CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000438/7565
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000438
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Beeram Singh
160, Dhakka, Kingsway Camp,
Delhi - 110009.
Respondent : Public Information officer &
Veterinary Officer(HQ)
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Veterinary Department (HQ), Town Hall,
Chandni Chowk, Delhi - 110006.
RTI application filed on : 21/07/2009
PIO replied : 10/08/2009, 15/09/2009, 06/08/2009, 24/07/2009,
29/07/2009, 10/08/2009, 12/08/2009, 12/08/2009,
10/08/2009, 03/08/2009, 04/08/2009 & 01/08/2009
First appeal filed on : 29/12/2009, 31/08/2009 & 10/08/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 04/01/2010, 01/09/2009,
Second Appeal received on : 17/02/2010
Information Sought:
1. Number of people who had been allocated dairy by MCD since 1975-2007 for rearing
cows and buffaloes.
2. Name of the person(s) who had been allocated these dairies with details of zone in which
these allocation of dairy had been made.
3. Copy of the rule/conditions on which those allocation had been made.
4. Number of people who sold his dairy in stead of returning it to the MCD and details of
action taken against them.
5. Whether the MCD was aware that the people who had been allocated dairy to rear cattle
were operating some other business from these premises. Details of action if any, taken
against them.
6. Number of illegal dairy being operated from Delhi region and details of action taken
against them.
7. Whether there was any plan to free Delhi from stray cattle.
8. Details of compensation amount if any, given by MCD to next of kin of those who had
been killed by the stray bulls.
9. Whether dairies had been ready in Ghogha. Number of people sent there.
10. Copy of the affidavit if any, given by MCD to Delhi High Court in respect of making
Delhi free from stray cattle. Whether Delhi High Court had given any fresh order in this
regard. If yes then copy of the same.
Reply of the PIO:
The PIO of all zones except PIO, Shahdara South Zone and HQ had not replied to the Appellant.
Page 1 of 3
PIO, Rohini Zone – 10/08/2009, 04/12/2009
PIO, Civil Lines Zone – 16/09/2009, 10/08/2009
PIO, Karol Bagh Zone – 06/08/2009
PIO, Narela Zone – 24/07/2009
PIO, Central Zone – 29/07/2009
PIO, West Zone – 12/08/2009
PIO, Najafgarh Zone – 12/08/2009
PIO, City Zone – 10/08/2009
PIO, South Zone – 03/08/2009
PIO, Sadar Pahar Ganj Zone – 04/08/2009
PIO, Shah (North) Zone – 01/08/2009
Ground of First Appeal:
Incomplete information received from the PIO.
First Appellate Authority ordered:
The FAA (HQ) directed all PIOs to give the complete information to the Appellant before
02/02/2010.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Non-receipt of complete information from the PIO after the order of the FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. Beeram Singh;
Respondent : Absent;
The Appellant has been trying to draw the attentions of the authorities to the facts that
lands have been given to various dairies which have been largely sold off and are being for other
purposes. The information sought by the Appellant would largely be available in the centralized
manner at the Head Quarters but the RTI application has been sent to various zones most of
whom have been informing appellant that this information would be available with the Head
Quarters. It appears that PIO (HQ) is trying to avoid giving the information to the Appellant it is
also significant that the First Appellate Authority(FAA) Director Veterinary Services had on
04/01/2010 directed that the complete information should be collected from Zonal offices and
forwarded to the Appellant by 02/02/2010. No meaningful information has been provided to the
Appellant even after this order. It is evident that the FAA believed that the information was
available and hence he has passed an order directing complete information would be provided.
The Commission is now directing PIO(HQ) to provide the complete information if necessary
after getting the help of the zonal veterinary officers.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO(HQ) is directed to provided the complete information to the
Appellant before 15 May 2010.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by
the PIO (HQ) within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO (HQ) is guilty of not furnishing
information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within
Page 2 of 3
30 days, as per the requirement of the RTI Act. He has further refused to obey the orders of his
superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also be
malafide. The First Appellate Authority has clearly ordered the information to be given.
It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause
notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission to show
cause why penalty should not be levied on him.
The PIO (HQ) will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 25 May 2010
at 2.30pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed
on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the
information to the appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the
Appellant the PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct
them to appear before the Commission with him.
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
26 April 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(GJ)
Page 3 of 3