them as
mandated under Section 20 (1).
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
18 December 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (BK)