CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room no. 415, 4th Floor, Block IV,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110 066.
Tel: 91+ 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01571/SG/00074
Appeal No. CIC/WB/A/2007/01571
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar,
R/o, 8972
14/B,Sidipura, Karol Bagh,
New Delhi-110005
Respondent : Deputy municipal Commissioner & PIO
Municipal corporation of Delhi,
City Zone,
New Delhi -110002
RTI filed on : 6/8/2007
PIO replied : No reply
First appeal filed on : 25/9/2007
First Appellate Authority order : 26/9/2007
Second Appeal filed on : 17/12/2007
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Kumar,
Respondent: Mr. Vijay Singh , PIO, represented byMr. Anil Wasan
And Mr. Ansar Alam , Ex. Engr. Buildings
The appellant had sought ” Exact number of dangerous buildings in the (City) Zone.
The PIO did not reply at all. The respondents claim that they had sent the information on
4/12/2007.
The appellant says he did not get the information.
The appellant was asked to look at the information brought by the respondents, and he
accepts that this is the information he had sought. Thus it is apparent that the information
could have been provided by the PIO, and the query was clearly understood.
The respondents have brought the information which they claim to have sent.
There is no explanation from the respondents for firstly not providing the information by
5/9/2007 as per the mandate of the RTI act. They also offer no explanation as to why they did
not obey the orders of the First appellate authority. The respondents appear to feel that since
they made the information on 4/12/2007 they cannot be faulted.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO has given the information to the appellant before the Commission.
From the evidence before us it appears that the PIO did not provide any reply to the RTI
application of the appellant. Further he refused to follow the orders of the First appellate
authority. The PIO Mr. Vijay Singh appears to have violated the provisions of the RTI act.
It is apparent from the facts before us that Mr. Vijay Singh, PIO has violated the law by not
furnishing the complete information and has disregarded the orders of the First Appellate
Authority,-who is also an officer senior to him in the Public authority.
From the facts before the Commission it is apparent that the PIO, Mr. Vijay Singh is guilty of
not furnishing information within the time mandated under 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.
It appears that the PIO Mr. Vijay Singh’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20
(1) .
A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed to present himself before 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 7th November, 2008 at 4.00pm alongwith his
written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as mandated
under Section 20 (1). The PIO will also produce evidence before the Commission of having
dispatched the information on 4/12/2007.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
15 October, 2008