CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opp. Ber Sarai Market, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/WB/C/2009/000118/SG/5998
Appeal No. CIC/WB/C/2009/0000118
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Complaint:
Complainant : Mr. S.M. Singh
Nathu Ki Bagichi, P.K. Road,
New Delhi - 110001
Respondent : Mr. H. P.Singh
Public Information Officer & EE (Ebr)
New Delhi Municipal Council
PIO (UACC) Pragati Bhawan,
Jai Singh Road, New Delhi – 110001
RTI application filed on : 28/07/2008
PIO replied : Not mentioned
First appeal filed on : 24/09/2008
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned
Complaint received on : 15/10/2008
Hearing Notice issued on : 06/11/2009
Hearing held on : 18/12/2009
Information sought:
The Appellant had sought following information from PIO, NDMC:
1- What action has been taken on the complaint dated 25.03.08 regarding demolition of
encroachment at Khera Helmet Shop, Ring Road.
2- What action has been taken to remove encroachment on the footpath of Nathu Ki
Bagichi, P.K.Road.
3- Whether shop owners selling their goods on the footpath at Nathu Ki Bagichi are
authorized? If yes what is amount been taken as rent for Tehbazari.
PIO’s reply:
Not mentioned.
Grounds for First Appeal:
No information was provided.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
Not mentioned
Grounds for Second Appeal:
No information was provided. FAA had also not decided the first appeal.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Complainant: Mr. S.M. Singh;
Respondent: Mr. H. P.Singh, Public Information Officer & EE (EBR);
Mr. Vijay Kaushik, Joint Director (Enforcement);
The RTI application was first received in Enforcement Building Regulation Branch on 01
August 2008. This was transferred to the PIO (Enforcement) on 08 October 2008. It is disgusting
that the so called Enforcement Branch is not able to do a simple job of transferring the RTI
application with in 05 days as required by the Law. It is evident that such an Enforcement
Branch could not have been functioning at all. The Enforcement Branch to which the RTI was
transferred did nothing on the RTI application. According to Mr. Vijay Kaushik, Joint Director
(Enforcement), “In October 2008 all the officers in the Enforcement Branch were transferred and
there was no PIO till November 2008. After this the Enforcement had no knowledge about the
RTI application received by them. Only in December 2009 when a communication was received
form the EBR Branch they realized that they have to supply the information. It is indeed a sad
comment on the capabilities and the working of the Enforcement Branch.
Decision:
The complaint is allowed.
The information 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 cost as per Section 7(6) of
RTI Ac.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
18 December 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)k.j.