CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000064/11453
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000064
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Devender Kumar
Asthal Colony, Bawana
Delhi-110039
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Office of Superintending Engineer
Narela Zone, Zonal Building, Narela
New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 07/06/2010
PIO replied : 14/07/2010
First appeal filed on : 04/08/2010
First Appellate Authority order : Not Ordered
Second Appeal received on : 29/12/2010
S.No Information sought by the appellant Reply of the PIO
1. Specify if any telephone booth has been allocated with Not related to this department.
Bawana School Health Scheme. If yes provide photocopy
of the same if no when will it be destroyed.
2. If yes then specify how can telephone booth be allocated to Same as above.
place where there is no booth.
3. Provide information about how without getting booth Same as above
sanctioned with their own money any person allotted booth
can get it constructed.
4. If no, then will it be demolished Same as above
5. Provide information about number of booths of these kind Same as above
allocated in Narela in 2008-09-10 and to whom
First Appeal:
Reply was unsatisfactory
Order of the FAA:
Not Ordered
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Reply was unsatisfactory
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a
perusal of the papers it appears that no information has been supplied to the Appellant. The PIO in his
reply has stated that the information is not related to his department. The appellant has sought
information about a telephone booth. The obvious implication is that the appellant believes that MCD
would have given permission for constructing the telephone booth. Alternately it would be an
unauthorized telephone or an encroachment on the public land. In that case MCD should have
recorded unauthorized construction/encroachment and taken appropriate action.
Hence the PIO should have provided some information as to whether any permission has been given or
allocation done. If the information is available with some other department the PIO should have
transferred the RTI application under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the information if available or obtain the
information from wherever available to the appellant before 05 April 2011.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information
within the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the
requirement of the RTI Act.
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.
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 05 April 2011 at 10.00am
alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also bring the information sent to the appellant as per
this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent 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
14 March 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (AP)