414 SmtLakshmidhawanVsL and DO 24 06 3 1
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Room No.308, B wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi-110066
Appeal No. CIC/LS/C/2009/000414
Complainant: Smt. Lakshmi Dhawan
Public Authority: Land and Development Office
(through Shri R.K. Sinha, L&DO; &
Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh, Deputy L&DO)
Date of Hearing: 24/06/2009
Date of Decision: 24/06/2009
FACTS
:-
The matter, in short, is that the L&DO has passed an order dated 02/11/2005
regarding substitution in respect of the property No.11/12, East Patel Nagar, in favour of
Appellant and Smt. Gunwanti Nand Keshwani. However, on the basis of some
complaint, the aforesaid order was cancelled on 03/03/2006. It is in this connection that
the present complaint has been filed before the Commission.
2. The matter was heard on 24/06/2009. The complainant is present before the
Commission along with her sister Gunwanti Nand Keshwani. The L&DO is represented
by the officers named above. The principal submission of the complainant is that the
orders under reference was cancelled without issuing her a Show Cause notice. Another
and, more important, submission of the Appellant is that she wishes to see the Vigilance
File in which the complaint under reference has been dealt with by L&DO.
3. On the other hand, it is the submission of Shri Singh that in compliance of this
Commission’s decision dated 31/03/2007, the Appellant was allowed to inspect the file.
However, as regards allowing inspection of the Vigilance File, Shri Singh would submit
that the matter is still under ‘investigation’ and the Appellant herein is a party therein
and, therefore, the same cannot be allowed to be inspected by her at this stage. When
queried as to how much time L&DO is likely to take to complete the inquiry into the
complaint, he would submit that the inquiry is being conducted against a Class I officer
of the Department and legal opinion etc. has to be taken and, therefore, it is going to take
some time and no firm time frame for completion of enquiry can be given. He would
also submit that vigilance inquiry has no implications as far the legal rights of the
complainant are concerned. He also assures that the L&DO would expedite action for
substitution of property in the name of the complainant and her sister Smt. Gunwanti
Nand Keshwani if the procedural requirements are fulfilled.
414 SmtLakshmidhawanVsL and DO 24 06 3 2
DECISION
4. The core point in this matter is that if the brother of the complainant files a
relinquishment deed, L&DO would have no difficulty in acceding to the substitution
request of the complainant, which, according to Shri Sinha and Singh, is a legal
requirement. The Commission cannot interfere in such matters. However, as regards
the reluctance of the L&DO to show Vigilance File to the complainant, after perusal of
the File, the commission is satisfied that an inquiry is underway and the information is
exempted under clause (h) of section 8(1) of RTI Act. Even so, the Commission would
like to observe that the enquiry has been pending since last three years and Director,
L&DO is advised to take necessary steps to have it expedited.
5. The matter is disposed of as stated herein above.
Sd/-
(M.L. Sharma)
Central Information Commissioner
Authenticated true copy. Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against application and payment of the charges,
prescribed under the Act, to the CPIO of this Commission.
(K.L. Das)
Assistant Registrar
Tele: 011 2671 73 53
Fax: 011 2610 62 76
Copy to:-
(1) Smt. Lakshmi Dhawan,
11/12, East Patel Nagar,
New Delhi-110008.
(2) Shri R.K. Sinha,
Land & Development Officer
Land & Development Office
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi.