CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001882/8616
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/001882
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Harish Kumar,
628/3, Shivaji Road,
Pul Mithai,
Delhi-110006
Respondent : Public Information Officer &
Superintending Engineer,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
S.P. Zone, Idgah Road,
Near Police Station,
Sadar Bazaar,
Delhi-110006
RTI application filed on : 17/02/2010
PIO replied on : No reply
First appeal filed on : 18/03/2010
First Appellate Authority order of : 23/04/2010
Second Appeal received on : 07/07/2010
S. No. Information Sought
1. Per the medium of the Sadar Paharganj Zone, maps of which houses are
accepted? As per which order or circular has that been done? Please provide the
certified copies of the same.
2. Within how many days/ months are the files to be accepted/ rejected as per the
DMA Act, departmental orders and circulars? Please provide the certified
copies stating the same.
3. How many maps of houses have been received by the Sadar Paharganj Zone
from 01/01/2007 to 17.02.2010? Please furnish the entire details.
4. Give details as to how many files of the Bhawan Swamis have been received by
the Sadar Paharganj Zone till 17/02/2010? Also provide details of the S. No.,
Department file number, date of reception of the files, and the dates till which
they have been kept pending and by which officers. Provide the certified copies
of the same.
5. How many files containing the maps of the houses are lying pending with the
different wards of the Sadar Paharganj Zone from 01.01.2001to
17.02.2010.Also specify the reasons for delay.
6. Mention the name and designation of the officers and employees posted in the
Sadar Paharganj Zone from 01.01.2001 to 17.02.2010 along with the S. No.,
name and post of the officer/employees, their Department, salaries, etc along
with the certified copies of the same.
7. Give details as to on how many illegally constructed houses has the order of
demolition/ partly demolition been passed under the Sadar Paharganj Zone,
along with the details and certified copies of the reconstruction of new houses
after the demolition and the action taken by the Bhawan Department on them.
Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
No reply was provided by the PIO.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The information has not been provided by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The FAA ordered the PIO to furnish the information to the Appellant within 10 working
days.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
No information provided by the PIO and non- compliance of the FAA’s order.
Decision:
The Commission has perused the documents submitted by the Appellant. The FAA has
given a clear order dated 23/04/2010 directing the PIO/ SE/ SPZ to provide the Appellant
with the requisite information available on record as per the RTI Act within 10 working
days. The Appellant has not been provided with the information requested for despite the
order of the FAA. The Commission therefore directs the PIO/ SE/ SPZ to provide the
information requested for by the Appellant. Denial of information to an Appellant under
the RTI Act can only be done if what is sought is not “information” as defined under
Section 2(f) of the RTI Act or it is exempt under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. The
PIO/SE/SPZ has neither claimed that it is not “information” nor has he claimed that it is
exempt under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act.
The Appeal is allowed. The PIO/ SE/ SPZ is directed to provide the information
requested by the Appellant before August 10, 2010.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO/ SE/ SPZ is guilty of not
furnishing information within the time specified under Section 7(1) by not replying
within 30 days per the requirement of the RTI Act. He has further refused to obey the
orders of the FAA, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may
also be mala fide. The FAA has clearly ordered the information to be given. It appears
that the actions of the PIO attract the penal provisions of Section 20(1) of the RTI Act. A
show cause notice is being issued to him and he is directed to 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 August 18, 2010
at 2:30 pm along with his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be
imposed on him as mandated under Section 20(1) of the RTI Act. He will also submit
proof of having given the information to the Appellant.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the
Appellant and for not complying with the order of the FAA, the PIO/ SE/ SPZ is directed
to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him.
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 per Section
7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
July 20, 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (VN)