{"id":131299,"date":"2011-06-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-06-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011"},"modified":"2017-12-07T12:57:37","modified_gmt":"2017-12-07T07:27:37","slug":"mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011","title":{"rendered":"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission<\/div>\n
Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011<\/div>\n
                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION\n                           Club Building (Near Post Office)\n                         Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067\n                                Tel: +91-11-26161796\n\n                                                  Decision No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000863\/12733Penalty\n                                                                 Appeal No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000863\nRelevant Facts<\/pre>\n
 emerging from the Appeal:\n<\/p>\n
Appellant                             :       Mr. Shiv Kumar\n                                              Maruti Bhawan, Behind OBC\n                                              South Civil Lines, Jansath,\n                                              Distt. Muzaffar Nagar -251314 (UP)\n\nRespondent                            :       Mr. Jai Prakash\n<\/pre>\n
                                              Public Information Officer & Dy. Director (Vigilance)
\n                                              New Delhi Municipal Council,
\n                                              Vigilance Department
\n                                              7th Floor, Palika Kendra,
\n                                              Sansad Marg, New Delhi- 110001<\/p>\n
RTI application filed on              :       17\/11\/2010
\nPIO replied                           :       24\/12\/2010
\nFirst appeal filed on                 :       01\/01\/2011
\nFirst Appellate Authority order       :       04\/03\/2011
\nSecond Appeal received on             :       01\/04\/2011<\/p>\n
Information sought by the appellant :\n<\/p>\n
    1. The department has received how many complaints against Dr. P. K. Sharma. Medical Officer
\n        of Health, New Delhi Municipal Council, Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg. New Delhi –110001?
\n      a. Has the department investigated\/taken any action on the complaints?<\/p>\n
            i. If yes, kindly provide the certified photocopy of each.
\n            ii. If not, please define the reason \/ ground for non taking action.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
    2. The department has received how many complaints against the licensing unit \/ Health
\n        Department. New Delhi Municipal Council, Palika Kendra. Sansad .Marg, New Delhi —
\n        110001?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       a. Is the department has investigated\/taken any action on the complaints?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             i. If yes, kindly provide the certified photocopy of each.
\n             ii. If not, please define the reason \/ ground for non taking action\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
   3. The department has received how many complaints against the Health Enforcement & General
\n        Enforcement Department?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     a. Has the department investigated\/taken any action on the complaints?\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           .i. If yes, kindly provide the certified photocopy of each.
\n            ii. If not, please define the reason\/information sought by the appellant ground for non taking
\n                 action.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Reply of the PIO (Vigilance Department) :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It is informed that reply to the Para No.1 can not be supplied being denied by the third party.
\nRegarding Para No.2&3, necessary comments from the concerned department have been asked to
\noffer. As soon as the same is received, will be intimated accordingly to you.\n<\/p>\n
Ground of the First Appeal:\n<\/p>\n
The information provided is unsatisfactory.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                              Page 1 of 4<\/span><\/p>\n
 Order of the FAA:\n<\/p>\n
 The PIO (Vig.) is directed to supply all the information except the information sought at S.No. 1 to
\nthe appellant within the prescribed period in the RTI Act, from date of the receipt of this order.\n<\/p>\n
Ground of the Second Appeal:\n<\/p>\n
The information sought for has been denied.\n<\/p>\n
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing on 07 June 2011:\n<\/p>\n
The following were present
\nAppellant: Mr. Shiv Kumar;\n<\/p>\n
Respondent: Mr. H. C. Sharma, SO on behalf of Mr. Jai Prakash, PIO & Dy. Director (Vigilance);\n<\/p>\n
        “The PIO has refused to give information on query-1 claiming that third party has stated that
\ninformation should not be supplied. This is without any basis in law. Section-11 of the RTI Act is a
\nprocedural requirement and if information is denied after the objection of the third party reasons for
