Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.Sudhir Kumar Kashyap vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 19 September, 2011

Central Information Commission
Mr.Sudhir Kumar Kashyap vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 19 September, 2011
                        CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                            Club Building (Near Post Office)
                          Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                 Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                         Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002110/14657
                                                                 Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002110

Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:


Appellant                            :     Mr. M. K. Kashyap,
                                           9/3170, Gali No.-4, Dharampura,
                                           Gandhi Nagar, Delhi-110031

Respondent                           :     PIO & AC,
                                           MCD, Shahdara (South) Zone,
                                           O/o The Astt. Commissioner,
                                           Zonal Office Building,
                                           Karkarduma, Shahdara,
                                           Delhi.

RTI application filed on             :     20/02/2011
PIO replied on                       :     04/05/2011
First Appeal filed on                :     26/05/2011
First Appellate Authority order of   :     Not Mentioned.
Second Appeal received on            :     28/07/2011

Information Sought:
   1. That how many Transport Godown/s, Cloth Godown/s, Flammable Foam, Fur, Rexene Chemical
      Oil are occurring according to the survey of License Department on dated: 31/03/2009 in
      accordance to the order of F. No. CIC/WB/A07/01186/SG/2261. dated: 02/04/2009.
   2. Give information about the name of the godown holders, name of the company's godown with
      address according to the question 1 stated above.
   3. Give information about the properties as stated in question 1 above, according to date as:
      01/04/2008 to 31/03/2009, 01/04/2009 to 31/03/2010 and 01/04/2010 to 20/02/2011.
   4. That according to which law in Master Plan 2021, these transport godown has got permit to run
      their godowns in the Residential Area of Gandhi Nagar.
   5. That which department/s like Corporation, Police Fire Department has issued NOC certificates
      regarding running of these godowns. Provide the copies of the same.
   6. Give information if the NOC is not issued regarding such godowns, then are they still running
      their godown.
   7. That how many challans were made against these godowns from 01/04/2007 to 31/03/2008,
      01/04/2008 to 31/03/2009, 01/04/2009 to 31/03/2010 and from 01/04/2010 to 20/02/2011 by
      License Department, Police & Traffic Police Department.
   8. That how much accessories were seized from these godowns from 01/04/2007 to 31/03/2008,
      01/04/2008 to 31/03/2009, 01/04/2009 to 31/03/2010 and from 01/04/2010 to 20/02/2011.
   9. Whether building department has been informed with regard to misuse of Residential Properties
      by operating transporter MPD 2021 with regard to for godowns and other godowns in residential
      properties. Provide information for 01/04/2007 to 31/03/2008, 01/04/2008 to 31/03/2009,
      01/04/2009 to 31/03/2010 and from 01/04/2010 to 20/02/2011.
                                                                                        Page 1 of 3
    The PIO Reply:
   Question No. 1. There is no such record available.
   Question No. 2. As stated above.
   Question No. 3. As stated above.
   Question No. 4. There is no permission given by the G.B 82(s) to Transport Godowns in respect of
   running in the residential area.
   Question No. 5. As stated above.
   Question No. 6. G.B. 82 (s) had not provided any permission. These activities are illegal.
   Question No. 7. The chalan were made time to time by the MCD but the record is not available since
   01/04/2007.
   Question No. 8. The encroachment being left from the Govt. Land from time to time.
   Question No. 9. As stated above.

Grounds for the First Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply was given to the appellant by the PIO.

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
      "No such order mentioned by the Appellant."

Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory information had been provided by the PIO.

Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

The following were present
Appellant : Mr. M. K. Kashyap;

Respondent : Absent;

The PIO has given some of the information but has not given the important information sought by
the Appellant:

1- Query-7: The PIO is directed to provide the information with respect to challans issued as desired
by the Appellant. The PIO has stated that information is not available. The PIO must state if he
does not have information with regard to the period 2009-2010 & 2011.
2- Query-9: The PIO will inform the Appellant whether any intimation has been given to the
Building Department for the misuse. If no intimation has been given to the Building Department
this should be stated.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is directed to provide the information as directed above to the Appellant
before 10 October 2011.

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 appears 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).
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.

Page 2 of 3

He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 12 October 2011 at 12.30pm
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.

If there are other persons responsible for the delay in providing the information to the Appellant the
PIO is directed to inform such persons of the show cause hearing and direct them to appear before the
Commission with him. If no other responsible persons are brought by the persons asked to showcause
hearing, it will be presumed that they are the responsible persons.

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
19 September 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (ved)

Page 3 of 3