Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.Saud Ahmed vs Gnctd on 6 May, 2011

Central Information Commission
Mr.Saud Ahmed vs Gnctd on 6 May, 2011
                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                           Club Building (Near Post Office)
                         Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                          Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000547/12284
                                                                  Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/000547

Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                            :      Mr. Saud Ahmed
                                            582,Jute Wali Gali, Churi Wala
                                            Jama Masjid, delhi -110006

Respondent                           :      Mr. Balbir Singh
                                            PIO & Dy. Director
                                            DUSIB Vigilance Department
                                            GNCTD
                                            H-10,Vikas Kutir, I P Estate
                                            New Delhi - 110002

RTI application filed on             :      20/12/2010
PIO replied on                       :      05/01/2011
First Appeal filed on                :      17/01/2011
First Appellate Authority order of   :      18/02/2011
Second Appeal received on            :      28/02/2011

Information Sought:
In reference to House No 768/1, Second Floor, Saudamaran Gali, Balli Maharan, Delhi -6, is there a
case registered against the Rent receipt issued by the Slum & JJ Deptt. In the Vigilance Deptt. Who
has made this complaint? Also provide the necessary records for inspection.

Reply of PIO:
No complaint has been lodged in this department. The files cannot be produced for inspection as the
matter in under enquiry.

Grounds for the First Appeal:
Information provided was incomplete and unsatisfactory.

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The information sought by the appellant related to a vigilance case under investigation. It comes
within the scope of exception under Section 8(h) of the RTI Act. The order stated that the PIO should
provide the reply mentioning specific provisions of the Act. The reply should be provided within 10
days.

Ground of the Second Appeal:
Answer was unsatisfactory.

Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

Following were present:

Appellant: Absent;

Respondent: Mr. Balbir Singh, PIO & Dy. Director; Mr. Rishi Parkash, Assistant Director;

The Respondent shows that on 27/04/2011 he has facilitated an inspection of the relevant files
by the Appellant and also provided him photocopies of 104 pages which the Appellant wanted.
Decision:

The Appeal is disposed.

The information available on the records appears to have been provided.
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
06 May 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)