CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building (Near Post Office)
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001371/4107
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001371
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal:
Appellant : Mr. S. C. Ahuja
A-41, Kiran Garden
New Delhi-110059
Respondent : Mr. C. K. Kaushik
Public Information Officer/RTI (Education)
New Delhi Municipal Corporation
Education Department
Palika Kendra, New Delhi
RTI application filed on : 22/09/2008
PIO replied : 12/12/2008
First appeal filed on : 21/10/2008
First Appellate Authority order : 10/11/2008
Second Appeal received on : 28/05/2009
Sl. Information Sought PIO’s Reply
(reply received after 1st appeal)
1. When was the post of DEO (G) created in As per available record in Education Estt. Branch,
Education Deptt. NDMC. the post of DEO (G) was created and recruitment
rules were framed vide Resolution No. 81 dated
31/08/1976 read with Resolution No. 1 dated
07/09/1976 and Resolution no. No. 1 dated
14/09/1976. (Photocopy attached)
2. Did the Deptt. define duties & Record is not available in Edn. Estt. Branch.
responsibilities of DEO (G) at the time of
creation of this post.
3. If yes, provide me the photocopy of same. NA
4. Has there been any amendment in these NA.
duties & responsibilities? If yes, provide
me the same.
Ground of First Appeal:
Non-receipt of information from the PIO within the stipulated time.
First Appellate Authority ordered:
The FAA ordered, “The reply of RTI Application no. 574 dated 19/09/2008 has not been
submitted till date. DD/S.O (Edn.) is hereby directed to supply the required information within 3
days failing to which penalty/responsibility shall be fixed on all concerned under the provision of
RTI Act, 2005.”
Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory and incomplete information received from the PIO.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant : Mr. S. C. Ahuja
Respondent : Mr. C. K. Kaushik, PIO
The PIO states that on the records available there is no evidence of duties and responsibilities of
the DEO (G) being available in 1976. The PIO has given the reply very late and states that this
has happened because they were trying to locate the records which is over 30 years old. The PIO
is warned to ensure that the time limits of the RTI Act are complied with.
Decision:
The Appeal is allowed.
The PIO will provide the information that from the records available there is no evidence of
duties and responsibilities of the DEO (G) being available in 1976. The PIO will give this to the
appellant before 20 July 2009.
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
13 July 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)
(GJ)