CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000541/12290
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000541
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. K.C.Gupta
C-5/130 Yamuna Vihar
Delhi 110053
Respondent : Mr.M.L. Nayak,
PIO & Engineering Officer (Zone M II)
Public Works Department and Housing
GNCTD
3rd Floor MSO Building, IP Estate,
New Delhi- 110009
RTI application filed on : 16/11/2010
PIO replied on : 27/12/2010
First Appeal filed on : 28/12/2011
First Appellate Authority order of : 25/01/2011
Second Appeal received on : 28/02/2011
Sl. Information Sought Reply of PIO
1. What was the necessity to install High Mast It is an illogical question ; akin to asking why
Lights(MHL) in parks and other areas. Give full does one install lights in their house.
details.
2. Who recommended these PWD carries on the work as per the
instruction of the client.The client can be the
State Government, MLA or an autonomous
boy.
3. Upto what limits can MLA`s/CM/Councilor install Question does not pertain to this division
HML in their concerned areas. Furnish details.
4. What amount can be spent for installing and -do-
functioning of each HML.
5. Under what fund was the HML installed. It may vary as the work is carried on by
PWD for different clients.
6. Which authority is responsible for the installation The Client may choose who is to carry out
and maintenance of these lights? the maintenance. It may or may not be given
to PWD.
7. Are MLA`s/CM/Councilor responsible for the No.The agency to whom the responsibility is
functioning of the HML? given is responsible for the crime.
8. On what basis is the amount being paid to different Responsibility of agency to which
groups for the proper function of the tubes maintenance work is given.
installed?
9. If and when these lights are not functioning -do-
properly , whats the use of installing them?
10 The HML are not function in Question does not pertain to this division
. i. C-5 Block Yamuna Vihar, Delhi 53
ii. Pilot Park and Pump House.
This area is used by senior citizens.
Who is responsible for looking after the whole
facility and maintenance of HML`s here?
11 Provide details of department in each area where Not Applicable.
. complaint for the removal of the HML can be
logged.
12 i. What is the standard time taken to respond to Depends on the nature of the work. Small
. these complaints. changes can be done the same day whereas
ii. Are any records maintained of such complaints? large works such as rewiring etc. may take
longer. A register lodging all the complaints
is maintained in the vicinity.
13 Were tenders invited for installation these lights. A tender was called. Copy may be obtained
. Provide copies. from the office on payment of fees.
16 How many HML are installed in NE Zone? Give 2 Nos. of 16 Mtr HML were installed ate
. per head amount spent on each. Chhhath Ghat , Yamuna Bank for Chhath
Puja.
17 Provide copies of any rules and regulation which Rules as per CPWA Manual are being
. exists in this regard. followed by the PWD.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
The PIO denied information.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
First appeal was heard before the Special Secretary, PWD. But as he was not the FAA in the matter,
the appellant as asked to approach the correct appellate authority in the matter.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
1. PIO did not allow for inspection of documents.
2. With regards to Q.Nos 1to 17, PIO did not provide authentic information.
3. PIO continuously denied information and followed dilatory tactics.
4. First Appellate Authority did not take up the appeal
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant : Mr. K.C.Gupta;
Respondent: Mr.M.L. Nayak, PIO & Engineering Officer (Zone M II) and Mr. P.P. Keshkar, EE (E);
The PIO has given certain information but the appellant would like to inspect all the relevant
records. The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the relevant records by the Appellant on 25
May 2011 from 10.30AM onwards at the office of the Executive Engineer-251, 4th Floor MSO Buldg,
IP Estate, New Delhi -110 002. In case there are any records or file which the appellant believes
should exist, which are not shown to him, he will give this in writing to the PIO at the time of
inspection and the PIO will either give the files/records or give it in writing that such files/records do
not exist.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to facilitate an inspection of the relevant records by the Appellant
on 25 May, 2011 from 10.30 AM onwards. The PIO will give attested photocopies of
records which the Appellant wants free of cost upto 200 pages.
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
6 May 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)