CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000192/7459Adjunct-II/Penalty
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2010/000192
Complainant : Mr. Chirag Saini
4447, Aarya Pura Subzi Mandi
Ghantaghar, New Delhi-110007
Respondent (1) : Mr. Kapil Dev
Deemed PIO & Junior Engineer (W)
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Rohini Zone, Zonal Office Building,
Sector-V, Delhi-110085
Facts
arising from the Complaint:
Mr. Chirag Saini had filed a RTI application with the PIO, MCD, Sadar Pahar Ganj Zone on
14/11/2009 asking for certain information. However on not having received any further information within
the mandated time, the Complainant filed a complaint under Section 18 of the RTI Act with the Commission.
On this basis, the Commission issued a notice to the PIO, MCD, SP Zone on 24/02/2010 with a direction to
provide the information to the Complainant and further sought an explanation for not furnishing the
information within the mandated time.
The Commission has received a copy of letter dated 18/03/2010 of the SE, MCD/SP Zone vide which
the Executive Engineer (B), MCD, SP Zone has been directed to provide the requisite information to the
Complainant. Further, the said letter states that O/o the SE has already given such directions to the EE (B)
vide letters dated 24/02/2010 and 03/03/2010 as also the Commission’s notice has been served to the EE (B)
vide a letter dated 05/03/2010. However, the Commission has neither further received a copy of the
information sent to the Complainant, nor has it received any explanation from the deemed PIO for not
supplying the information to the Complainant. Therefore, the only presumption that can be made is that the
deemed PIO has deliberately and without any reasonable cause refused to give information as per the
provisions of the RTI Act.
Decision dated 14/04/2010:
The Complaint was allowed. In view of the aforesaid, the deemed PIO was hereby directed to provide
the complete information in regard to the RTI Application dated 14/11/2009 to the Complainant before
07/05/2010 with a copy to the Commission. From the facts before the Commission, it appeared that the
deemed PIO had not provided the correct and complete information within the mandated time and had failed
to comply with the provisions of the RTI Act. The delay and inaction on the deemed PIO’s part in providing
the information amounted to willful disobedience of the Commission’s direction as well and also raised a
reasonable doubt that the denial of information may be malafide.
The deemed PIO was hereby directed to present himself before the Commission on 14/05/2010 at
02.30 pm along with his written submissions to show cause why penalty should not be imposed and
disciplinary action be recommended against him under Section 20 (1) and (2) of the RTI Act. Further, the
deemed PIO might serve this notice to such person(s) who are responsible for this delay in providing the
information, and might direct them to be present before the Commission along with the deemed PIO on the
aforesaid scheduled date and time. If the information had already been supplied to the complainant, bring a
Page 1 of 4
copy of the same to the Commission with your written submissions, and also proof of seeking assistance
from other person(s), if any.
Facts emerged during showcause hearing dated 14/05/2010:
Complainant: Absent
Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, APIO/EE(B), SPZone, MCD
The APIO, Mr. A.K. Singh, EE(B), SP Zone has submitted his written submissions with the copy of
the reply dated 12/05/2010 of the RTI application dated 24/11/2009 and he has stated that the RTI application
was marked to the AE(B)/SPZ, Mr. S.R. Lakhan and JE(B), Mr. Kapil Dev but he has no proof of the said
marking of the RTI application or the copy of movement register with him. He has also submitted the
forwarding letter dated 10/05/2010 of the Commission’s order to the abovesaid AE(B) & JE(B). He has also
submitted a copy of letter dated 22/03/2010, according to which the Complainant had received the reply of
the said RTI application. However, when the Commission has contacted the Complainant over the phone, the
Complainant has denied that he ever received the information.
