CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No. 415, 4th Floor,
Block IV, Old JNU Campus,
New Delhi -110 067.
Tel: + 91 11 26161796
Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000220/2771
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/000220
Relevant Factsemerging from the Appeal
Appellant : Mr. V.K. Sharma,
E-6D, DDA Flats, Munirka,
New Delhi-110067.
Respondent : Mr. M. Rastogi
Superintending Engineer-I & PIO,
Municipal Corporation of Delhi,
South Zone, Green Park,
New Delhi.
RTI application filed on : 21/10/2008
PIO replied : 26/11/2008
First appeal filed on : 02/12/2008
First Appellate Authority order : not replied.
Second Appeal filed on : 11/02/2009
Appellant had asked in his RTI application about several complaints with
DDA/MCD for the removal of unauthorized structure raised by the allottee of
Flat No. E-6/B (G.F.) Munirka, New Delhi. I would like to seek information
alongwith relevant papers relating to Flat No. E-6/B on the following issues
under RTI Act.
Particular of required information :-
1. A copy of approved site plan of Flat No. E-6/B (G.F.) showing authorized
construction only.
2. How much area has been covered by unauthorized construction and with
whose permission?
3. A copy of approval of extra construction.
4. What course of action has been taken on the letter from DDA addressed to
MCD wherein they had mentioned that this “…..illegal construction is to be
removed by MCD”?
5. What steps have been taken so far to demolish unauthorized additional room
which has been constructed without any consent from allottees of upper floors
and permissions of MCD?
6. what action has been taken so far on my complaint made in the aforesaid letter
dated 17.09.2008 regarding alterations/additions made inside Flat No. E-6/B
(G.F.) without any approval/permission from MCD?
The PIO replied.
The application is supported by letter issued by DDA, addressed to
ZAC/South Zone on 26.04.1996 for taking action against the alleged unauthorized
construction, which establishes that said construction was come up prior to 1996. as
regards encroachment, it is submitted that concerned works department has carried
out action to remove the encroachment. Therefore, a factual report regarding removal
of encroachment is required on the part of concerned department i.e. EE(M)-I/South
Zone.
The First Appellate Authority ordered.
Not replied.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present
Appellant: Mr. V.K. Sharma
Respondent: Mr. B.S. Yadav APIO
The information has been provided to the appellant. However MCD continues to take
a position that wherever DDA construction is there, they do not have plans and
therefore are blissfully ignorant about illegal construction.
In this situation Citizens are left feeling that MCD has no means of controlling
unauthorized construction.
Decision:
The appeal is disposed.
The information has been provided.
This decision is announced in open chamber.
Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties.
Shailesh Gandhi
Information Commissioner
17 April 2009
(In any correspondence on this decision, mentioned the complete decision number.)