CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002103/14636
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002103
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Raj Kumar Tomar
F-70/4, Gali No. 3,
Subhash Vihar, North Ghonda,
Delhi - 110053
Respondent : Mr. A. K. Mittal
Public Information Officer & SE-I
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Shahdara North Zone
Keshav Chowk, Red Light,
Opp. Welcome Metro Station,
Shahdara, Delhi
RTI application filed on : 19/04/2011
PIO replied on : Not mentioned.
First Appeal filed on : 26/05/2011
First Appellate Authority order of : 14/07/2011
Second Appeal received on : 29/07/2011
The information sought: The Appellant wants information about ward no. 256 and 257.
1. How many illegal constructions were booked from 01 January 2011 to 31 March 2011? Provide
me Name, Address, Property No., file book no.
2. How many building height are more than 50 feet's? What the action was taken against it?
The PIO reply:
No PIO reply mentioned.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The appellant did not receive reply from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Mr. B.L.Sharma AE was present. " The main ground for appeal was dissatisfaction with the reply
furnished by the PIO. Appellant states that he has not supplied the details of booked, property from
01.01.11 to 31.03.11 PIO is directed to supply the details to the appellant within seven days from the date
of issue of this letter." PIO SE I Shahadara North transferred the application on 18/7/2011.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The applicant has not received reply by PIO and unsatisfactory order was passed by the First Appellate
Authority.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Absent;
Respondent: Mr. A. K. Mittal, Public Information Officer & SE-I;
The PIO claims that the RTI application was not received. However, no such claim has been made
before the FAA during the hearing on 12/07/2011. The FAA had recorded that Mr. B. L. Sharma, AE was
present on behalf of the PIO. The FAA had also directed the PIO to supply the information to the
Appellant within 07 days of the order which was issued on 14/07/2011.
The PIO has provided some information regarding the wards covered in EE(B-I) which is 17 wards
including ward no. 256. Ward no. 257 is under the charge of SE-II/EE(B-II). The Commission directs the
PIO Mr. Mittal to provide the details of the illegal bookings done in EE(B-I) and obtain the details of
illegal constructions booked in EE(B-II) from the concerned officer and provide it to the Appellant before
05 October 2011.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant
before 05 October 2011. He will take the assistance of any other officer if necessary and
provide the information to the Appellant.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the PIO
within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the 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 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.
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 10 October 2011 at 12.30pm
alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated
under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given 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. If no other responsible persons are brought by PIO to the showcause hearing, it
will be presumed that he is the responsible persons.
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
16 September 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (MG)