Mr.R H Bansal vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 14 January, 2011

                        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                            Club Building (Near Post Office)
                          Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                 Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                             Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000055/10961
                                                                     Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000055

Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                            :       Mr. R.H. Bansal
                                             A-59, Vijaya Vihar
                                             Phase-2, Delhi

Respondent                           :       Public Information Officer & SE-II
                                             Municipal Corporation of Delhi
                                             Rohini Zone, Section-V,
                                             Rohini, Delhi

RTI application filed on             :       01/07/2010
PIO replied                          :       No Reply
First appeal filed on                :       23/08/2010
First Appellate Authority order      :       28/09/2010
Second Appeal received on            :       04/01/2011

Query Nos.                                Information sought by the appellant
1.             Specify if the plan of the B-7/ 19 &20, Sector-4, Rohini, where construction is going on,
               is sanctioned.
2.             Specify if the above mentioned building is being constructed as per sanctioned plan.

3.             Provide copy of the plan sanctioned for the building.
4.             Specify the role of the area engineer in construction of the above mentioned building.

Reply of the PIO:
No reply

First Appeal:
Reply to the question was not provided by the PIO.

Order of the FAA:
"I. Sh. R.H. Bansal (Appellant) is present
2. Sh. Jagdish Kumaar EE-13-II/RZ is present
The case was taken up today. The original application of the appellant, appeal memo has been gone
through. The grievance of the appeliant is that he has not received the reply so far. The PlO is therefore,
directed to furnish the reply to the applicant within 2 weeks."

Ground of the Second Appeal:
No information was provided by the PIO.
 Decision:
From the contention of the appellant it appears that no information has been provided to
him. The FAA has recorded the presence of Sh. Jagdish Kumar, and yet Mr. Jagdish
Kumar deemed PIO appears to have disregarded the order of the First appellate authority.

The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to provide the complete information to the appellant before 30 January
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 31 January 2011 at 02.30pm
alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated
under Section 20 (1). 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.
.

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.

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
14 January 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (SG)