Shri.Anil Dutt Sharma vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 23 November, 2011

Central Information Commission
Shri.Anil Dutt Sharma vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 23 November, 2011
                           Club Building (Near Post Office)
                         Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067
                                Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                                          Decision No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002413/15859
                                                                  Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2011/002413

Relevant facts emerging from the Appeal:

Appellant                            :       Sh. Anil Dutt Sharma
                                             D-129, New Seelampur
                                             Delhi - 110053

Respondent                           :       PIO
                                             Municipal Corporation of Delhi
                                             O/o The Executive Engineer,
                                             Shahdara North Zone,
                                             Keshav Chowk,
                                             Welcome Shahdara,

RTI application filed on             :      23-02-2011
PIO replied on                       :      08-04-2011
First Appeal filed on                :      22-05-2011
First Appellate Authority order of   :      Not Ordered
Second Appeal received on            :      01-09-2011

Information Sought:-
The Appellant has sought the following information regarding the Construction being carried out
opposite to each other near 1/9720, Bahal Gali, Shahdara, Delhi :

1. Provide me report which you have receive any request from above mentioned plots owners for
sanctioning the land plan for construction. If yes when.
2. Provide me the time limits you have provided for construction of this plot. Provide me the exact last
date of completion of buildings and the exact no. of plot.
3. If any Map sanctioned for construction of above mentioned plot then provide me, copy of notice
under section 6.1 of Delhi master plan 2021. If, notice has not been received from the constructer then
provide me action taken report under section 337(4) of .DMC. act.
4. If action has not been taken under section 337(4) of M.C.D. act then provide me the name whose
duties were to take action but failed to do so.
5.If you found any irregularity in construction provide me action taken report against constructer and
provide me particular sections under which normally you have to initiate action against the delinquent
6. Please provide me name of the person, is empowered to take action against the plots constructers
and what action is due against him for not taking action.
7. Provide me monthly certificate issued by J.E. under his signature to the effect that there is no
unauthorized ongoing construction and /or encroachment on public/government land. (Reference High
court Judgment (Kalyan Sanstha Social Welfare Organization v/s Union of India and Ors.)
8. If not issued, please provide me under which law/judgment the said certificate was not issued.
9. Provide me action taking report against the JE and AE for not compliance the order of the Hon'able
High Court.
10. In the context of said High Court judgment, please give details regarding unauthorized ongoing
construction at above mentioned plot.
11. If not, what action is due against J.E. and A.E for dereliction of duty?
                                                                                            Page 1 of 3
 12. Provide me the date and other details about the Copies of this certificate issued by J.E. and action
taken plan has been furnished to the concerned Deputy Commissioner with a copy to the Head
Quarters who would maintain records of such certificates.
13. Unauthorized construction is a cognizable offence under section 466 A of M.C.D act. Provide me
the detail which you have sent to the local police for taking action.
14. If 466A of M.C.D. act not attracted against the said plot constructer, Provide me such law there
under you have delegated power for giving relaxation to above mentioned plot owner.
15. Provide me the name of J.E. Architect (with address and phone no.) and A.E and Provide me exact
no. of the plot
16. Provide me under which norms you have permitted relaxation to the constructer for not compliance
of Clause 7.3.2 of Building bye laws. If relaxation has not been provided then give me proof in
compliance of the said clause.
17. If any map sanctioned for construction of building, please provide me, is it for apartment,
residential or commercial purpose.
18. If this building is old and occupied then provide me the no. of this building out of 775 heritage
sites of Delhi.
19. Provide me information about ID reference No. mentioned on this RTI application above.
20. Provide me copy of such notice, required for construction of building after sanctioned building and
before completion certificate.

PIO's Reply:-
The appellant was provided with the following reply :-
   1. There is no kind of information or any record about the property no. Abutting plot of 1/9718
       Behal gali, Rohtas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi in building department, MCD. So, it is not possible
       to answer your question.
   2. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   3. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   4. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   5. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   6. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   7. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   8. Due to overloading of staff there certificate are not in effect.
   9. Answer as per Sr. No. 8. above
   10. Answer as per Sr. No. 8 above.
   11. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   12. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   13. Answer as per Sr. No. 8 above.
   14. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   15. Answer as per Sr. No. 1 above.
   16. JE, Sh. G P Jaiswal, (Bldg.)-II, AE Sh. V K Tyagi (Bldg,)-II, Shahdara North Zone, Architect-
       Answer as per Sr. No. 1.
   17. Answer as per Sr. No. 1.
   18. Answer as per Sr. No. 1.
   19. Answer as per Sr. No. 1.
   20. ID No. 2377.

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

Order of the First Appellate Authority (FAA):
Not Ordered.

Ground of the Second Appeal:
Unsatisfactory reply was given by the PIO and No order was passed by the FAA.

                                                                                            Page 2 of 3
 Relevant Facts

emerging during Hearing:

Both the parties were given an opportunity for hearing. However, neither party appeared. From a
perusal of the papers it appears that the information available on the records appears to have been
provided. The Appellant appears to be claiming that information available on records does not reflect
the actual condition on the ground. The Commission has no jurisdiction in this matter.


The Appeal is disposed.

Information available on the records appears to have been provided.
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
23 November 2011
(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (ved)

Page 3 of 3

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information