Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr. Sanjay Chirpal vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 23 June, 2009

Central Information Commission
Mr. Sanjay Chirpal vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi on 23 June, 2009
                           CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                                  Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
                                Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
                                    New Delhi - 110067.
                                   Tel : + 91 11 26161796

                                                                     Decision No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000408/3812
                                                                       Complaint No. CIC/SG/C/2009/000408

Complainant                                :        Mr. Sanjay Chirpal
                                                    N-1, Riviera Apartments
                                                    45, Mall Road
                                                    New Delhi-110054

Respondent                                  :       The Public Information Officer
                                                    Municipal Corporation of Delhi
                                                    Civil Line Zone
                                                    Delhi-110054

Facts

arising from the Complaint:

Mr. Sanjay Chirpal had filed a RTI application with the PIO, Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
Civil Line Zone on 19/03/2009 asking for certain information. Since no reply was received within the
mandated time of 30 days, he had filed a complaint under Section 18 to the Commission.

The Commission issued a notice to the PIO on 05/05/2009 asking him to supply the
information by 09/06/2009 and sought an explanation for not furnishing the information within the
mandated time. The PIO has informed the Commission, that the information has been provided to the
complainant vide letter dated 26/05/2009.

Decision:

The Complaint is allowed.

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 is apparent 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. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20
(1) and Section 2 (2).

He will present himself with the written explanation to show cause why penalty should not be imposed
on him as mandated under Section 20 (1) on 30 July, 2009 at 04:30 pm. He will also submit proof of
having given the information to the appellant.

Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
June 23, 2009.

For any further communication with the Commission please mention the decision No. given at the top.