CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi -110 066.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /WB/A/2008/01249//SG/0894
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2008/01249/
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Ritu Raj Gehlaut,
401/7, Ashok Mohalla,
Nangloi,
Delhi – 110041
Respondent 1 : Dy. Commissioner & PIO,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi.
Office of the Deputy Commissioner,
West Zone, Rajouri Garden,
New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 27/12/2007 PIO replied : 25/01/2008 First appeal filed on : 25/02/2008 First Appellate Authority order : 27/03/2008 Second Appeal filed on : 24/06/2008
The appellant had asked in the RTI application about unauthorized
constructions in the regularized markets are situated in ward no. 41 of MCD,
Guruharkishan Nagar, New Delhi.
Detail of required information:-
The appellant had an application regarding unauthorized constructions in the
regularized markets situated in ward no. 41 of MCD, Guruharkishan Nagar, New
Delhi. Give details i.e. name and address of all the regularized marked. Are all these
markets handed over to MCD give details date, month, and year wise., number of
shops and measurement of each shops, name, & address of shops present trade to
trade for which they hold the license, provide information of MCD employees, who
responsible for cleaning of streets and drains situated in ward no. 41, Guruharkishan
Nagar, Delhi give name and designation of these employees.
The PIO replied.
The PIO had provided information to the appellant as per office record.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
“The appellant and the DC (West Zone) were present for hearing on
18/03/2008 at 11.00 am. The matter was discussed with the PIO/DC (West Zone),
who stated that he would look into the details of this case afresh and thereafter a reply
would be provided to the appellant at the earliest possible.
The PIO/DC (West Zone) must ensure that the required information is
collected from the concerned departments and made available to the appellant at the
earliest possible but not later than 7th April, 2008 under intimation to this office.”
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Ritu Raj Gehlaut
Respondent: Mr. Madan Mohan PIO
The respondent has given most of the information after the order of the First appellate
authority. However the appellant points out that it was given late and the PIO is
warned to ensure that replies are given within the timeframe of the RTI act.
To the appellant’s query ‘How many shops have applied for change of license trade?’
The PIO will provide a categorical answer.
Decision:
The appeal is partially allowed.
The PIO will give the information on the point mentioned above to the appellant
before 30 January 2009.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
6 January, 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)