CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2011/0001381 to 001388/12246
Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2011/0001381 to 001388
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Complaint:
Complainant : Mr. Rajendra Gupta
704, G T Road, Shahdara,
Delhi-110032
Respondent : Mr. V. R. Bansal
PIO/SE (SP Zone)
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Sadar Paharganj Zone, Idgah Road,
Paharganj, Delhi
RTI application filed on : 13/08/2010
PIO replied : Not mentioned
First appeal filed on : 13/10/2010
Complaint received on : 18/11/2010
Date of Notice of Hearing : 04/04/2011
Hearing Held on : 03/05/2011
Information sought:
Appellant sought following information regarding property nos. 9423, Multani, Dhada Paharganj, 1980-9
Chuna Mandi, 2/4 , 7/3 and B-278 at Deshbandhu Gupta Road, Mother Dairy Shop no. 410, 10603
Jhandewalan Road, Nabi Karim,
1. Whether the map of the said property had been passed by Building Dept, MCD, SPZ or had
any permission been given for that construction? If yes, then furnish the name and mobile no.
of the Engineer who had been given responsibility to inspect that construction. Furnish name,
post of the all engineers who had been reported by him.
2. If any permission had not been given for that construction, then what had action been taken
against that illegal construction by the Department? Or within how long was action to be taken.
3. Whether that construction was going on the part of said property.
4. Whether the above map of the said property had been passed as per standards and rules of
master plan? Whether the map of the said property had been passed after checking the chain of
the registry?
5. Whether the construction was being done as per standards and design fixed for anti-earthquake
and had permission been taken from concerned department? Furnish the information.
6. If above said property had been booked, inform whether demolition order had been passed or
not. Till how long had prosecution been done? Furnish information with their copy.
7. Whether any direction had been given to local constable to stop the illegal construction or by
what date same had been done.
8. Whether the information has been published on website, If above said property had been
booked or any action had been taken?
Page 1 of 3
Reply of the Public Information Officer:
Not enclosed.
Grounds for the First Appeal:
Information was not provided within stipulated time.
Grounds for the Complaint:
Information was not provided within stipulated time.
Submission received on 19/01/2011 from the Complainant:
Query no. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8: wrong information.
FAA order dated 23/11/2011:
“I have gone through the appeal. It revealed that the application filed under RPI Act vide receipt no..
BZtl30O209 of Rs. 10 dt. 30.08.10 in S.P.Zone.
Application was forwarded to EE(B)/SPZ under Id no. 379/SE/SPZ. But no reply was given to applicant
so far despite the reminder issued to EE(B)JSPZ by
SE/SPZ.
Therefore, deemed PIO/EE(B)/SPZ is directed to provide the requisite info4ation to the appellant within
10 working days as available on record under the p1tovision of RTI Act.”
PIO’ reply dated 08/12/2010:
1. No map of the property, in front of 9423, has been passed .
2. Action has been taken after getting information about illegal construction.
3. There is no information related to Building Dept.
4. As above.
5. As above.
6. As above.
7. As per D.M.C. Act
There is no information available in this regard.
Relevant Facts emerging during the Hearing:
The following were present:
Complainant : Mr. Rajendra Gupta;
Respondent : Mr. S. R. Lakhan the then AE and Mr. S. K. Aggarwal, EE(B) on behalf of Mr. V. R.
Bansal, PIO/SE (SP Zone);
The RTI application had been filed on 13/08/2010 and the information was provided only on
10/12/2010 i.e. after the order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The Complainant alleges that an
illegal building was being built when he filed the RTI application. The answer to query-1 admits that no
plan has been passed but the answer to query-2 states that when the department receives information of
unauthorized construction it will take action. The Complainant alleges that this shows that the department
has no interest in booking illegal unauthorized construction. Mr. Aggarwal assures the Commission that
he will personally look into this and give the correct information to the Complainant.
The Respondent states that the deemed PIOs at the time were Mr. Inderjeet Singh EE(B) , Mr. Sarafat Ali
AE, Mr. S.L. Meena JE(B), Mr. S. R. Lakhan AE and Mr. V. S. Rai JE;
Decision:
The complaint is allowed.
The Commission directs Mr. S. K. Aggarwal, EE(B) to provide the appropriate
information on query-1 & 2 to the Complainant before 20 May 2011.
Page 2 of 3
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
deemed PIOs Mr. Inderjeet Singh EE(B) , Mr. Sarafat Ali AE, Mr. S.L. Meena JE(B), Mr. S. R.
Lakhan AE and Mr. V. S. Rai JE within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIOs are 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.
It appears that the deemed PIOs actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20 (1). A showcause notice
is being issued to them, and they are directed give their reasons to the Commission to show cause why
penalty should not be levied on them.
Mr. Inderjeet Singh EE(B) , Mr. Sarafat Ali AE, Mr. S.L. Meena JE(B), Mr. S. R. Lakhan AE and Mr. V.
S. Rai JE will present themselves before the Commission at the above address on 31 May 2011 at
04.00PM alongwith their written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on them
as mandated under Section 20 (1). They will also bring 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
03 May 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AK)
Copies through Mr. V. R. Bansal PIO & SE to:
1- Mr. Inderjeet Singh EE(B) ,
2- Mr. Sarafat Ali AE,
3- Mr. S.L. Meena JE(B),
4- Mr. S. R. Lakhan AE
5- Mr. V. S. Rai JE
Page 3 of 3