CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/003074/6506
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/003074
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Gupta
Editor 704, G.T.Road,
Shahadara, Delhi – 110032
Respondent : Mr. Arun Kumar
Public Information Officer & SE-II
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Shahdara North, Zonal Office Building,
Keshav Chowk, G.T.Road, Delhi – 110032
RTI application filed on : 03/08/2009
PIO replied : 22/10/2009
First appeal filed on : 23/10/2009
First Appellate Authority order : Not mentioned
Second Appeal received on : 08/12/2009
Date of Notice of Hearing : 22/12/2009
Hearing Held on : 21/01/2010
The Appellant had sought information regarding unauthorized construction on property Khasra
no.299, Main Wazirabad Road, Delhi:
S. No Information Sought Reply of the PIO
1. Whether permission for construction was given by the As per records Building
department? Copy of the Layout plan of the Department had not given
construction? Give copy of plan. permission nor any lay out plant
was passed by the MCD.
2. Whether fee for layout plan was paid? If yes give mode As Sl. 1 above.
of payment and details?
3. If no permission was granted then what action MCD has Because of Laldora no action was
taken against this construction? taken.
4. Had MCD booked this construction for demolition? If As Sl. 3 above.
yes then by which date demolition will be completed?
5. If there is any problem in demolition had you sealed the As Sl. 3 above.
premises?
6. If permission for construction was given then have you As Sl. 1 above.
verified whether the construction is as per plan/rule? If
no what action MCD has taken against it?
7. If permission for construction was given then who is the Junior Engineer is Mr. B.S. Meena
Officer responsible to report the status of construction? no official mobile is given to Mr.
Give name of the officer/Engineer with mobile number. Verma.
8. Give name of the officers to whom the above Executive Engineer is Mr.
officer/engineer reported regarding construction. Yogendra Sharma and Assistant
Page no. 1 of3
Engineer is Mr. Aarif Khan,
Shahdara
9. What is the area of the construction? This information is not available in
Building Department.
10. What was the present status of the building when this As of now 2 and Half storey has
complaint was made i.e. how many rooms/floors were been constructed.
built.
11. Out of the approved are what was the permission area for As Sl. 1 above.
construction?
12. How many floors, rooms, kitchens, bathrooms etc were As Sl. 1 above.
permitted?
13. Whether this construction is on the part of the property? Yes
14. Whether any complaint was made against this No complaint received in this
construction give copy of such complaint and action regard.
taken on complaints?
15. Give name and mobile number of the officers involved in Mr. Aarif Khan, Assistant
the construction? Engineer and Mr. B.S. Meena ,
Junior Engineer.
First Appeal:
No action was taken on complaints nor information was provided.
Order of the FAA:
Not mentioned.
Ground of the Second Appeal:
False information was provided by the PIO after lapse of 30 days.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Rajendra Gupta;
Respondent: Mr. Arun Kumar, Public Information Officer & SE-II;
The RTI application was filed on 03/08/2009. The information was given on 29/10/2009.
The PIO states that the person responsible for giving the information late by 77 days was Mr.
B.S. Meena, Junior Engineer.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The information appears to have been provided.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by
the deemed PIO Mr. B.S. Meena, Junior Engineer within 30 days as required by the law.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the deemed PIO Mr. B.S. Meena, Junior
Engineer 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.
It appears that the deemed 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.
Page no. 2 of3
Mr. B.S. Meena, Junior Engineer will present himself before the Commission at the above
address on 23 February 2010 at 11.00am alongwith his written submissions showing cause why
penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1).
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
21 January 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(RR)
CC:
To,
Mr. B.S. Meena, Junior Engineer through Mr. Arun Kumar, Public Information Officer & SE-II;
Page no. 3 of3