Mr. A. K. Singh has claimed that he had sought the assistance of Mr. S. R. Lakhan, AE(B) and Mr. Kapil
Dev JE(B) to provide the information. He claims that he had sought the assistance on 04/12/2009 from
AE(B) Mr. S. R. Lakhan. He has no brought any documentary evidence to show this the Commission issues a
showcause notice to Mr. S. R. Lakhan, AE(B), Mr. Kapil Dev JE(B) and Mr. A. K. Singh AE(B) to show
cause why penalty under Section 20(1) should not be levied on them for not supplying the information within
time. Mr. A. K. Singh is directed to bring documentary evidence to show that he has sought the assistance on
04/12/2009. All the three deemed PIOs will also get written submissions if they wish to present them. All
three officers are directed to be present before the Commission on 11 June 2010 at 5.00PM.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Complainant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him.
Relevant facts emerged during the hearing dated 11/06/2010:
“Complainant: Mr. Chirag Saini
Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, the then EE(B), SPZ; Mr. Rajesh Kumar, the then JE(B)
The then EE(B) Mr. A.K. Singh submitted the copy of movement register, in which it was apparent
that the RTI application dated 14/11/2009 was received in the office of the PIO/SE, SPZ on 03/12/2009.
Further, it was marked to the AE (B), Mr. S.R. Lakhan on 04/12/2009 and on 08/12/2009 the same was
forwarded to the JE(B) Mr. Rajesh Kumar through Mr. Vijay. Subsequently, as per the movement register the
RTI application was marked to another JE(B) Mr. Kapil Dev on 12/04/2010.
The deemed PIO & the then JE(B) Mr. Rajesh Kumar stated that he was only the officiating JE(B)
since 07/12/2009 to 31/12/2009 in the absence of the then JE(B) Mr. Kapil Dev. He also stated that he had
handed over all the records related to the RTI application to the then JE (B) Mr. Kapil Dev on 01/01/2010.
He submitted the copy of document which shows the handing over & taking over of the Daks of Ward no.
76, duly signed by Mr. Rajesh Kumar & Mr. Kapil Dev.
The then EE(B) Mr. A.K. Singh also stated that the responsibility for providing information after the
order of the FAA was of Mr. S.R. Lakhan, AE(B) whose assistance was sought on 03/03/2010.
However, Mr. S.R. Lakhan and Mr. Kapil Dev did not appear and the Commission did not receive
any written explanations from them showing cause why penalty under Section 20(1) should not be levied on
them for not supplying the information within time. The Commission also did not receive any
communication from them explaining their absence.
The information has been provided to the Complainant on 12/05/2010.
Adjunct decision dated 15/06/2010:
“The Commission has decided to schedule another showcause hearing on 12/07/2010 at 04:30 p.m.
The Commission hereby directs Mr. S.R. Lakhan, Mr. Rajesh Kumar and Mr. Kapil Dev to present
themselves before the Commission at the abovementioned address on 12 July 2010 at 04:30 pm alongwith
Page 2 of 4
their written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on them as mandated under
Section 20 (1).”
Relevant facts emerged during the hearing dated 12/07/2010:
Complainant: Mr. Chirag Saini;
Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Kumar, JE(B);
Determining the responsibility for providing the information late it is necessary that Mr. S. R.
Lakhan, Mr. Kapil Dev and Mr. Rajesh Kumar present themselves before the Commission together. All three
officers were directed to present themselves before the Commission on 11/06/2010 when Mr. Lakhan and
Mr. Kapil Dev did not appear. They were again asked to appear before the Commission on 12/07/2010 but
Mr. Kapil Dev and Mr. S. R. Lakhan have chosen not to be present again. They have also not sent any
written submission to offer any explanation. The Commission under its powers under Section 18(3) of the
RTI Act summons the presence of Mr. S. R. Lakhan, Mr. Kapil Dev and Mr. Rajesh Kumar to present
themselves the Commission on 30 July 2010 at 4.00PM and showcause whey penalty under Section 20(1)
and disciplinary action under Section 20(2) should not be initiated against them. If any of the three officers
absent themselves on 30 July 2010 the Commission will assume that they have no explanation to offer and
will levy appropriate penalty and recommend disciplinary action against them.
