CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001479/9383
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001479
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. H P Nanda
Q - 5, Hans Apartment,
CBD, Shahdara, Delhi - 110032.
Respondent : Mr. Ved Prakash
APIO & Assistant Registrar (East-II)
Government of NCT of Delhi
Office of Registrar of Co-operative Societies
Parliament Street, Old Court’s Building,
New Delhi – 110001.
RTI application filed on : 25/03/2010
PIO replied : 19/04/2010
First appeal filed on : 26/04/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 13/05/2010
Second Appeal received on : 01/06/2010
Sl. Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. The office vide society letter dtd. 10-6-08 was informed in B & W that the a) Please see DOS Ad and
society has collected Rs.25, 000 from two members namely S/Sh. Chibba Rules. This is available on our
website. rcs.delhigovt.nic.in
& Kumar in Feb, 88 and Dec97 respectively and the money has been
accounted for in books of the society. The names did not figure in any of (b) As above.
the lists referred in and enclosed with the letter under reference. (a) Is the
society competent under DCS Act/Rides or bye laws, to collect money
from such payers whose name & membership does not figure in any
reveal any list or document cleared by RCS as in above case? And (B)
What is the exact locus standi of such payers with regard to affairs of the
society as per Co-op. laws?
2. The society vide pan 3 (Letter dtd.10-6-08) informed the office that a No review petitions have been
REVIEW PETITION to JR-I is being filed within a day or two. Has any filed by the society before J.R-1
Review PETITION as claimed above been filed with JR-I by the society till date.
till date? If so, what is the outcome?
3. Is society, accountable to the office, free to deal with payers similarly Please see DCS Act and rules,
placed as Sh. Chibba with whom society has struck private financial which is available on our
deals? What role is assigned to the office to arrest such deals? website. rcs.delhigovt.nic.in
4. In response to the No.F.AR/S/HBFCGHS/03/873 dt. 4-11-2003 society has Pertains to society and society
claimed vide No. NIL dtd.9-12-03 that accounts got prepared by the being not public authority the
previous MC on computer of the society were distorted by the Secretary by request cannot be forwarded to
removing die Hard Disk of the computer and the same has not yet been society.
returned to the present MC in spite of repeated direction of the AR (East)
and the RCS himself. What exactly was the office informed of removal of
the Hard disk and What action was initiated by the office to gauge gravity
of the guilt on receipt of the communication? And Has Hard disc been
recovered by the society?
Page 1 of 2
5. The 1st phase of draw of flats cleared by RCS to DDA was held in Jan, Pertains to DDA and the RTI
1986. When and who conducted 2nd & 3rd phases of the draws for two application has been forwarded
and eight numbers of flats cleared separately by RCS to DDA on 17-07- to DDA vide this office letter
1987 & 17-12-87 respectively? And What is the exact total number of dated 26-03-2010 for necessary
names cleared solar by RCS to DDA for various phases of draws? action. The exact total Nos of
name cleared so by RCS to DDA
for various phases of draw is
-254. (244+8+2). / –
6. The society has inked to the office vide No. HBFCGHS (2008) dtd.22-07- Pertains to society and society
06 that there was absolutely no fraud committed with regard to Rs. 80,000 being not public authority the
collected @ Rs. 10,000 per aspirant from eight additional members. The request cannot be forwarded to
names of 8 additional members were cleared by RCS to DDA for society.
allotment on 17-12-87. Was any amount, on this head, collected from the
two members whose names were earlier cleared by RCS to DDA for
allotment on 17-07-87 and over two hundred members whose names were
cleared by RCS n DDA during 1985-86?
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The PIO is directed to look into the grievances of the Applicant sympathetically and dispose them of as
per DCS Act and Rules.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information provided by the PIO
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. H P Nanda;
Respondent: Mr. Ved Prakash, APIO & Assistant Registrar (East-II);
The information has been provided to the appellant. The appellant has certain grievances and is
advised to raise this at an appropriate forum.
Decision:
The Appeal is dismissed.
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
16 September 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(YM)
Page 2 of 2