Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. Chirag Saini vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 17 August, 2010

Central Information Commission
Mr. Chirag Saini vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 17 August, 2010
                           CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                               Club Building (Near Post Office)
                             Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                    Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                                 Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000677/9014
                                                                   Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000677

Complainant                                                :    Mr. Chirag Saini
                                                                4447, Arya Pura, Sabzi Mandi,
                                                                Delhi - 110007
.

Respondent : PIO & Assistant Commissioner
O/o Assistant Commissioner (SPZ),
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Sadar Paharganj Zone,
Idgah Road, Delhi

Facts arising from the Complaint:

Mr. Chirag Saini filed a RTI application, which is addressed to the PIO, Sadar
Paharganj Zone, with the PIO, O/o Lt. Governor, Secretariat, Raj Niwas, Delhi on
13/03/2010 asking for certain information. Which was transferred to the PIO, O/o Deputy
Commissioner, Sadar Paharganj Zone, Delhi U/s 6(3) of the RTI Act vide a letter dated
23/03/2010. However, on not having received any information, the Complainant filed a
complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act with the Commission on 21/05/2010. On this
basis, the Commission issued a notice to the PIO, O/o Deputy Commissioner, Sadar
Paharganj Zone, Delhi on 24/05/2010 with a direction to provide the information to the
Complainant and further sought an explanation for not furnishing the information within
the mandated time.

Subsequently, the Commission received a letter dated 23/06/2010 from the PIO &
AC, Sadar Paharganj Zone, Delhi, wherein it has been stated that the reply to the RTI
application was provided vide a letter dated 18/05/2010 to the Complainant. However, in
compliance of the Commission’s direction dated 24/05/2010 the same information had
again been provided to the Complainant by hand on 18/06/2010. The PIO & AC also
enclosed the copy of the reply with the noting of the Complainant that “I am fully satisfied
by this reply.”

Decision:

The Complaint is disposed off.

The Commission warns the PIO to ensure that information is provided to applicants
within the mandated time as per the provisions of the RTI Act.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
17 August 2010

(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RA)