CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000085/11507
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000085
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Ashok Argal
14, Dr. B.D. Marg
New Delhi
Respondent : Mr. B. M. Jain
Dy. Secretary & PIO
Home (General) Department, GNCTD
5TH Level, A Wing, Delhi Sachivalaya
I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 110002
RTI application filed on : 02/08/2010
PIO replied : 27/09/2010.
First appeal filed on : 15/10/2010 First Appellate Authority order : ------------- Second Appeal received on : 07/01/2011 Information Sought:-
1. Whether, it is a fact that MHA had issued the guidelines for validation of Arm licenses to All state
including Delhi vide letter No-V-11026/08/89 Arms dated 04.07.1989 if yes provide the certified
copy of these guidelines?
2. Whether it is fact that, as per letter no. V-11026/08/89-Amrs dated 04.07.89. All States Govt. /UT
Administration can not grant the All India validity of Arm licenses but State Govt./UT
Administration was sent their recommendation to MI-IA Govt. of India. If answer is ‘Yes’, how
many recommendation received in MHA through GNCT Delhi or UT Delhi?
3. Whether it is a fact that MHA Govt. of India had issued another guidelines for Arm licenses for
area validation by gazette notification dated 28.03.1990 provide the certified photocopy of it.
4. Whether it is a fact that MHA had issued new guidelines for all states/UT Administration of Arm
licenses or Area validation vide letter no V- 1026/20/89 Arms dated 29.03.1990 and it is
mentioned that the area validity should be considered keeping in views of 1989 guidelines and
State Govt. and GNCT Delhi can approved the All India validity of certain categories, which were
mentioned in 1989 guidelines at Para No-5, ‘What is the last date for these guidelines and certain
categories were in vogue in Delhi.
5. Whether it is a fact that 1989 guidelines and mention certain category for All India validity were
valid up to 11.10.1995 and 1989 guidelines and mention certain category in 1989 guidelines at
Para No-5 have been superceded vide letter no V-11026/106/94 on 11.10.1995. If answer is No,
kindly provide the 1ettêr or date in which certain categories which were mention in 1989
guidelines at Para No-5 were abolished or ended by MHA Govt. of India.
6. Whether it is a fact that MHA has issued new guidelines vide letter no-V-11026/106/94/ Arms on
11.10.1995 instead of 1989 guidelines and 1989 guidelines have been superceded by MHA and
1995 guidelines are in vogue up to 31.03.2010.
Page 1 of 3
7. Whether it is a fact that the following categories which are mention in Para No-5 of letter no V-
11026/08/89 Arms dated 04.07.89 are considered only All India validation of Arm licenses by All
State Govt/GNCT Delhi. The following categories for All India Validity are ass follows.
A- Ministers and Members of Parliament
B- Servicing Officer of Defense Services, Police Para Military Organization and Officer of
Government having liability to serve anywhere in India and
C- Members of Recognized Rifle Clubs and rifle Association for Bonafied Sports and games
When these above categories have been superceded or abolished by MHA Govt. of India. Kindly
provide the letter under which these above categories have been superceded or abolished by MHA and
what is the abolishing date of above categories and what is the last date to implement of these
categories in GNCT Delhi on the applicants in Delhi.
8. Whether it is a fact MHA has issued new guidelines for Area validation of Arm licenses in 2010
vide letter No V-11016/16/2009/Arms dt. 3l.03.2010 kindly provide the certified copy of these
guidelines.
9. Whether it is a fact that MHA has received some self made guidelines by GNCT Delhi regarding
validation of Arm licenses in Delhi in 2009 and these guidelines have been rejected by MHA and
MHA has issued new guidelines vide letter No. V-11016/16/2009 Arms dt. 31.03.2010. I need the
following information
A- If GNCT Dclhi has empowered to make guidelines regarding Area validation of Arm licenses so
what is the need of MHA to issue new guidelines. Kindly provide the reasion of it.
B- If GNCT Delhi has not empowered to make guidelines regarding validation of Arm licenses and
MHA has only the power to issue guidelines for All India validation and other State validity so what
action has been taken against those officer who have prepared self made guidelines in Delhi and these
guidelines have sent to MHA Govt of India and what action has been taken by MHA on these illegal
guidelines which were issued by GNCT Delhi? Provide the action taken report.
C- Which guidelines are in vogue at present in Delhi for validation of Arm licenses for All India
validity kindly provide the certified photocopy of these guidelines.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):-
With reference to MHA letter No. V-11026/131/2010-Arms dated 17-9-2010. received on transfer
in this office on 22-9-2010 reply in respect of Point No. 3&4 and 7 is as under :-
Point No. 3&4- Copy of Gazette Notification dated 28-3-90 is enclosed. (Four pages)
Point No. 7- As per procedure circulated by MHA vide dated 11-10-1995 in suppression of letter
dated 04-7-89 the application for grant of area extension of area validity of NPB arm 1icense are being
sent by the licensing unit of Delhi Police for obtaining approval of competent authority. However after the
delegations of powers vide wireless message no. V-11026/20/89-Ars dated 29-3-90 for informing the
issuance of the notification dated 28-3-90 the state government legitimately adopted and continued to
grant all Indai validity to the categories as mentioned by the applicant in RTI application dated 02-08-
2010.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
1. The reply of Point No-3 is right
2. The Reply of Point No-4 is wrong I asked what is the last date for the guidelines and certain
categories were in vogue in Delhi which were mention in 04.07.1989 MHA guidelines PIO has not
reply the asking information kindly provide the exact last date for these certain categories were in
vogue in Delhi
3. PIO’s reply is not match with the asking information in Point-7 I asked When the mention
categories have been supercede or abolished by MHA Govt. of India kindly provide the letter
under which these mentioned categories for abolished by MHA and what is the abolishing date of
Mention categories and what is the last date to implement of thses categories in GNCT. Delhi on
the applicants in Delhi. The PIO’s reply is not match with asking information. The PIO has
mentioned that the State Govt. adopted mid continued to grand all India Validity to the certain
Page 2 of 3
Mention category. I asked what the starting date and what is the last date for mention categories to
apply on the applicants in Delhi.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
No order passed by FAA
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory & incomplete information received from PIO and no order passed by FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. J. K. Sharma representing Mr. Ashok Argal;
Respondent: Mr. Vineet Kumar, OSD on behalf of Mr. B. M. Jain, Dy. Secretary & PIO;
The PIO has given most of the information and is now directed to provide the specific information
on the following:
1- If there is a date by which the categories mentioned in query-7 were to be abolished such dates
should be provided. If there is no specific date by which these were to be abolished this will be
stated.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant
before 30 March 2011.
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
16 March 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(KJ)
Page 3 of 3