CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003109/10617
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003109
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mrs. Imarti Devi,
w/o Raja Ram,
7575, Old Ice Factory,
Ram Nagar, Paharganj,
Delhi-110055
Respondent : Public Information Officer & Executive Engineer
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi,
Office of the Executive Engineer(B),
Sadar Pahar Ganj Zone,
Idgah Road, New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 13/05/2010
PIO replied : 14/06/2010
First appeal filed on : 22/06/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 30/09/2010
Second Appeal received on : 03/11/2010
Information Sought:
The Appellant had filed appropriate papers for sanction of building plan of his property bearing No. 7575,
Old Ice Factory Ram Nagar Paharganj, New Delhi and he has deposited the requisite fee Of Rs.300/- as
back as 2.2.2009. Certain objections were raised and he had replied and removed those objections since
back. But till today, he has not been intimated as to what has finally happened in the matter. Therefore he is
asking as to whether plan is sanction and if not , why and send me the sanctioned building.
Reply of the PIO:
PIO replied to the appellant that the case of sanction building plan of property bearing No-7575, Old Ice
Factory, Ram Nagar, Pahar Ganj, New Delhi had been rejected by AE(B)/SPZ.
First Appeal:
Irrelevant and vague information given by the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
“On hearing dt. 29.09.2010, Appellant Sh. Raja Ram, R/o Smt. Imarti Devi as well as EE(Bldg./SPZ on
behalf of PIO/SE/SPZ was present. Appellant has wished to know the status of his building plan and if
rejected than reasons thereof. Though he has been intimated the rejection of his plan EE(Bldg./SPZ is
advised to further intimate reasons of rejection within 07 working days.”
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Raja Ram representing Mrs. Imarti Devi,
Respondent : Absent;
The Appellant shows that he had filed for sanction of building plan on 02/02/2009 and has received
a letter form MCD on 25/02/2009 to makeup some deficiencies in the application. He shows that he had by
a letter of 09/03/2009 sent a letter to address the deficiency which was received by the Executive Engineer
(B) by registered AD on 16/03/2009. The Appellant was seeking information about action taken on his
application after he had sent the letter of 09/03/2009 which was received on 16/03/2009. The Deemed
PIO/EE(B-SPZ) has not provided any information of any action having been taken after receiving the letter
of the Appellant on 16/03/2009. The Appellant also shows that another reminder was sent in this matter to
the EE(B) on 13/07/2009 and 30/03/2010 which have been received in the EE(B) Office on the same day.
The Deemed PIO/EE(B) is directed to provide the information on action taken after receiving the letter of
the Appellant on 16/03/2009 and reminders dated 13/07/2009 and 30/03/2010.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The Deemed PIO/EE(B) is directed to provide the information to the Appellant
as per the order of the FAA before 15 January 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
Deemed PIO/EE(B) within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the deemed PIO is 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. He has further refused to obey the orders of his superior officer, which raises a
reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has
clearly ordered the information to be given.
It appears that the deemed PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice
is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show cause why penalty
should not be levied on him.
Deemed PIO/EE(B) will present himself before the Commission at the above address on
20 January 2011 at 11.30am alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be
imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also send the information sent to the
appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent the information to
the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the PIO
is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him.
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
24 December 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (PBR)
Encl:
1- Letter of 09/03/2009 reminder letters dated 13/07/2009 & 30/03/2010.
2- Copy of acknowledgement showing receipt by EE(B) on 16/03/2009