CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003062/10282
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/003062
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Vaid
7/78B, Bhim Street, Vishwas Nagar,
Shahdara, Delhi-32
Respondent : Public Information Officer &
Sanitation Superintendent
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Shahdara South Zone, Karkardooma,
Shahdara, Delhi
RTI application filed on : 05/08/2010
PIO replied : No reply
First appeal filed on : 14/09/2010
First Appellate Authority order : 11/10/2010
Second Appeal received on : 29/10/2010
Information sought:
1. No. of places in Shahdra South Zone
2. No. Assistant mates of a supervisor in Shahdara South Zone
3. No. of mates working at a place. How many mates should be woking?
4. If mates family also works. If yes, then details.
5. No. of biometric machines in Shahdara south zone in each of the wards.
6. No. of places in a ward. No of biometric machines and requirement.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
No reply by the PIO
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The Appellant Shri Mukesh Vaid appeared for hearing and stated that the required information in, respect
of his applications bearing receipt No.78669 dated 03/08/2010 and receipt No.84353 dated 05/08/2010
has not been provided by the PI0 so far.
The Sanitation Superintendent, Shri Bahchu Lal, who was present for hearing on behalf of the PIO, has
been directed to provide the required intimation to the Appellant by I 8th October, 2010 positively under
intimation to the undersigned. The PIO should ensure that the required information is provided by the SS.
Grounds for the Second Appeal:
Non- compliance of FAA’s order by the PIO
Decision:
The appellant has stated that inspite of the categorical order of the FAA no information has
been provided to the appellant. The PIO has not claimed any exemption as per
Section-8 (1) of the RTI Act. Hence it appears that the denial of information is without any
reason.
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information based on the records to the
appellant before 20 December 2010.
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 give his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
mandated under Section 20 (1) before 25 December, 2010. He will also send the information sent to
the appellant as per this decision and submit speed post receipt as proof of having sent 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
3 December 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(VMK)