Relevant facts emerged during the Showcause hearing on 30/07/2010:
Complainant: Mr. Chirag Saini
Respondent: Mr. S.R. Lakhan Deemed PIO & Assistant Engineer (B) SP Zone ; Mr. Rajesh Kumar
Deemed PIO & present Junior Engineer (B) SP Zone; Mr. Kapil Dev Deemed PIO & the then Junior
Engineer (W) SP Zone;
Mr. S. R. Lakhan states that he joined this position only in March 2010 and was able to give the
information by 12/05/2010 to the appellant. Mr. Kapil Dev deemed PIO admits that he joined this position in
January 2010 but states that he was not clear what he was supposed to do. The RTI application has only
sought four queries seeking to know the action on a complaint made by the complainant about a dangerous
building and seeking to know what action has been taken, a copy of the complaint sent by him and
designation of the officer responsible. Inspite of this very simple query no information was provided to the
complainant and he filed a complaint with the Commission on 07/02/2010 inspite of the notice being sent
information was not provided to the complainant. The PIO had sent a reminder to all the Engineering Staff on
18/03/2010 and also issued a showcause on 24/02/2010 and 15/03/2010 inspite of this information has only
provided to the complainant on 12/05/2010. Mr. Kapil Dev the then Junior was expected to give this
information but did not provide the information at all. Mr. Kapil Dev was on this post from 31/12/2009 to
23/04/2010. The RTI application has been filed by the Complainant on 14/11/2009 and the information
should have been provided to him before 14/12/2009. Instead the information has been provided to the
Complainant only on 12/05/2010. It is very clear that Mr. Kapil Dev is certainly responsible for the delay in
providing the information. Mr. Kapil Dev claims that he did no know as to what needs to do with the RTI
application. Mr. Kapil Dev was asked to explain why he did not provide the information. He claims that he
gave verbal information to EE Mr. A. K.Singh. Mr. Kapil is offering no written evidence to prove his
contention. He has not been able to offer any reasonable explanation for the delay in providing the
information.
Since the delay in providing the information has been for over 100 days and the responsibility for this is with
Mr. Kapil Dev the Commission finds this as a fit case for levy of penalty under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act.
The RTI Act under Section 20(1) specifies the penalty of Rs.250/- per day of delay subject to a maximum of
Rs.25000/- on the PIO or deemed PIO if no reasonable can be ascertain for the delay. The Commission has
no discretion in this matter. In view of this the Commission imposes the maximum penalty of Rs.25000/- on
Mr. Kapil Dev, Deemed PIO & the then Junior Engineer as per Section 20(1) of the RTI Act.
Page 3 of 4
Decision:
As per the provisions of Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act 2005, the Commission finds
this a fit case for levying penalty on Mr. Kapil Dev deemed PIO & the then Junior Engineer
(W) SP Zone. Since the delay in providing the correct information has been over 100 days,
the Commission is passing an order penalizing Mr. Kapil Dev Rs. 25000/ which is the
maximum penalty under the Act.
The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi is directed to recover the amount
of Rs.25000/- from the salary of Mr. Kapil Dev and remit the same by a demand draft or a
Banker’s Cheque in the name of the Pay & Accounts Officer, CAT, payable at New Delhi
and send the same to Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar, Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary
of the Central Information Commission, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, New Delhi –
110066. The amount may be deducted at the rate of Rs.5000/ per month every month from
the salary of Mr. Kapil Dev and remitted by the 10th of every month starting from September
2010. The total amount of Rs. 25000 /- will be remitted by 10th of January, 2010.
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, 2005.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
30 July 2010
1- Commissioner
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Town Hall, Delhi- 110006
2. Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar,
Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary
Central Information Commission,
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110066
Page 4 of 4