CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office),
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001395/4133
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001395
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Birinder Singh
Jt GM (PS), IIFCO,
C-1, Saket Place,
New Delhi
Respondent : Mr. Suresh Chandra
PIO, SE (Bldg)
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi,
Office of the Superintending engineer,
Karol Bagh Zone,
New Delhi-110005.
RTI application filed on : 13/01/2009 PIO replied : 16/04/2009 (reply after 1st appeal) First appeal filed on : 03/03/2009 First Appellate Authority order : 21/05/2009 Second Appeal received on : 03/06/2009 Information sought:-
The appellant in his RTI application has sought the information regarding the
unauthorized construction by property A-71/2, Naraina Vihar, New Delhi, provide following
information
(The PIO reply after the 1st appeal)
S.No. Information Sought PIO’s reply
1. Steps and activities involved No such steps/activities are stipulated in the
between lodging of complaint and form of information on record.
booking of unauthorized
construction.
2. Stipulated time frame for each Nothing is indicated in item I as steps
step/activity indicated in item i. In /activities and the answer to item (i) is "No".
case no time frame is specified as The second part of the query dos not constitute
per MCD rules, the normal time the information as defined in the RTI act.
frame required for completing each
step/ activity .please provide a copy
of these rules.
3. MCD officials involved and there Answer to the item (i) is "No" as above.
responsibilities in completing each
step/activity in item i.
4. Daily progress against my complaint Photocopy of your complaint with movements
dt 22nd May 2008 till date. on it is enclosed herewith.
5. Names and the designationof the Photocopy of your complaint with movements
officials with whom this case was on it is enclosed herewith as referred in point
lying during this period. number 4.
6. Please give the proof of receipt and Photocopy referred above bears the dates and
dispatch of this case in the offices of stamps of the offices.
each of these officials.
7. In case the officials have not The reply to point no 1& 2 is “No” .Since there
adhered to the time limit as per item is no time frame and stipulated steps to be
ii and are guilty of violating these followed as envisaged by you, the question of
rules and hence guilty of violating one does not arise.
misconduct under their conduct rules
.please give a copy of there conduct
rule, which they have violated the
above mentioned rule.
8. What action will be taken against The reply to point no 1& 2 is “No” .Since there
these officials for violating the is no time frame and stipulated steps to be
above rules and for causing mental followed as envisaged by you, the question of
agony to the public? violating one does not arise.
9. By when this action would be taken At, present there is nothing on the record to
suggest it.
10. Kindly provide time frame for There is nothing on record, on the basis of
booking and demolishing the said which such time frame can be provided.
property Moreover, it requires generating of the
information.
11. Copy of all correspondence, notes, Photocopy of the complaint bearing
approvals, file noting in relation to movements,inspection report of JE dated
this case be provided. 6.06.2009 and the letter written to DDA have
already been abtained by you under RTI
.However ,you are welcome to inspect the
record avalaible with department to identify the
document,if any,so that the same can be
provided to you as per the provisions of the
RTI Act.
12. Name and designation of the MCD No such decision is taken on the record .The
officials who has taken decision to plan is being obtained as a document for
seek the standard /accommodation reference and a supportive document in this
plan from DDA. matter , as a usual procedure/routine
Grounds for First Appeal:
Non receipt of the information by PIO with in stipulated period of time.
The First Appellate Authority’s Order:
PIO is directed to show all the files/document /information relating to 71/2 ,NARAINA Vihar
,New Delhi, to the appellant ,on the date so fixed .
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Respondent 1 has not provided the information as indicated in our letter 28th April 2009 .First
Appellate Authority has offered inspection of records in place of providing the information.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. K.K.Lumba on behalf of Mr. Birinder Singh
Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Verma on behalf of PIO Mr. Suresh Chandra
The appellant Mr. Birinder Singh ahs sent a letter stating he has received all the information and
that MCD ahs also taken an action for booking and demolishing illegal/unauthorized properties.
He therefore wishes to withdraw the appeal.
Decision:
The appeal is withdrawn.
The information has been provided to the appellant.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
15 July 2009.
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(R.K)