\ndenial have to be given as per Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. The onus of providing that denial of
\ninformation was justified is on the PIO and no justification has been offered by the respondent for
\ndenying the information. Denial of information can only be justified based on the provisions of Section
\n8(1) and the PIO has to give reasons based on which the information was denied. This has not been
\ndone. Further on query-2 & 3 the respondent has written a letter to the Appellant on 31\/05\/2011 asking
\nhim to deposit and additional fee of Rs.288\/-. This is also contrary to the law since Section 7(6) clearly
\nstates that after the period of 30 days the information has to be provided free of cost to the Appellant.”\n<\/p>\n
Commission’s Decision dated 07 June 2011:\n<\/p>\n
The Appeal was allowed.\n<\/p>\n
        “The PIO is directed to provide the information on all three queries to the Appellant free of
\ncost before 25 June 2011.\n<\/p>\n
The issue before the Commission is of not supplying the complete, required information by the
\nPIO within 30 days as required by the law.\n<\/p>\n
From the facts before the Commission it appears that the PIO is guilty of not furnishing information
\nwithin the time specified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 by not replying within 30 days, as per the
\nrequirement of the RTI Act. It appears that the PIO’s actions attract the penal provisions of Section 20
\n(1). A showcause notice is being issued to him, and he is directed give his reasons to the Commission
\nto show cause why penalty should not be levied on him.\n<\/p>\n
He will present himself before the Commission at the above address on 30 June 2011 at 11.30am
\nalongwith his written submissions showing cause why penalty should not be imposed on him as
\nmandated under Section 20 (1). He will also submit proof of having given the information to the
\nappellant.”\n<\/p>\n
Relevant Facts emerging during the showcause hearing on 30 June 2011:
\nThe following were present
\nAppellant: Mr. Shiv Kumar;\n<\/p>\n
Respondent: Mr. Jai Prakash, PIO & Dy. Director (Vigilance);\n<\/p>\n
        The PIO has not provided the information as ordered by the Commission. He has provided
\nattested photocopies of some pages and given it to the Appellant. He has not provided even the number
\nof complaints against Dr. P. K. Sharma or the licensing\/Health Department. The queries of the
\nAppellant were fairly simple and the PIO has given a written submission in which now he suddenly
\nclaiming that providing the information is difficult since it is very voluminous. It is significant to note
\nthat this plea was not taken initially nor was this plea put before the FAA. Even during the hearing
\nbefore the Commission it was not claimed that providing the information could disproportionately
\ndivert the resources of the public authority.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                               Page 2 of 4<\/span><\/p>\n
 The PIO Mr. Jai Prakash, Dy. Director (Vigilance) consistently refused to provide the information as
\nper the provisions of the RTI Act. Initially for query-1 he claims that there was third party objection
\nbut had not given any reasons under Section 8(1) of the RTI Act. Regarding query-2 & 3 he did not
\nprovide any information. The FAA ordered on 04\/03\/2011 that he was supporting the PIO’s claim on
\nquery-1 but ordered the PIO to provide the information on query 2 & 3 to the Appellant. Despite this
\norder the information was not provided to the Appellant. Only after the order of the Commission some
\ninformation has been provided, which is just certain photocopies. In this there is not a single complaint
\nagainst Dr. P.K. Sharma and the PIO has refused to give the information point wise as sought by the
\nAppellant. The PIO admits that there are complaints against Dr. P. K. Sharma and is now saying that
\nhe will provide the information to the Appellant.\n<\/p>\n
Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act states, “Where the Central Information Commission or the State
\nInformation Commission, as the case may be, at the time of deciding any complaint or appeal is of the
\nopinion that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case
\nmay be, has, without any reasonable cause, refused to receive an application for information or has not
\nfurnished information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 or malafidely denied
\nthe request for information or knowingly given incorrect, incomplete or misleading information or
\ndestroyed information which was the subject of the request or obstructed in any manner in furnishing
\nthe information, it shall impose a penalty of two hundred and fifty rupees each day till application is
\nreceived or information is furnished, so however, the total amount of such penalty shall not exceed
\ntwenty five thousand rupees;\n<\/p>\n
Provided that the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the
\ncase may be, shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before any penalty is imposed on
\nhim:\n<\/p>\n
Provided further that the burden of proving that he acted reasonably and diligently shall be on the
\nCentral Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer, as the case may be.”
