CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000845/7837
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000845
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Tapesh Kumar Gupta
1477/78, Punjabi Mohalla
Ghanta Ghar, Subzi Mandi,
Delhi - 110007.
Respondent : Public Information Officer &
JE(B) CLZ
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Civil Lines Zone, 16, Rajpur, Road,
Delhi - 110054.
RTI application filed on : 24/11/2009
PIO replied : 15/12/2009
First appeal filed on : 23/12/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 27/01/2010
Second Appeal received on : 05/04/2010
Information sought: -
The Appellant requested that he be allowed to construct on his property no. 1477-78 in view
of the fact that the two constructions were going on at the adjacent property no. 1479 about
which the PIO had assured the Appellant that the any illegal construction would be stopped.
Reply of the PIO:
The PIO informed the Appellant that the action against the property no. 1479, Punjabi
Mohall, Subzi Mandi, Delhi had been initiated vide file no. 212/B/C-9/UC/CLZ/2009 dated
14/12/2009.
Ground for the First Appeal:
Incomplete and unsatisfactory information received from the PIO.
Order of the FAA:
The FAA in its order sated that the property no. 1477/78, Punjabi Mohall, Ghanta Ghar,
Subzi Mandi, Delhi was a sub-divided property. Hence no separate building plan can be
sanctioned as per the Building Bye Laws.
Ground for the Second Appeal:
Unfair disposal of the Appeal by the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 24 May 2010:
“The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Tapesh Kumar Gupta;
Respondent: Absent;
The PIO has provided the information to the appellant. The appellant is not satisfied
with this. The appellant wants clarification of some of the information provided by the PIO.
He wants clarification of the statement of the FAA that “PIO submitted that property no.
1477/78 Punjabi Mohalla, Sabji Mandi is a sub-divided property. Hence no separate
sanctioned building plan can be entertained as per building bye-laws.” The PIO is directed
to clarify this statement and send it to the Appellant.”
Decision announced on 25 May 2010:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to clarify the statement mentioned above and send it to the
Appellant before 15 June 2010.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
25 May 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)(GJ)