CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Old JNU Campus,
Opposite Ber Sarai, New Delhi 110067.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001833/4855
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001833
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Kali Ram Tomar
1/4196, Ram Nagar Extn.,
Loni Road, Shahdara,
Delhi-110032
Respondent : Public Information Officer
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Office of the Asstt. Commissioner,
Shahdara South Zone, Karkardooma
Delhi-110092
RTI application filed on : 30.03.2009
PIO replied : N.A.
First appeal filed on : 03.06.2009
First Appellate Authority order : 15.07.2009
Second Appeal received on : 23.07.2009
Information sought & PIO's reply:
The Appellant vide his RTI Application sought for the following information regarding safai
karmcharis:
1. How many Applicants deposited their forms for Substitute Safai Karamchari in 1996-97 in MCD?
2. How many Applicants did MCD Shahdara South recruit?
3. Were photos put on Applications?
4. How many such substitute safai karmacharis were there who got amendment done in their father’s
name after their recruitment in 1996-97?
5. How many such substitute safai karmacharis were there who got amendment done in their own
name after their recruitment in 1996-97?
6. Give a copy of the list of such substitute safai karmacharis who got their father’s names changed
after their recruitment in 1996-97.
7. Give a copy of the list of such substitute safai karmacharis who got their own names changed after
their recruitment in 1996-97.
8. Give a copy of the list of such substitute safai karmacharis who got their house addresses changed
after their recruitment in 1996-97.
9. Did safai karmacharis who got recruited in 1996-97 get their names, father’s names, house
addresses amended by giving affidavit or any other documents?
10. Did MCD Shahdara South do verification of such substitute safai karmacharis who got
amendments done by giving affidavit?
11. Is it correct that the substitute safai karmachari who got his name amended, that is fake and the
name that is registered in form that person is different?
12. Is this correct that the forms in which labours father’s names were amended, that father is of
different labour and has gotten employed by submitting fake documents?
Order of First Appellate Authority:
FAA ordered PIO to provide information to the Appellant within ten days.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
The Appellant has alleged that the PIO has not provided any information till date.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Kaliram Tomar
Respondent: Absent
The PIO has not given any information and inspite of the order of the First Appellate Authority on
15/07/2009 to give the information, the order has not been complied with. It appears to be a very
deliberate and conscious attempt to deny the information.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO Mr. SK Sharma, Asst. Commissioner Shahdara South Zone will provide the information to
the Appellant before 7 October 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. He has further refused to obey the
orders of his superior officer, which raises a reasonable doubt that the denial of information may also
be malafide. The First Appellate Authority has clearly ordered the information to be given.
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 present himself before the Commission at the above address on 9 October 2009 at 11 am
alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
mandated under Section 20 (1). 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, 2005.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
18 September 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.) (AA)