CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001801/4822
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/001801
Relevant Facts
emerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. Sunil Agarwal
482, Pkt-6, Sec-2,
Rohini, Delhi-110085.
Respondent : The SE-II & PIO
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Office of the SE (Rohini Zone),
Rohini , Delhi-110085.
RTI application filed on : 13/03/2009
PIO replied : 20/03/2009
First appeal filed on : 11/05/2009
First Appellate Authority order : No order
Second Appeal filed on : 16/07/2009
Appellant had sought information regarding 12 points in respect to a concrete road from
Pkt-3 to 7 in Sec-2 Rohini. Appellant was satisfied with the reply given to Para 1 & 2.
Sr. No. Information sought PIO’s reply
3. Rate of the Construction of List of work order with rates is enclosed with
these roads? file.
4. Ratio of the Materials for the RMC M-20 grade.
Construction of this
road/work?
5. Name of the concerned officer Sh. Anjani Kumar.
who Supervised.
6. Whether the payment of Partly made.
construction of these roads
have been made or not?
7. Present status of the roads Satisfactory.
which were constructed
presently?
8. Sample report of the material Satisfactory as per specification.
used for construction of these
roads?
9. The thickness of the material 08 cms. To 10 cms.
laid for making the roads.
10. The copy of the all awarded – Copy enclosed with the file-
tenders of the road of Sector-2
from Pocket-3 to Pocket-7.
11. Why some roads of sector-2 The remaining roads works are under tender
have been not constructed? and in the process of award.
12. From which funds these H.O. A/C = XL-VIII-Za.
constructions have been made?
Area MLA or Area Councilor.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Appellant is not satisfied with the reply given to queries 3 to 12.
The First Appellate Authority ordered:
No ordered.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Appellant is not satisfied with the reply given to queries 3 to 12 and no action taken by FAA.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Sunil Agarwal
Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Ailawadi (PIO)
The information has been provided to the Appellant but the Appellant complains that the
thickness of the concrete road is much less than 8-10cms which has been specified. The PIO
agrees that Executive Engineer Mr. S.K.Gupta will conduct a joint inspection with the Appellant
on the said road and record the actual thickness which is visible. The Appellant states that the
road thickness is visible since the road has been cut by certain utility agencies. The joint
inspection by the Executive Engineer and the Appellant will be conducted on 22 September 2009
at 9.00 A.M. They will meet at House No. 482, Pocket 6, Sector-2, Rohini. They will prepare a
joint report of their observations and one copy will be given to the Appellant.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The joint inspection will be done by the Executive Engineer and the Appellant will be conducted
on 22 September 2009 and joint report be prepared of their observations. A copy of this report
will be given to the Appellant.
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
16 September, 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)
(AK)