CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room no.415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi 110 066.
Tel: 9111 26161796
Decision No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01495/SG/00027/penalty1
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01495
Showcause Hearing on 24 October 2008 at 4.30pm
Present :
1. Dr. Alok Aggarwal
Deemed Public Information Officer Under RTI Act 2005
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Veterinary Department (West Zone)
Room No. 104, MCD Office, Vishal Encalve
Rajouri Garden, New Delhi - 110027
2. Dr. Bhalla
Public Information Officer Under RTI Act 2005
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Veterinary Department (West Zone)
MCD Office, Vishal Encalve
Rajouri Garden, New Delhi - 110027
3. Mr. Jagpal Singh
Deemed Public Information Officer Under RTI Act 2005
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Engineering Department (West Zone)
4. Mr. Naveen Verma
Public Information Officer Under RTI Act 2005
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Engineering Department (West Zone)
5. Mr. Devender Kumar
Public Information Officer Under RTI Act 2005
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
DEMS Department
Ambedkar Stadium, Delhi Gate, Delhi
6. Mr. Raj Pal Sing
Nodal Officer & Public Information Officer Under RTI Act 2005
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Engineering Department
Town Hall, Chandni Chowk, Delhi - 110006
7. Mrs. Alka R. Sharma
ADC (Health) & Public Information Officer Under RTI Act 2005
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Engineering Department
Town Hall, Chandni Chowk, Delhi - 110006
And Appellant A.N.Prasad
Proceedings
The Commissioner asked whether the information was provided to the Appellant.
The appellant pointed out that whereas information had been given to him about the
status of this complaint after the RTI application, the respondents had not given the
information about the action taken on his complaints from the date that the filed the
complaints, up to the date the RTI application. The respondents said that they had
understood that they needed to provide this information only after the date of the filing of
the RTI application. They have been directed to furnish this information to the appellant
by 6, November 2008 for the action taken on the complaints from the date that the
complaints of filed.
On the question of imposing penalties on the responsible officers they claim that the RTI
application had initially been handled by one person and from there it went to 3 different
departments and the various officers have handled the application, and therefore it was
difficult for them to identify the responsible officers. The commission has asked them to
prepare a table listing the movement of the RTI application and the names and
designations of the officers who had handled the RTI application. They were directed to
deliver this by 06/11/2008 after which the commission will decide on the further action to
be taken.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
24 October, 2008
