CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: +91-11-26161796
Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2010/000440/7332
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000440
Appellant : Mr. Somnath Bharti
(Advocate)
Bharti & Associates NIL 26AB,
Malviya Nagar, New Delhi-110017.
Respondent : Mr. Dilip Ramnani
Public Information Officer & SE
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
(Building Department)
South Zone, Green Park, New Delhi
.
RTI application filed on : 28/07/2009
PIO replied : 26/10/2009
First Appeal filed on : 08/09/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 07/10/2009
Second Appeal Received on : 17/02/2010
Notice of Hearing Sent on : 11/03/2010
Hearing Held on : 01/04/2010
Sl. Information sought PIO's reply (received after
FAA's order)
1. A certified copy of the documents, numbered starting from 10/N till Copy enclosed.
the end, from the file of de-sealing of the basement and ground floor
of C-12, Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi-110016.
2. Is there any still picture /video recording to show the pre-sealing Yes, the applicant can procure the
status i.e. the status as on 06/05/2008, of the aforementioned C.D.
property? If yes, a certified copy of all such material.
3. Names, contact details and their present whereabouts of the MCD Sh. Surinder Kumar was the J.E.
officers under whose supervision and presence ground and first (B), who was looking after the
floor of the property at C-12, Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi- said area.
110016 were sealed on 01/02/2007. What were the designations of
those MCD officers at the time of inspection? What was the
status/nature of occupancy of other floors of the building on
01/02/2007? Were they also sealed? If yes, when were they de-
sealed and under what categories?
4. Names, contact details and their present whereabouts of the MCD Sh. Surinder Kumar was the J.E.
officers under whose supervision and presence ground and firs floor
(B) concerned who de-sealed the
of the property at C-12, Panchsheel Enclave, New Delhi-110016 premises permanently on
were de-sealed on 1/03/2007. What were the designations of those13/03/2007. Presently he is
MCD officers at the time of inspection? posted with Slum & J.J. Deptt.,
MCD.
5. Names, contact details and their present whereabouts of the MCD Sh. Sunil Dawar, AE (B) & Sh.
officers under whose supervision and presence basement and Narender Kumar, JE(B) were the
ground floor of the property at C-12, Panchsheel Enclave, New concerned officers who had
Page 1 of 3
Delhi-110016 were sealed on 06/05/2008. What were the placed seal there. Sh. Sunil
designations of those MCD officers at the time of inspection? What Dawar is placed under
was the status/nature of occupancy of other floors of the building on suspension, whereas Sh. Narender
01/02/2007? Were they also sealed? If yes, when were they de- Kumar was relived to Rohini
sealed and under what categories? Zone. His exact place of posing
can be ascertained from the O/o
A.D.C. (Engg.)/HQ, MCD.
6. Names, contact details and their present whereabouts of the MCD Sh. J.S. Rana, JE (Bldg.) was the
officers under whose supervision and presence basement and officer concerned and he was
ground floor of the property at C-12, Panchsheel Enclave, New transferred EE (Project)-II,
Delhi-110016 were inspected on 29/12/2008. What were the Central Zone, MCD.
designations of those MCD officers at the time of inspection?
7. On page 2/N of the documents from the file of de-sealing of Sh. J.S. Rana was the officer
basement and ground floor of the property at C-12, Panchsheel concerned. Copy of requisite
Enclave, New Delhi-110016, there is a mention of the refusal of documents i.e. 1/N and 2/N are
JE(P) from singing for further necessary action. Who was the then enclosed.
JE (P) and why was he refusing to sign on the file for further
necessary action? If he at all agreed to sign later on, who/what
made his agree to do so? Was this brought to the notice of the then
deputy commissioner of MCD, South Zone?
8. What is the movement route of a de-sealing (permanent/temporary) Any file to Members, Monitoring
application/ affidavit filed with MCD? Name of the offices/present Committee (Apex Court) is routes
officers through who such a request has to mandatorily travel and in through Jr. Engineer
how much approximate time does each of these offices is supposed (Bldg.)/Asstt. Engineer (Bldg.),
to clear such application. If there is an official mandate defining the Ex. Engineer (Bldg.),
route, time and style to clear such de-sealing request, provide the Superintending Engineer, Dy.
same. Commissioner, Addl.
Commissioner and finally to
Monitoring Committee, and
received back in the same
manner.
9. When the Hon’ble monitoring committee in its direction dated No such entry/endorsement is
19/12/2008 approved the recommended de-sealing for verification available in the file.
of the premises, was this intimated to the owners of the property?
Were the owners informed of the 29/12/2008 visit and asked to be
present themselves or through their representative on the site during
the inspection?
10. When the MCD officer in his visit dated 29/12/2008 found the seal No
tempered as alleged in his report on page 10/N of the file, were the
owners informed of the alleged tempering of the seal and asked to
be present in the schedules visit of 30/12/2008 by the then deputy
commissioner and her team?
11. Have the owners been informed of the alleged tempering of the seal No
so far?
12. Who ordered the filing of an FIR with the SHO, PS: Hauz Khas? On the basis of report given by
the JE (B) concerned, the then
AE(B) had sent a letter to SHO
concerned for lodging FIR against
owner/builder.
13. Were the owners asked to put up their side of story, if any, before No
taking the decision of filing FIR?
14. Have the police met any official during its investigation in this No such information is recorded
case? If yes, provide their names, contact details and dates of such in the file.
meetings.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Page 2 of 3
Non-receipt of the information from the PIO.
Order of the First Appellate Authority:
The information/reply as sought by Sh. Somnath Bharti should not be delayed and the same
should be provided to the applicant by 9th of Oct, 2009 positively. PIO/SE-I is also called upon to
explain as to due to whose fault, the information was not supplied to the applicant till date while
the same should have been forwarded within 30 days.”
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Somnath Bharti;
Respondent: Mr. Dilip Ramnani, Public Information Officer & SE;
The PIO has provided certain information but is now asked to provide following
information:
1- Query-3: The details of other floors that were sealed on 01/02/2007. The PIO has also
stated that the MCD officer at the time of sealing was Mr. Surender Kumar. The PIO is
directed to provide the name of the other officers and their present whereabouts.
2- Query-5: Names and whereabouts of the officers who were present in the sealing on
06/05/2008.
The PIO states that all the records in relationship to the information sought are available in six
files. He also states that there are no records apart from these six files. The PIO is directed to
provide all the records available in these files and also issue a certificate that there are no other
records in relationship to this in MCD.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to give the information mentioned above to the
Appellant before 15 April 2010 and the information regarding the two points
mentioned above will be provided to the Appellant before 30 April 2010.
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
01 April 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)(AK)
Page 3 of 3