CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001140/8098
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001140
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mittal
54-B Jhang Co-op Group Housing Society
Ltd.
Plot No.-40, Sector-13, Rohini,
New Delhi-110085.
Respondent : Mr. Pradeep Gupta
Public Information Officer & Dy. Commissioner
O/o the Commissioner of Industries,
GNCT of Delhi,
Udyog Sadan, 419, FIE,
Patparganj Indl. Area,
Delhi-110097.
RTI application filed on : 08/02/2010 PIO replied : 02/03/2010 First appeal filed on : 22/03/2010 First Appellate Authority order : 08/04/2010 Second Appeal received on : 03/05/2010 Information Sought:
Copy of the rent agreement dated 24/11/1994 referred to in the Minutes of the I.L.M.A.C. held
on 04/01/2010.
Public Information Officer’s (PIO) reply:
Copy of the Rent Agreement dated 24/11/1994 between Mr. Ramesh Jadav and Mr. Manoj
Kumar was provided.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA found that the information provided by the PIO was complete.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unfair disposal of the appeal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Manoj Kumar Mittal;
Respondent: Mr. Pradeep Gupta, Public Information Officer & Dy. Commissioner;
The appellant has been provided the information that he had sought. The appellant states
that in a minutes of the meeting ILMAC held on 04/01/2010 at 11.30am in the chamber of Joint
Commissioner of Industries it has been recorded on page-8 “further he has taken on rent only
two rooms built on first floor of the said property which carry total area of 25sq yards and this
does not make him to assert that he has occupied entire 125sq yards of the plot (ref.rent
agreement dated 24/11/1994 given by the applicant at the time of filing application)”. The
appellant states that the copy of the rent agreement provided to him is of 24/11/1994 but does not
mention the details which were mentioned in the minutes of the meeting. The PIO states that
there is only one copy of the rent agreement with him which he had provided to the appellant.
Decision:
The Appeal is disposed.
The information available on the records has been provided 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
10 June 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AG)