CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002297/15132
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002297
Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta,
F-2/94, Sector-16, Rohini,
Delhi-110089.
Respondent : Mr. M. P. Gupta
PIO & SE-II
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Rohini, Zone, Sector-5,
Rohini, Delhi-110085.
RTI application filed on : 01/03/2011
PIO replied on 1. 21/03/2011
2. 11/04/2011
3. 24/04/2011
First Appeal filed on : 27/04/2011
First Appellate Authority order of : 30/05/2011
Second Appeal received on : 23/08/2011
Information Sought:
1. The appellant is describing some plots and wards of sector 16 and 17 in which he is seeking some
information about the action taken on unauthorized work done on the land issued for the Building
Plan since January 1, 2009 to till date.
2. Give information about the name and post of the J.E., A.E., & E.E responsible for such violation.
3. Give information about the action taken by the MCD on these Violations. Give detailed
informations.
The PIO reply:
1. Reply from the PIO Executive Engineer, (M-RZ)-IV:
1. The information seeking is related to the Bldg, Department, Rohini Zone. And the Violation is
removed with the help of police time to time.
2 This information is not available in this office.
3. The violation is removed with the help of police force time to time.
2. Reply from the PIO Superintending Engineer-II:
1. The information related to the Query is related to the Building Department, Rohini Zone. There
is no record available regarding violation in the service lane and streets. The violation is checked by the
police force time to time.
2. This information is not available in the office.
3. The action of the police force is available time to time by the violation department.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply was given to the appellant by the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Mr. S. R. Meena, EE(B-II) was present on behalf of PIO:
"The case was taken up today. The original application of the appellant, reply given by the PIO and
contents of appeal memo have been gone through. I find that the reply given by the PIO is not proper. PIO
is directed to furnish proper reply to the appellant within two weeks from the date of issue of this order."
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information had been given by the PIO.
Relevant Facts
emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta;
Respondent: Mr. A. K. Jain, AE on behalf of Mr. M. P. Gupta, PIO & SE-II;
The Appellant states that no information has been received by him after the order of the FAA. The
respondent does not seem to have any knowledge of any information having been sent.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information to the Appellant before
30 October 2011.
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 appears 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 07 November 2011 at 3.30pm
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.
If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him. If no other responsible persons are brought by the persons asked to showcause
hearing, it will be presumed that they are the responsible persons.
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
11 October 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (BK))