CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000447/12112
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000447
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Rakesh Gupta
C 6/B 177 Janakpuri,
New Delhi.
Respondent : Mr. R. Prasad
PIO & SE
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
O/o the SE, Civil Lines Zone,
16, Rajpur Road, Civil Line,
Delhi -110054.
RTI application filed on : 02/12/2010
PIO replied : 06/01/2011
First appeal filed on : 31/12/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 21/01/2011
Second Appeal received on : 17/02/2011
Information sought by the appellant:
RTI is regarding of drainage system of ground toilet block & terrace of MC pry school old Mukheijee
Nagar in C-II vide W.O.NO. 83 DATED 26/6/09 That appellant had completed the items demolishing of
c.c, brick work, regarding of mudphaska, brick work, removing of malba, plaster l2mm, l5rnm, sewer line,
c.c, supplying of good earth, laying of good earth, gully grating, main hole, in said school as per direction
of concern i.e. but now it has completed the said work as per satisfaction of concern i.e. (Ashwani tyagi)
the said i.e. not interested giving bill of said work. discussed the matter with Z.E Sh Krishan kumar but
there is no reply :
Sl. Information Sought for : PIO Reply
1. What is the status of above said bill? The work is still incomplete, though the contractor has been
asked to complete the work several times. Whatever the
work executed by the contractor, the same has duly been
entered in the Measurement Book.
2. How much time it will take to pass The information is outside the purview of RTI Act, however
the bill, already five months without completing the work, it is
back. I have completed the hardly possible to process the bill further.
work till date.
Grounds of the First Appeal:
Appellant is not satisfied.
Order of the FAA:
“Provide the satisfied information to the appellant.”
Ground of the Second Appeal:
The appellant was not satisfied.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Rakesh Gupta;
Respondent: Mr. S. N. Hasan, EE on behalf of Mr. R. Prasad, PIO & SE;
The Appellant admits that the information has been provided to him as per records. The Appellant
believe that he would get payment of bills if he comes to the Commission in an appeal.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed.
The information available on the records has been provided.
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
25 April 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (RJ)