CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi -110 067.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000215/2768
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000215
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Dharminder,
House No. 16/12, Indra Vikas Colony,
Mukherjee Nagar, Timar Pur Delhi.
Respondent : PIO,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Vigilance Department, 16, Rajpur Road,
Civil Lines, Delhi-110054.
RTI application filed on : 11/06/2008
PIO replied : 20/06/2008
First appeal filed on : 14/07/2008
First Appellate Authority order : 22/08/2008
Second Appeal filed on : 12/12/2008
Appellant had asked in his RTI application
Particular of required information :-
1. Please provide the daily progress made on my application/ grievance.
2. Please give the names and designations of the officials with whom my
application/grievance was lying during this period please intimate the period when it
was lying with which officer and what was the action taken by that official daring that
period.
3. Please give the proof of receipt and dispatch of my application grievance in the office
of each of these officials.
4. According t your rules or citizen charter or any other order. In how many days should
such a matter be dealt with and resolved. Please a copy of these.
5. The above officials have not adhered to the time limit mentioned in these rules are
these officials guilty of violating these rules and hence guilty of misconduct under
their conduct rules. Please give a copy of their conduct rule. Which they have violated
by violating the above mentioned rule.
6. Those official have caused serious mental injury to me by making me run around all
this while. Are these officials guilty of causing mental harassment to the public?
7. What action can be taken against these official for violationg all the above rules and
for causing mental agony to the public? By when this action would be taken?
8. By when will my problem be resolved now.
The PIO replied.
The PIO refer to appellant application dated 11.06.2007 which has been forwarded to
this office by PIO, Town Hall vide his office letter no. D-410/ADC/(HQ)/2007 dated
11.06.2007 and received in Vigilance Deptt., MCD on 15.06.2007 on the above cited subject.
In this connection, it is informed that no action taken on your complaint dated 10.05.2007
with the application in Vigilance Department (enclosed with RTI file), and the said complaint
was forwarded to Dy. Commissioner, South Zone vide this office diary No. 10964 on
04.06.2007 for taking necessary action at his end at the dak stage. Hence, further information
in this regard will be provided by D.C. South Zone.
The First Appellate Authority ordered.
“In this connection, The Dy. Commissioner / South Zone vide letter No. 63/DC/SZ
dated 19/07/2007 asked the applicant to deposit Rs. 680/- (Rs. 2/- per page) for 340 pages and
collect the information from the office of DC/South Zone. It seems that the applicant has not
deposited the desired amount and due to this, the information has not been supplied to him.
The PIO of South Zone is hereby directed to furnish the desired information to the applicant
on depositing of the requisite amount as above.”
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Absent
Respondent: Mr. A.M.Muthu on behalf of Mr. U.B.Tripathi PIO Vigilance
The respondent shows that the information was offered to the appellant by a letter of
19/7/2008 asking the appellant to send an additional fee of Rs.680/- . Since the period of 30
days was over the PIO should have supplied the information free of cost to the appellant. The
PIO has failed to do this.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The complete information will be sent to the appellant before 30 April, 2009.
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 is apparent 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 give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on
him as mandated under Section 20 (1) before 5 May, 2009. He will also submit proof of
having given the information 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
16 April 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)