CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000584/7483
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000584
Appellant : Mr. Baldev Raj,
1300-1318/102-A,
1st Floor, Sulatan Singh Building,
Kashmere Gate, Delhi-110006,
Respondent : Ms. Anju Nigam
Deemed PIO & Law Officer
Slum & JJ Department,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Vihas Kutir, G Block
ITO, New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 19/10/2009
PIO replied : 18/11/2009
First Appeal filed on : 30/11/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 11/01/2010
Second Appeal Received on : 05/03/2010
Information sought:
Giving reference to the Notification dated 05/06/1963 and 02/07/1992, Appellant wanted
inspection of the above mentioned records/files in respect of the boundaries of the Urban Village
Shahdara, at Chandrawli, Delhi-110032.
PIO's Reply:
"As reported by Dealing Asstt. no such record as asked by the applicant is available in Law
Office Slum & JJ Deptt, MCD"
Grounds for First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
"Shri Akshay Srivastva, JLO informed that the notification file of 1992 is available in the Law
Section and the Appellant can inspect the file on any working day and the record prior to 1992 is
not available in the Law Section, S & JJ. The Appellant is requested to inspect the file in the
PIO's office. PIO is directed to provide the copies of the relevant record to the Appellant if
demanded after inspection as per the provision of RTI Act".
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Requisite records were not provided for 1963-1964.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Baldev Raj;
Respondent: Ms. Anju Nigam, Deemed PIO & Law Officer;
The Appellant has sought inspection of regarding notification file for the period 1963-64
and additions made on it in 1992. The deemed PIO has given an inspection of the file of
additions made in 1992 but there is no file in the records of the original base notifications of
1963-64. The deemed PIO states that there is no evidence of the file that the appellant is seeking
and hence it is not possible to give an inspection of such a file. The appellant states that this is a
very important record and MCD should reconstruct the file. The public authority may consider if
this is necessary.
Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
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 April 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj