Central Information Commission Judgements

Mr.Yogender Dagar vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 25 May, 2010

Central Information Commission
Mr.Yogender Dagar vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 25 May, 2010
                    CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                        Club Building (Near Post Office)
                      Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                             Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                    Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000900/7846
                                                          Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2010/000900
Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                            :      Mr. Yogender Dagar
                                            A - 8/47, First Floor,
                                            Sector - 16, Rohini,
                                            Delhi - 110089

Respondent                           :      Mr. Suresh Pal Meena,
                                            APIO & Assistant Director
                                            Municipal Corporation of Delhi
                                            Horticulture Department
                                            Rohini Zone,
                                            Near Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Hospital
                                            Sector - 5, Rohini
                                            New Delhi.

RTI application filed on             :      05/11/2009
PIO replied                          :      No Reply
First appeal filed on                :      18/01/2010
First Appellate Authority order      :      10/02/2010
Second Appeal received on            :      08/04/2010

Information Sought:
   a) Whether any budget has been allocated in the current financial year (i.e. 1st April 2009 to
      31st March 2010) from the department for the beautification, uplifttment and maintenance
      of the said park?
   b) "Whether any official of the department has visited in the park to make the estimate/
      proposal for beautification & maintenance of the park? If yes, provide the necessary
      detail regarding the calculated estimate and the current status of its approval."
   c) Whether any time limit has been prescribed to start & complete the beautification &
      maintenance of the park by the department? If yes, provide details of schedule to be
      followed to start & complete the said work.
   d) Details regarding the Budget that has been sanctioned by the department to construct the
      boundary wall of the park, and when is the work likely to start?
   e) "Whether the beautification, upliftment & maintenance of park involves only generating
      source of water & cutting of grass, which the department has done during a period of 7
      months? Provide the details of the work carried out for beautification during 7 month, in
      pursuance of reply of the department vide letter no. DDH/RZ/09/342 dated 09/03/2009,
      under which it was stated that the development of park will be carried out inn current
      financial year. Also provide the schedule of remaining 5 months (i.e. 1st Nov. 2009 to 31st
      March 2010).
   f) "Whether the residents have to request several times too the horticulture staff posted at
      Park in A -4, DDA Market Sector 16, Rohini, Delhi - 89. Who comes in the Pocket A -8,
      Park in two - three months and collect the garbage, bricks etc. in the name of cleanliness
         from the park and dump the same in the parking area meant for parking of vehicles.
        Whether it is not the duty of that personnel to lift the said garbage from there. If the said
        person does not care to do so then to whom the residents have to approach to lodge their
        grievance in that regards.
     g) When are the sign boards likely to be installed displaying direction by Horticulture
        Department mentioning that the Park is not meant for organizing marriages, Jagran or
        other function, not to roam the pet dogs and not to litter any garbage in the park etc.?

Reply of the Public Information Officer (PIO):
No Reply

Grounds for the First Appeal:
No information provided the PIO, even after the expiry of stipulated period of 30 days
.

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
The First Appellant Authority has directed the PIO to furnish the specific within 2 weeks from
10/02/2010 and take necessary steps for the redressal of the grievances of the appellant.

Grounds for the Second Appeal:

No information has been provided the PIO, even after the order passed by the FAA.

Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:

The following were present
Appellant: Mr. Yogender Dagar;

Respondent: Mr. Suresh Pal Meena, APIO & Assistant Director
The PIO claims that information has been provided on 12/12/2009. The Appellant states
that he has not received any information until now. The FAA has mentioned that the reply is not
specific and has directed the PIO to furnish specific information within two weeks. The PIO
states that no information has been sent to the appellant after the order of the FAA. The PIO Mr.
S. P. Singh was present at the time of first appellate hearing.

Decision:

The Appeal is allowed.

The PIO is directed to give the information to the Appellant as directed by
FAA before 15 June 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
25 May 2010
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)
(MS)