\nA plain reading of Section 20 reveals that there are three circumstances where the Commission must
\nimpose penalty:\n<\/p>\n
1)      Refusal to receive an application for information.\n<\/p>\n
2)      Not furnishing information within the time specified under sub-section (1) of section 7 – 30
\n        days.\n<\/p>\n
3)      Malafidely denying the request for information or knowingly giving incorrect, incomplete or
\n        misleading information or destroying information which was the subject of the request\n<\/p>\n
4)      Obstructing in any manner in furnishing the information.\n<\/p>\n
All the above are prefaced by the infraction, ‘ without reasonable cause’.\n<\/p>\n
Section 19 (5) of the RTI Act has also stated that “In any appeal proceedings, the onus to prove that a
\ndenial of a request was justified shall be on the Central Public Information Officer or State Public
\nInformation Officer, as the case may be, who denied the request.”\n<\/p>\n
Thus if without reasonable cause, information is not furnished within the time specified under sub-
\nsection (1) of section 7, the Commission is dutybound to levy a penalty at the rate of rupees two
\nhundred and fifty each day till the information is furnished. Once the Commission decides that there
\nwas no reasonable cause for delay, it has to impose the penalty at the rate specified in Section 20 (1)
\nof the RTI Act and the law gives no discretion in the matter. The burden of proving that denial of
\ninformation by the PIO was justified and reasonable is clearly on the PIO as per Section 19(5) of the
\nRTI Act.\n<\/p>\n
The RTI application was filed on 17\/11\/2010 hence the information should have been provided to the
\nAppellant before 17\/012\/2010. The PIO Mr. Jai Prakash, Dy. Director (Vigilance) did not provide the
\ninformation even after the order of the FAA and despite the order of the Commission has failed to
\nprovide complete point wise information to the Appellant.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                             Page 3 of 4<\/span><\/p>\n
 The Commission once against directs the PIO Mr. Jai Prakash that the complete
\npoint wise information is sent to the Appellant before 10 July 2011<\/p>\n
Since the PIO has refused to provide the information without any reasonable cause and the delay is
\nmuch more that 100 days, the Commission is imposing the maximum penalty under Section 20(1) of
\nthe RTI of `25000\/- on Mr. Jai Prakash, PIO & Dy. Director (Vigilance).\n<\/p>\n
It also appears that the PIO has consistently refused to provide the information. Even after the order of
\nthe FAA he did not provide the information and despite the order of the Commission he has refused to
\nprovide the complete point wise information. Since there has been consistent failure to provide the
\ninformation the Commission under its powers under Section 20(2) of the RTI Act recommends
\ndisciplinary action to be taken against the PIO Mr. Jai Prakash.\n<\/p>\n
In view of this under the provisions of Section 20(2) of the RTI Act the
\nCommission recommends that disciplinary action be taken against Mr. Jai
\nPrakash, PIO & Dy. Director (Vigilance)as per the service rules applicable. The
\nChairman, New Delhi Municipal Council will inform the Commission about the
\naction taken before 30 September 2011.\n<\/p>\n
Decision:\n<\/p>\n
        As per the provisions of Section 20 (1) RTI Act 2005, the Commission finds this
\na fit case for levying penalty on Mr. Jai Prakash, PIO & Dy. Director (Vigilance). Since
\nthe delay in providing the information has been more than 100 days, the Commission is
\npassing an order penalizing Mr. Jai Prakash of `25000\/-.\n<\/p>\n
      The Chairman, New Delhi Municipal Council is directed to recover the amount
\nof `2500\/- from the salary of Mr. Jai Prakash, PIO & Dy. Director (Vigilance) and
\nremit the same by a demand draft or a Banker’s Cheque in the name of the Pay &
\nAccounts Officer, CAT, payable at New Delhi and send the same to Shri Pankaj K.P.
\nShreyaskar, Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary of the Central Information
\nCommission, 2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan, New Delhi – 110066. The amount
\nmay be deducted at the rate of `5000\/ per month every month from the salary of Mr. Jai
\nPrakash and remitted by the 10th of every month starting from August 2011. The total
\namount of `25000 \/- will be remitted by 10th of December, 2011.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                                 Shailesh Gandhi
\n                                                                                       Information Commissioner
\n                                                                                                    30 June 2011
\n(In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number. (DW))
\nCC : To,
\n1-        The Chairman
\n          New Delhi Municipal Council
\n          Palika Kendra, Sandad Marg,
\n          New Delhi<\/p>\n
2.        Shri Pankaj K.P. Shreyaskar,
\n          Joint Registrar and Deputy Secretary
\n          Central Information Commission,
\n          2nd Floor, August Kranti Bhawan,
\n          New Delhi – 110066<\/p>\n
                                                                                                      Page 4 of 4<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Central Information Commission Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION Club Building (Near Post Office) Old JNU Campus, New Delhi – 110067 Tel: +91-11-26161796 Decision No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000863\/12733Penalty Appeal No. CIC\/SG\/A\/2011\/000863 Relevant Facts emerging from the Appeal: Appellant : Mr. Shiv Kumar Maruti Bhawan, Behind OBC South Civil Lines, Jansath, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-131299","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-central-information-commission","category-judgements"],"yoast_head":"\nMr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-06-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-07T07:27:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-07T07:27:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1984,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Central Information Commission\",\"Judgements\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011\",\"name\":\"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-07T07:27:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-06-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-07T07:27:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011","datePublished":"2011-06-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-07T07:27:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011"},"wordCount":1984,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Central Information Commission","Judgements"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011","name":"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-06-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-07T07:27:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mr-shiv-kumar-vs-ndmc-gnct-delhi-on-30-june-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mr.Shiv Kumar vs Ndmc, Gnct Delhi on 30 June, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/131299","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=131299"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/131299\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=131299"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=131299"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=131299"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}