CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi -110 067.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC /SG/A/2009/000149/2693
Appeal No. CIC /SG/A/2009/000149
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Gupta,
A-103, New Cosmopolitan Society,
Plot No.33, Sector-10,
Dwarka, New Delhi-110075.
Respondent : Jt. Assessor & Collector &
PIO
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Assessor & Collector, Shah(South) Zone,
18-Block, Geeta Colony, Delhi-31.
RTI application filed on : 15/10/2008
PIO replied : 18/11/2008
First appeal filed on : 17/01/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 16/01/2009
Second Appeal filed on : 27/01/2009.
The Appellant had asked following information from MCD regarding property
no. S-230, Pandav Nagar, Delhi:-
1. What is the built up area at S-230 Pandav Nagar Delhi: (How many floor
including basement was constructed on this plot)
2. Whether the owner of property No.S-230 Pandav Nagar Delhi has deposited their
property tax for the year 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05.
3. If yes, whether he has deposited property tax as residential/commercial/any other
category for the year 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05.
PIO’s Reply
PIO had replied that “In this regard it is informed that the information sought is
related to 3rd Party of the recoded Tax Payer and you have no right to claim the
information related to the said Property which may be Exempted under section-8 (1) (g)
of RTI Act 2005, as information relates to Personal Information’s of the person’s
property and has no relationship to the Public Activities”.
The First Appellate Authority ordered.
Reply furnished by PIO is inadequate. Hence he is directed to provide information within
7 days.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Gupta,
Respondent: Mr. A. Rahman PIO and Jt. A & C
The appellant had sought information about the area and property tax payment of
property at S-230 Pandav Nagar. The appellant has been earlier given a letter by the Asst.
Assessor & Collector on 28/12/2005 that a notice had been issued under Section 123A
and 123B for non-submission of Annual property tax by the said property holder.
In reply to his RTI application the PIO refused to give him the information on
18/11/2008.
The First appellate authority’s order led to a reply from the PIO giving the area of the
property but claiming that it was not possible to know whether property tax had been paid
or not. The First appellate authority again passed an order on 24/3/2009 stating that the
PIOs reply was incomplete and that the PIO must furnish complete information within 7
days. The PIO claims he has prepared the information on 6/04/2009 in which he has
disclosed that no property tax has been deposited for 2002-03 & 2003-04. Tax has been
deposited for 2004-2005 vide G-8 Rect. No. 2448097 of 2/1/2006. It also states that
though the basement is a commercial property, the tax has been paid as residential.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The information has been provided in small driblets to the appellant.
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required
information by the PIO within 30 days as required by the law.
It also appears that the First appellate authority’s orders have not been implemented.
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. 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. From the sequence of events it also appears that there may be a
malafide intent of allowing defrauding of the Public exchequer by collusion.
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 1 May 2009 at
5.00pm alongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be
imposed on him as mandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having
given the information to the appellant.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
9th April, 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)