Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. Harish Kumar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 18 March, 2010

Central Information Commission
Mr. Harish Kumar vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 18 March, 2010
                  CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                   Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
                     Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
                             Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                  Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000270/7188
                                                        Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000270

Appellant                                    :      Mr. Harish Kumar,
                                                    628/3, Shivaji Road, Pul Mithaee,
                                                    Near Azad Market,
                                                    Delhi-110006

Respondent                                   :      Mr. N. K. Gupta
                                                    Public Information Officer
                                                    O/o the Superintending Engineer,
                                                    Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
                                                    Sadar Pahar Ganj Zone, Idgah Road
                                                    Behind Sadar Police Station , Pahar Ganj,
                                                    New Delhi

RTI application filed on                     :      29/09/2009
PIO replied                                  :      30/11/2009
First Appeal filed on                        :      29/10/2009
First Appellate Authority order              :      08/01/2010
Second Appeal Received on                    :      01/02/2010
Notice of Hearing Sent on                    :      18/02/2010
Hearing Held on                              :      18/03/2010

Information sought:
Appellant sought information vide nine points regarding certified copy of
rules/circular/official order under which map of the building is accepted or rejected in MCD,
Sadar Paharganj Zone, how much FAR determined for 1st Floor, 3rd Floor, 4th Floor, how
much area for space should be left open for a particular area. Whether the building may be
regularized if new construction made on passed map at place of open area? If yes, certified
copy of rules/circular/official order thereof. Provide details of document required for passing
map of a building. The Appellant sought certified copy of details with copy of map passed,
no. of days under which map is accepted or rejected after submitting required documents.

PIO's Reply:
   1. Applicant does not seek any information as per various provisions RTI Act, 2005.
   2 to 9. Same as (1).

Grounds for First Appeal:
Information was not provided till date.

Order of the First Appellate Authority:


                                                                                   Page 1 of 3
 "PIO/SE/SPZ may review the same. Information pertaining to general policy of sanction of
building plans. The same may be provided within ten days."


Grounds for Second Appeal:
Appellant requested for completed information with documents.

Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Harish Kumar;

Respondent: Mr. N. K. Gupta, Public Information Officer & SE;

The Appellant has framed the queries in a manner where some of the queries would
amount to clarifications rather that information. The Appellant’s contention is that the
sanction of building plan is being done on the basis of the building byelaws of 1983 alongwith
Master Plan of Delhi-2021 read alongwith various orders issued by Municipal Authorities at
different times. Consequently he states that since most citizens do not have access to the
office orders issued by these authorities there is lot of arbitrariness in sanctioning the plans.
The PIO states that all the orders issued by various authorities in connection with Sanction of
Building Plans are available with Superintending Engineer Building (HQ) Mr. R. K. Sharma.
The Commission orders Superintending Engineer Building (HQ) Mr. R. K. Sharma to provide
all the relevant orders/circulars based on which building plans are sanctioned and regularized.
The Commission also directs Mr. R. K. Sharma to ensure that all such order/circulars are
putup on the website of the MCD so that all citizens are aware of these. In case any fresh
orders or circulars are issued these should also be updated on the website.

The Appellant has also sought the list of properties booked for unauthorized construction
from 01/04/2007 to 30/09/2009. Effectively this means the photocopy of the missal band
registers for this period. The PIO states that this is in the custody of Executive Engineer (B)
Mr. A. K. Singh. The PIO states that he has asked Mr. A. K. Singh to provide the information
but is unable get Mr. Singh to provide it.

The Appellant states that he would like to inspect the records of sanctioned building plan
files. The Commission directs the PIO Mr. N. K. Gupta to facilitate an inspection of these file
on 15 April 2010 at 10.00AM at the office of the PIO.

Decision:

The appeal is allowed.

The Commission directs Mr. R. K. Sharma, Superintending Engineer Building (HQ)
to provide all the relevant orders/circulars based on which building plans are sanctioned and
regularized to the Appellant before 05 April 2010.

The Commission also directs Mr. R. K. Sharma to ensure that all such order/circulars are
putup on the website of the MCD before 15 April 2010.

The Commission directs Executive Engineer (B) and deemed PIO to provide the photocopy of
the missal band register for the period 01/04/2007 to 30/09/2009 to the appellant before 05
April 2010.

Page 2 of 3

The PIO Mr. N. K. Gupta is directed to facilitate an inspection of the records to the Appellant
on 15 April 2010 at 10.00AM. The PIO will give photocopies of records which appellant
wants free of cost upto 500 pages.

The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information
by the deemed PIO Executive Engineer (B) Mr. A. K. Singh within 30 days as required
by the law.

From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed 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.

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.

Executive Engineer (B) Mr. A. K. Singh will give his written submissions showing cause why
penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1) before 15 April
2010. 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.
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
18 March 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj

CC;

To,

Superintending Engineer Building (HQ) Mr. R. K. Sharma through Mr. N. K.
Gupta, PIO;

Page 3 of 3