Central Information Commission
2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066
Website: www.cic.gov.in
Decision No.3882/IC(A)/2009
F. No.CIC/MA/A/2009/000052
Dated, the 17th April, 2009
Name of the Appellant: Mrs. Nisha Sharma
Name of the Public Authority: Department of Power, GNCTD
i
Facts
:
1. The appeal was listed for hearing on 17/4/2009. While the appellant was
present, the PIO did not avail of the opportunity of hearing. The appeal is,
therefore, examined on the basis of responses of the PIO and the Appellate
Authority and the issues raised by the appellant in her RTI application.
2. In her appeal before the Commission, the appellant has submitted as
under:
“My husband who was an ex-serviceman expired on 18th December 2002
and when I visited Rajaya Sainik Board Delhi for the completion of the
formalities, I came to know about the scheme of 75 units of electricity free
granted by the Govt. of NCT Delhi to all the disabled personnel and
widows of the Ex-servicemen for their valuable contributions to the
country.
Accordingly, in November 2003 on the recommendation of the Rajaya
Sainik Board vide their letter No.28/E/Welfare/03 on 5th November 2003
(copy attached) I was given concession.
From January 2007, BSES Rajadhani (Power) Ltd. without informing
stopped the concession on their own will.
Immediately I took the matter up with BSES Rajdhani (Power) Ltd. in
January 2007 and after a prolonged correspondence and several personali
“If you don’t ask, you don’t get.” – Mahatma Gandhi1
visits I was informed vide their letter No.BM (D) VKJ/2390 on 1st August
2007.
Afterwards I took the matter up with Rajaya Sainik Board, Delhi, DERC &
Ombudsman but still awaiting their reply.
In May 2008 I approached Delhi Public Grievances Commission, Govt. of
NCT, Delhi who then forwarded by application to Principal Secretary
(Power) Govt. of NCT, Delhi.
In April, Principal Secretary who replied vide letter
No.F.11(01)/2006/Power/1104 on 28th April 2008 (copy attached). Since I
was not satisfied with their reply vide my letter dated 28th may 2008 asking
for clarification. Since no reply was received despite several reminders till
9th September 2008.
I vide my application dated 9th September 2008 (copy attached) I sought
the information under the RTIA copy of the letter No.F.11(05)/505/2008/POWER/2385 of 23rd
September 2008 in reply to my RTI, rather than solving the issue it created
more complications as they say the concession was withdrawn on July
2002 and whereas I was given the concession in the month of November
2003 and ;availed till December 2008 (copy of the letter attached).
Accordingly I filed the First Appeal which vide their order under reference
has been turned down and did not provide information called for.
In view of the above it is clear that the officials in the Govt. of NCT are
knowingly hesitate in giving the information which I think is neither
confidential nor secret. The following information that I seek to be
supplied are as follows:
(i) Whether the following concession has been withdrawn?
(II) If so on which date was it withdrawn?
(iii) Does the Ministry of Defence, Rajay Sainik Board, Delhi informed
of the withdrawal of the concession as they are the authorities looking
afterwards the welfare of the Ex-servicemen and their widows and ;such
concessions to eligible personnel are only granted by the Govt. of NCT,
Delhi on their recommendation.
I shall be grateful if my application is looked into and the required action is
taken and the offices involved are also directed to give the above
information sought at the earliest.”
3. In her original RTI application, she requested for the following information:
2
(a) Whether concession granted by Govt. of NCT Delhi has been
withdrawn;
(b) If so, the date from which withdrawn;
(c) Whether the Defence authorities were informed as it has an
adverse effect on the need of Defence Personnel; and
(d) The source viz the information was given to effected personnel.
4. The PIO replied vide his letter dated 29th September 2008, as under:
“After unbundling of DVB on 30.06.2002, the concession has not been
carried forward. Hence w.e.f. 01.07.2002 this concession is no longer
available.”
5. Subsequently, the appellant submitted her first appeal, in response to
which Shri. Rajendra Kumar, Secretary (Power) and the Appellate Authority,
replied as under:
“The undersigned as 1st Appellate Authority under the Right to Information
Act, 2005 has examined the appeal filed by the applicant against the reply
furnished by the Link A.P.I.O., Department of Power in respect of
application I.D. No.505.
The free electricity up to 75 units per month was given to disabled army
personnel or families of the deceased army personnel during the period of
DESU/DVB. After unbundling of DVB, the concession has not been
carried forward. Therefore, the Link A.P.I.O., has furnished the
information available in the Department”.
6. During the hearing, the appellant stated that the benefit of electricity
concession was provided to the families of Dead Ex-servicemen. In her case,
the concession was provided with effect from September 2003 to December
2006. She has, therefore, alleged that the PIO has given misleading information
stating that “with effect from 1/7/2002 this concession is no longer available”. In
fact, she was provided the electricity concession at a later date, i.e. with effect
from September 2003 to December 2006. Thus, the PIO has provided
misleading information. Likewise, the Appellate Authority has also misled her by
stating that “after unbundling of DVB, the concession has not been carried
forward”. She has argued that it was indeed carried out and she was the
beneficiary. But, now she is deprived of the electricity concession.
7. Further more, the appellant said that the unbundling of DVB was effected
from 30th June 2002 whereas the concession was provided to her with effect from
September 2003 to December 2006. Thereafter, this benefit was discontinued.
She has, therefore, sought to know the grounds on the basis of which the
electricity concession provided to her has been discontinued. She, therefore,
3
pleaded for providing correct information, so that she can approach the
competent authority for redressal of her grievances.
Decision:
8. The appellant has grievances regarding discontinuation of the electricity
concession, which was provided to her from September 2003 to December 2006.
She has sought to know the reasons for discontinuation of the electricity
concession. The PIO and the Appellate Authority have replied and stated that
after unbundling of DVB on 30/6/2002 concession has not been provided. But,
the appellant has stated that she availed of this benefit from September 2003 to
December 2006, which is much later than the period indicated by the PIO and
the Appellate Authority for discontinuation of the service. Clearly, either the
appellant or the respondent has lied and made untrue statement.
9. The Secretary (Power) and the Appellate Authority is, therefore, directed
to examine the facts and accordingly furnish correct information and indicate the
grounds for discontinuation of the electricity concession provided to the
appellant, who is a widow. If it is established from the fact that the respondent
has provided misleading and incorrect information to mislead the appellant,
appropriate action u/s 20(1) of the Act would be initiated. The Appellate Authority
is, therefore, directed to re-examine the application for information and furnish a
fresh reply to the appellant within one month from the date of issue of this
decision. If necessary, the matter should be investigated to unearth the truth so
that appellant’s grievance could be suitably redressed. The appeal is, therefore,
remanded back to the Appellate Authority who should review its decision on the
matter.
10. The appellant is free to approach the Commission again, if she is not
satisfied with the response of the Appellate Authority.
11. The appeal is thus disposed of.
Sd/-
(Prof. M.M. Ansari)
Central Information Commissioner ii
Authenticated true copy:
(M.C. Sharma)
Assistant Registrar
ii
“All men by nature desire to know.” – Aristotle
4
Name & address of Parties:
1. Mrs. Nisha Sharma, 76, Mahipalpur, New Delhi – 110 037
2. The Public Information Officer, Department of Power, GNCTD, 8th Level,
B-Wing, Delhi Secretariat, I.P. Estate, New Delhi – 110 002.
3. Shri. Rajendra Kumar, Secretary (Power) & the Appellate Authority,
Department of Power, GNCTD, 8th Level, B-Wing, Delhi Secretariat, I.P.
Estate, New Delhi – 110 002
5