Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.Mahavir Singh Chadda vs Delhi Jal Board, Gnctd on 10 June, 2011

Central Information Commission
Mr.Mahavir Singh Chadda vs Delhi Jal Board, Gnctd on 10 June, 2011
                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                           Club Building (Near Post Office)
                         Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                        Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000927/12812
                                                                Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000927

Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                            :      Mr. Mahavir Singh Chadda,
                                            RWA, 241, Gali No. 4,
                                            Chilla Saroda, Mayur Vihar Phase- 1,
                                            Delhi- 110091

Respondent                           :      Mr. V. P. Tanwar
                                            PIO & Joint Director (R) (East),
                                            Delhi Jal Board, GNCTD,
                                            E- Block, Preet Vihar,
                                            New Delhi

RTI application filed on             :      13.12.2010
PIO replied to application on        :      24.01.2011
First Appeal on filed on             :      Not enclosed
First Appellate Authority order of   :      17.03.2011
Second Appeal received on            :      05.04.2011

No.                        Information Sought                                   Reply of the PIO
1.    Grounds on which dues were charged on Govind Ram's file          Due amount till 07.05.2010 is Rs.
      by the Water Board.                                              45, 158/-
      Dates, for which the dues have been charged, the connection
      was provided and the amount he has paid back against the
      dues.
2.    Why did officials have problem with the file of Govind Ram       Bill-amount is decided in respect
      seeking a water-connection? Is this because the Board has        of a property and not in respect of
      charged his father with due-amount?                              individuals.
3.    Present status of the file which has been lying in the office    File will be approved if the
      since 2 years.                                                   applicant will pay the due amount.
4.    Report of action taken on application by RWA dated               Information is available at the O/o
      22.11.2010, to the Chief Minister regarding incorrect bills      The Chief Minister, Delhi.
      charged from Chilla Saroda Residents
5.    List of files which have been sent for verification to SDM       Information can be sought from
      Preet Vihar or Office of DC (East)                               the Executive Engineer
6.    Details of officials who supervised the construction of water-
      line built by Shivam Contractor in 2008.

Grounds for the First Appeal:
Not enclosed.

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The PIO was directed to provide the sought information and make available for inspection, the file
pertaining to the application on 25.03.2011 at 03.00 PM and relevant copies shall be provided by
28.03.2011.

Ground of the Second Appeal:
No information furnished to the appellant even after Order of the FAA. Incorrect information provided
by the PIO.
 Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

The following were present
Appellant : Mr. Mahavir Singh Chadda;

Respondent : Mr. V. P. Tanwar, PIO & Joint Director (R) (East);

The respondent admits that there has been a mix-up in the names of Gurusharan and Gurusahai
and hence some of the information relating to query-1 was given for one instead of the other. The
appellant wants to see the files relating to the payment of dues by Mr. Rajesh Kumar and Mr. Buddh
Singh. The PIO claims that he is not able to locate these files. The PIO will arrange to locate these files
or get them from any other office where they may have been sent and give inspection of these files to
the Appellant on 27 June 2011 from 10.30AM onwards at the office of the PIO.

It these files have not been located the PIO will file a police complaint reporting the loss/theft of these
files giving the names of the officers who last handled these files and send a copy of the police
complaint to the Appellatn before 15 July 2011.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is directed to facilitate inspection of the files as described above to the
Appellant on 27 June 2011 form 10.30AM onwards.

If case the files are not found he will give a written statement to this effect to the
Appellant on 27 June 2011 and send a copy of the police complaint to him before
15 July 2011.

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
10 June 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (AA)